March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 185 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Wednesday, March 1, 2000 1:30 p.m. Date: 00/03/01 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers THE SPEAKER: Hon. members, on this special day Alberta’s Legislative Assembly will hear first reading of the First Nations Sacred Ceremonial Objects Repatriation Act. I would ask that you now join me in the prayer. Creator, we humbly ask Your guidance as we turn our thoughts to the legacy of First Nations sacred ceremonial traditions.

Grant us vision so that these sacred ceremonial objects can once again play their role in the living traditions of First Nations people today, and grant us under- standing so that we make wise choices for the future. Amen. I want to give thanks to Dr. Jack Ives, the manager of archeology and ethnology at the Provincial Museum of Alberta for assistance with the words of the prayer today. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Visitors THE SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. MR. KLEIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before I introduce our distinguished guests, I would like to like to point out that you are an honorary chief of the Alexis First Nation with the name White Man with a Kind Heart. Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Legislature a number of distinguished First Nations guests who have come to witness the introduction of a very significant piece of legislation entitled the First Nations Sacred Ceremonial Objects Repatriation Act. Prior to entering the Legislature Chamber today, these guests were part of a First Nations ceremony in honour of this legislation.

These distinguished guests are elders and chiefs representing three First Nations treaty areas in the aboriginal culture. Elders are highly respected as they provide their people with important counsel as to their traditional way of life. Mr. Speaker, they are your special guests and are seated in your gallery. I would ask them to rise as I call out their names, and then once I’ve introduced them, I would ask all Members of this Legisla- tive Assembly to give them the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly.

Frank Weaselhead, representing the Blood tribe; Martin Heavy Head, representing the Blood tribe; Leonard Bastien, representing the Peigan nation; Nelson Adams, representing the Paul band; Madge McCree, representing Swan River First Nation; Joe Willier, representing the Sucker Creek band; Harold Healy, representing the Blood tribe, and his wife, Joan; Mike Beaver, representing the Big Stone Cree nation; Kirby Bird, representing the Paul band; Allen Pard, representing the Peigan nation; Gabriel Meneen, representing the Tallcree band; Bennet Grey, representing the Whitefish Lake First Nation; Chief Wilson Bearhead, representing the Paul band; Chief Richard Davis, representing the Swan River First Nation: I would ask them to receive the warm welcome of this Legislature.

THE SPEAKER: The hon. Associate Minister of Forestry. MR. CARDINAL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of my colleague Pearl and I, I’d like to say a few words in our own language today. [remarks in Cree] I am honoured to be here along with our colleague Pearl Calaha- sen to participate in this most important ceremony. I thank our Premier and everyone that was involved in the development of this legislation. Thank you. [as submitted] Mr.

Speaker, I’m honoured also to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Legislature Chief Harry GoodRunning, Sunchild reserve; Chief Darcy Dixon, Bearspaw band; Chief Gerry Ermineskin, Ermineskin band; Chief Paul Chiniquay, Chiniki band; and other special guests representing treaties 6, 7, and 8 who are seated in the members’ gallery. I thank them for being here on this special occasion of witnessing the introduction of a very significant piece of legislation and for being part of a native ceremony in honour of this legislation.

I would ask them now to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. THE SPEAKER: Hon. members, there are other members of First Nations here, and I would ask them to rise as well. Chief Alexis and others, please rise and receive the warm welcome. head: Presenting Petitions THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Red Deer-South. MR. DOERKSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to table a petition today on behalf of the members for Lacombe- Stettler, Rocky Mountain House, Ponoka-Rimbey, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake, Drumheller-Chinook, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills, Red Deer- North, and Red Deer-South.

The petition has 5,287 signatures and reads as follows. We, the undersigned residents of Alberta reaffirm our support for the five basic principles upon which Medicare was built: accessibility, universality, portability, comprehensiveness and public administration. We urge the Government of Alberta to uphold the letter and spirit of these principles. We also oppose two-tier health care and urge the government of Alberta to maintain an adequate system of public hospitals and to not permit the development of private hospitals in the province of Alberta. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for St. Albert. MRS.

O’NEILL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present a petition on behalf of the hon. Member for Stony Plain. Three hundred and fifty-one parents in his riding wish to urge the Legislative Assembly to intervene on behalf of the students at Meridian Heights school to “ have the Parkland school division No. 70 review and reconsider the decision to amalgamate the French Immersion program.” THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. DR. NICOL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a privilege of mine today to table a petition with 821 names on behalf of citizens from Lethbridge, Coleman, Blairmore, Fort Macleod, Milk River, Raymond, Coutts, and Taber asking the government to stop promoting private health care and to ensure that the public health care system is kept strong. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert. MRS. SOETAERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, have a petition signed by 395 people in the Grande Prairie, Beaverlodge, Fort McMurray, Wembley, and Anzac areas. They are petitioning the

186 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 Legislative Assembly to “urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining the public health care system.” THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to table a petition signed by 242 Albertans. They are requesting that this Legislative Assembly pass a bill “banning private for-profit hospitals in Alberta so that the integrity of the public, universal health care system may be maintained.” This brings the total number today to 1,115 signatures on this petition. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise this afternoon to table a petition with over 1,000 signatures on it from the citizens of Edmonton-Gold Bar: We the undersigned citizens petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care. This petition has been gathered by many energetic seniors. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 1:40 head: Reading and Receiving Petitions THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. MS LEIBOVICI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise this afternoon to ask that the petition I presented yesterday be now read and received. THE CLERK: We the undersigned citizens of Alberta petition the Legisla- tive Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. MR. WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to ask that the petition I presented yesterday be read and received now.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned citizens of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. DR. NICOL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to request that the petition standing on the Order Paper under my name now be read and received. Thank you. THE CLERK: We the undersigned citizens of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care. THE SPEAKER: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. MR. BONNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With your permission I ask that the petition I presented yesterday to the Legislative Assembly be now read and received. THE CLERK: We the undersigned citizens of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. MS BLAKEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to request that the petition I presented yesterday signed by a number of individuals from Cold Lake be now read and received. Thank you.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned citizens of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert. MRS. SOETAERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would ask that the petition I presented the other day regarding public health care be now read and received. THE CLERK: We the undersigned citizens of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to stop promoting private health care and undermining public health care.

THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request that the petition I presented yesterday be now read and received. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of th e province of Alberta hereby petition the Legislative Assembly of Alberta to pass a Bill banning private for-profit hospitals in Alberta so that the integrity of the public, universal health care system may be maintained. head: Introduction of Bills THE SPEAKER: The hon. Associate Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

Bill 2 First Nations Sacred Ceremonial Objects Repatriation Act MS CALAHASEN: Mr. Speaker, otherwise known as the White Man with a Kind Heart, thank you very much. [remarks in Cree] Mr. Speaker, I’m very proud and honoured to be asked by our Premier – I call him my chief – and supported by the elders of the aboriginal community and the leaders of the aboriginal community to rise today to move first reading of Bill 2, the First Nations Sacred Ceremonial Objects Repatriation Act. I am very proud and thankful to the Creator for this opportunity to do the bidding requested of me.

It’s up to us as aboriginal people that we do the right thing, from elders to leaders. This bill is giving back what is rightfully ours, but we need to ensure we have pro- cesses in place, for this is truly significant for our own survival. [as submitted] Mr. Speaker, this act does three very important things. First, it establishes some basic principles that will enable Alberta to

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 187 repatriate sacred ceremonial objects from government collections to First Nations communities. Second, the act sets in motion a consultative process in which Alberta Community Development and Aboriginal Affairs will work with First Nations communities to learn how they would like to proceed with the treatment, loan, or repatriation of sacred ceremo- nial objects.

Finally, this legislation will amend the Glenbow-Alberta Institute Act so that 251 Blackfoot sacred ceremonial objects cared for by the Glenbow Museum can be repatriated to the Blood tribe, the Peigan nation, and the Siksika nation as per the Blackfoot agreement which was signed on January 14, 2000, at the Glenbow Museum. Mr. Speaker, in this millennium, in the year 2000 we see a real change. This legislation is groundbreaking, the first anywhere in this country. I thank the Premier, who has led this province in ensuring that whatever happens the aboriginal people will get what is rightfully theirs.

I think he deserves a big hand, and I would like to ask you, all our colleagues, to give him that hand. [applause] Colleagues, we should be very proud today, b ecause as one elder said in Blackfoot when the repatriation was happening: when the pages of our bible are returned to us, aboriginal people can continue their healing and complete that healing, because when we take control of our own destiny by getting those pages back, only then will aboriginal people truly take their place in society. I thank this Legislature, my colleagues, and especially my colleagues the Hon.

Ralph Klein and Stan Woloshyn for all the work they did to ensure that whatever happens, we as aboriginal people can get back our sacred objects. This is the first reading of Bill 2. [Motion carried; Bill 2 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Government House Leader. Bill 12 Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2000 MR. HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 12, the Appropriation (Supplementary S upply) Act, 2000. This being a money bill, Her Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor, having been informed of the contents of this bill, recommends the same to the Assembly.

We have had occasion, Mr. Speaker, to discuss in Committee of Supply the details of the appropriation being requested. Suffice it to say for the purposes of introduction that it deals with supplementary supply to the departments of Community Development, Environ- ment, Health and Wellness, and Justice. [Motion carried; Bill 12 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. MRS. MacBETH: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a bill, but before I do, I want to congratulate the government on bringing forward Bill 2, the First Nations Sacred Ceremonial Objects Repatriation Act.

We on the side of the Official Opposition look forward to working with the government to ensure a speedy passage. Bill 207 Provincial-Municipal Tax Sharing Calculation Act MRS. MacBETH: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a bill being the Provincial-Municipal Tax Sharing Calculation Act. This bill will put forward an option for consideration to move to more of a revenue-sharing model in our province as opposed to a children-of-the-province model with municipalities as has been too often the case. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 207 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon.

Leader of the Official Opposition. 1:50 Bill 208 Gaming and Liquor Amendment Act, 2000 MRS. MacBETH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I beg leave to introduce a bill being the Gaming and Liquor Amendment Act, 2000. Mr. Speaker, this bill was prepared with a good deal of help and reflects the valuable work done by the Member for Lacombe-Stettler in terms of embodying some of those recommendations into legislation. Thank you. [Motion carried; Bill 208 read a first time] Bill 209 Employment Standards (Parental Leave) Amendment Act, 2000 MR.

CAO: I beg leave to introduce Bill 209, Employment Standards (Parental Leave) Amendment Act, 2000. [Motion carried; Bill 209 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fish Creek. Bill 210 Traffic Safety Amendment Act, 2000 MRS. FORSYTH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being the Traffic Safety Amendment Act, 2000. The intent of Bill 210 is to give police officers increased legal authority in dealing with drivers whose blood alcohol content is within .05 to .08. [Motion carried; Bill 210 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora.

Bill 211 Alberta Taxpayer Bill of Rights MR. SAPERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I beg leave to introduce a bill being Bill 211, the Alberta Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Mr. Speaker, the Alberta Taxpayer Bill of Rights will for the first time enshrine into law a set of principles for fair taxation and will prohibit the provincial government from raising the personal income tax, the flat tax as proposed, the fuel tax, the hotel room tax, the property tax, or any other prescribed tax of this government without first going to the people of th is province and seeking specific permission.

It’s the first true taxpayer protection law that this province will enjoy, and I hope that colleagues on both sides of the Assembly will rush its passage. [Motion carried; Bill 211 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader.

188 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 Bill 212 Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Amendment Act, 2000 MR. HAVELOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If it’s appropriate, I’d like to move on behalf of the hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview Bill 212, entitled the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Amendment Act, 2000. [Motion carried; Bill 212 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Bill 213 Farm Implement Amendment Act, 2000 MR. HLADY: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the member for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills I’d like to introduce Bill 213, the Farm Implement Amendment Act, 2000. [Motion carried; Bill 213 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Stettler. Bill 214 Police (Special Constable Safety) Amendment Act, 2000 MRS. GORDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I beg leave to introduce a bill being Police (Special Constable Safety) Amendment Act, 2000. This amendment act addresses specific safety issues relative to special constables. [Motion carried; Bill 214 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods.

Bill 215 School (Early Childhood Education) Amendment Act, 2000 DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being the School (Early Childhood Education) Amendment Act, 2000. Mr. Speaker, this bill would make kindergarten part of the formal education system, would invite school boards to set K to 3 class size targets of 17 students, and would require screening of children to identify those at risk. [Motion carried; Bill 215 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Bill 216 Labour Statutes (Workers’ Rights) Amendment Act, 2000 DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 216, known as Labour Statues (Workers’ Rights) Amendment Act, 2000. Very briefly, Mr. Speaker, the purpose of Bill 216 is to extend the scope of labour statutes to commercial farms and ranches, provide prorated benefits to some part-time workers, enable the Labour Relations Board to facilitate firs t collective agreements, and make reinstatement provisions more meaningful for striking or locked-out workers. Thank you. [Motion carried; Bill 216 read a first time] DR. PANNU: Mr.

Speaker, I would also like to take the opportunity to join with my colleagues in the Legislature to congratulate the First Nations peoples on the introduction of Bill 2. I think it’s indeed a historic bill and a historic day for the introduction of this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Highwood. Bill 217 Public Highways Development Amendment Act, 2000 MR. TANNAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being Public Highways Development Amendment Act, 2000. Mr.

Speaker, Bill 217 will strengthen the ability of the Department of Infrastructure to deal expeditiously with nonconforming advertis- ing along our provincial highways. [Motion carried; Bill 217 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for St. Albert. Bill 218 Insurance Statutes (Gender Premium Equity) Amendment Act, 2000 MRS. O’NEILL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being the Insurance Statutes (Gender Premium Equity) Amendment Act, 2000.

The intent of the bill is to ensure that no insurer provides automo- bile insurance with a premium that discriminates on the basis of gender. [Motion carried; Bill 218 read a first time] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Clover Bar-Fort Saskatche- wan. Bill 219 Blind Persons’ Rights (Service Dogs) Amendment Act, 2000 MR. LOUGHEED: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being the Blind Persons’ Rights (Service Dogs) Amendment Act, 2000.

It will amend the current Blind Persons’ Rights Act to ensure that all persons with disabilities in Alberta will have the legal right to be accompanied by a service dog in public. [Motion carried; Bill 219 read a first time] 2:00 Bill 220 Citizens’ Initiative Act MR. DUCHARME: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill 220, being the Citizens’ Initiative Act. [Motion carried; Bill 220 read a first time]

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 189 head: Tabling Returns and Reports MS EVANS: Mr. Speaker, today, in response to an hon. member’s request yesterday, I provide five copies of the records management program which provides specific policies and procedures for the creation, handling, security and storage, and final disposition of child welfare records. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Human Resources and Employment. MR. DUNFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m pleased to table with the Assembly the annual reports for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta for the period of April 1, 1998, to March 31, 1999; the Alberta Dental Association for the period of January 1, 1998, to D ecember 31, 1998; the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association 1999 annual report; and the College of Chiropractors of Alberta annual report for the year ending March 31, 1999. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. MR. DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m delighted to be able to table this afternoon copies of the final report from the Calgary Multicultural Health Care In itiative entitled Building Bridges: Healthy Living for Calgary’s Diverse Community. Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table for the information of members of the Assembly the document Auxiliary Nurses are Worth It: Because We Care. I received this document today on the AUPE information picket line at the University hospital. Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. MR.

SAPERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have the appropriate number of copies of two separate documents. One is the Capital health region Royal Alexandra/Glenrose site information sheet on LPNs. The other is a sheet prepared by the AUPE regional office for the information pickets held today at various health facilities around the province. It’s information regarding the offer to the LPNs which would see that they would receive 62 cents over three years. I leave both copies for the Assembly. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. DR. NICOL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to table five copies of the Chinook region health restructuring update from this Febru- ary. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to table requisite copies of only two of the dozens of letters that my office is receiving every day on the health care issue. The first letter is from Mr. Terry Darbyson from Vegreville. He wants me to add his name to the list of Albertans who are opposed to the proposal of allowing regional health authorities to enter into contractual arrangements with private, for-profit hospitals.

The second letter is from Robert Lawrence from Calgary express- ing the same sentiments as Mr. Darbyson. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Environment. MR. MAR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table the requisite number of copies of the environmental protection security fund annual report for the year ending 31 March 1999 in accordance with the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. head: Introduction of Guests THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. MR. BONNER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two introductions today.

The first group that I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Legislative Assembly is 60 bright, young grade 6 students from St. Philip Catholic school. They’re accompanied today by t eachers Jerome Burghardt and Roger Millette as well as student teachers Carolyn Currie and Robert Hoppins and student helpers Mrs. Sevigny and Mrs. DelMastro. They’re seated in the public gallery. With your permission I would ask that they now rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the House.

Also, I’d like to introduce to you and through you to Members of the Legislative Assembly Jimmy Ragsdale. Jimmy is seated in the public gallery, Mr. Speaker, and with your permission I would ask that he now rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the House. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce to you and through you to all Members of the Legislative Assembly 29 hardworking, conscientious students in grade 6 at Waverley elementary school located in the Kenilworth neighbour- hood of Edmonton-Gold Bar.

They are accompanied today by their teacher, Paula Tessaro, and by parent volunteers Mrs. Laurie Harnack, Mrs. Sherry Wesson, Mrs. Brenda Gaunt, and Mrs. Cindy Dwyer; and also student teacher Mrs. Jenni R ubuliak. They are in the members’ gallery, and I would ask them now to please rise and receive the warm and traditional welcome of the Assembly. Thank you. MR. DOERKSEN: Mr. Speaker, it’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly Jo Davis, Dorothy Corney, Elkmar Schrag, Colleen Dennehy, Floyd Van Slyke, Shirley Thomas, Mary Nelson, Joan Hepburn, and Don Hepburn.

They’re here to witness the presentation of the petition and also to observe the proceedings of the House. I would ask them to rise and receive the warm greeting of the Assembly. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Wainwright. MR. FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Legislature 16 talented grades 5 and 6 students from the Amisk school in the Wainwright constituency. They are accompanied by teacher Hilary Gray and parents Mrs. Carol Anholt, Mrs. Bev. Holte, and Mrs. Shelley Drever. They are studying government.

They are excited about their field trip, and they’re excited to observe the proceedings of this House, especially this special day for the First Nations. They are seated in the members’ gallery, and I’d ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of this House. MRS. FORSYTH: You save the best for last, Mr. Speaker. It’s my

190 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 pleasure to introduce through you and to you two favourite constitu- ents of mine, Heather and Neville Beck. Neville is celebrating his 60th birthday. I would ask Heather and Neville to rise and members to give them a warm welcome. THE SPEAKER: Well, then, hon. Member for Calgary-Cross. MRS. FRITZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased today to introduce to you and through you my dear friend who is visiting the Legislature, Mr. Harjit Rai. Mr. Rai is a very active member of the Sikh community, and he’s also the recent past president of the southwest Sikh Society of Calgary. Mr.

Rai is also a very strong Progressive Conservative, who I’m proud to say has been a hard- working member of my Calgary-Cross board for a number of years, on my executive. He’s visiting today with his son-in-law Mr. Sekhon. They are seated in the public gallery, and I would ask that they both rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. MS BLAKEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Members of the Assembly have often heard me speak of the exceptional people who live in Edmonton-Centre, and today I am very pleased to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly one of those constituents. Barry Bigelow has been very active in the community. I first met him when he was here as a volunteer judge for the CFB heritage fair, but he has also worked with me on a community strategy on youth crime. I would ask Mr. Bigelow to please rise and accept the warm and traditional welcome of the Assembly. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Fort McMurray. MR. BOUTILIER: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the last person to introduce visitors today, it is my pleasure to welcome all gallery visitors here, specifically Ellen and Paul Laursen and their two children, Alicia and Brittany. They endured the tablings today and unfortunately have left, but for Hansard they are here today. Thank you very much. 2:10 head: Oral Question Period Private Health Services MRS. MacBETH: Mr. Speaker, the goal of this Premier and the special interests backing him is to bring in two-tiered, privatized health care into Alberta.

The government is pulling out all the stops to bring in the Premier’s priv atization scheme: truth squads, newspaper ads, TV ads, radio spots, mail-outs, polls, focus groups, and, tomorrow, their Trojan horse bill to destroy health care. My question is to the Premier. Is the message of his propaganda campaign based on the focus groups, and is that why his government will not let Albertans see the truth in his doctored document? MR. KLEIN: All the information that was asked for and all the information that was released was in accordance completely with the rules of the freedom of information legislation. Mr.

Speaker, there is a process. If they’re not satisfied with what they receive, there is a course of appeal. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. leader of the Liberal opposition that they know how to use FOIP legislation. They use it more than anyone else. MR. DICKSON: Point of order. MRS. MacBETH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that Albertans deserve to see who and how much they are paying, will this Premier table with the bill tomorrow the costs, the contracts, and the agencies that he is using in promoting his private hospitals communications plan? MR. KLEIN: Mr.

Speaker, this is a piece of legislation that needs to be communicated and communicated properly. The Liberals have been spending taxpayer dollars to spread a lot of malicious misinfor- mation. Other groups and organizations have been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to spread untruths related to this particular piece of legislation, so we want to make sure that we take sufficient steps to ensure that Albertans are well informed about this legislation, even to the point of taking the unpr ecedented step of mailing the bill out to every Alberta household. MRS. MacBETH: No, Mr.

Speaker, we haven’t been trying to convince Albertans of anything. We’ve been listening to them. Mr. Speaker, will this Premier tell Albertans just how many seniors will have to have their hip replacements or their cataract surgeries delayed because he’s spending their health money on fancy advertising agencies instead of on our public hospital system? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, that’s one of the problems: our delays that we’re experiencing right now in the health care system, our waiting lists for certain elective surgery procedures. Mr. Speaker, yes, we want to get the facts out there.

We want to the get facts out in an orderly, reasonable fashion. We want to engage Albertans in unemotional, reasonable debate on this particular issue, and we want to hear what Albertans say. All the information that we will be releasing pertaining to this bill, all of that information, is the bill itself and an explanation of the various components of the bill and what it will mean to Albertans. THE SPEAKER: Second main question. The Leader of the Official Opposition. MRS. MacBETH: Mr.

Speaker, the real title – the real title – of tomorrow’s bill is the private hospitals act, but the Premier and the special interests backing him just don’t have the courage to tell Albertans the truth. Will this Premier admit that his Trojan horse bill tomorrow is a diversion and that his real agenda is contained in the communications plan hidden away in the Public Affairs Bureau? M R . K L E I N : M r . S p e a k e r , w e s i m p l y w a n t t o m a k e s u r e t h a t Albertans have the facts. The facts will be contained in the bill. That bill eventually and hopefully will become the law of this province.

The title of the bill – and I can share this with the hon. member – is the health protection act. The health protection act. It is not a Trojan horse to shield anyone from anything. It is the health protection act, which has as its

preamble absolute adherence to the fundamental principles of the Canada Health Act and spells out loud and clear that all you will need to access the publicly funded health care system in this province is your health care card. MRS. MacBETH: Well, Mr. Speaker, his wordsmiths have been working overtime. Mr. Speaker, will this Premier admit that there’s no plan to gather real public opinion or changes that Albertans may have in mind and that, once introduced, this bill is signed, sealed, and delivered for the special interests backing the Premier and his party? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m going to respond to that

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 191 question by asking a question, and I would like this hon. member to do the honourable thing and stand up and say who these so-called special interest people are. Who are they? I would like to know. You know, she’s very vague on this particular issue just as she has been very vague on the bill itself. With one breath she says that there’s a possibility she will support the bill. Now she’s calling it the private hospitals bill when it is indeed the health protection act. She accuses this government of orchestrating a campaign. Yes, there is a campaign to get the facts out. Mr.

Speaker, I tabled in the Legislature an e-mail sent by one of the Liberal staffers to all Liberal MLAs encouraging them to get out there with their petitions and with this and that and to orchestrate a campaign. It has been a campaign, as I’ve said before, a campaign not of the truth but a campaign of malicious information. They’re so good at it. MRS. MacBETH: Mr.

Speaker, given that health is too important for the spin and the glitz and Albertans won’t be bought with their own money, will this Premier simply stand up, look Albertans in the eye, cut the spin, and admit that his Trojan horse bill is filled with private hospitals? MR. KLEIN: I will look Albertans in the eye and say to all Alber- tans: you will have the opportunity to see the bill and to read it for yourselves unfettered, Mr.

Speaker, not with a bunch of political rhetoric, the kind that comes from the Liberal opposition, not filled with malicious information, the kind of misinformation that is being spread by the Liberal Party, but the facts as contained in the bill. There is nothing more paramount, as I’ve said before, than a bill to be tabled in this Legislature that purports to become the law of this land. This is not about the kind of malicious information that they’re spreading. This is about getting the facts out there in a true and truthful and straightforward manner. MRS. MacBETH: Mr.

Speaker, Albertans don’t trust the Premier’s private hospitals bill. And you know why? It’s because no matter what his wordsmiths have crafted, no matter what that bill says, his private agenda is to open the door to private hospitals in this province so that they can make a profit at the taxpayers’ expense. My questions are to the Premier. What happens when an operation in a private hospital goes wrong, when there are complications or infection? What happens when there are things that that private hospital can’t deal with? 2:20 MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, again, that is a good question.

What happens now in an abortion clinic when something goes wrong? This hon. member knows all about therapeutic abortion clinics, because they were alive and well and actually a number of them were established under her watch. What happens? What I assume happens is that if something goes wrong, an ambulance is called, and the patient is then taken to a fu ll-scale treatment hospital. That’s what happens. [interjections] Well, I stand to be corrected. What happens now? Maybe the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness can respond.

What happens now if something goes wrong in one of the 47 surgical clinics that are now operating? What happens? [interjections] THE SPEAKER: Hon. Leader of the Official Opposition, would you carry on? MRS. MacBETH: Mr. Speaker, the Premier knows the answer. They go back to the public system. My second question is: who pays when a person has to go back to a large public hospital because of the complications of major surgery that a private hospital can’t handle? MR. KLEIN: Mr.

Speaker, all procedures, minor, major – it doesn’t matter what takes place in the health system today, all procedures, all treatments must conform with the standards and the guidelines and the very, very strict code of discipline set down by the College of Physicians and Surgeons. These are the people who know, not this hon. member. She is not a medical doctor and knows absolutely nothing about the health system as it pertains to the treatment of people, and I would add that she knows absolutely nothing about health policy. MRS. MacBETH: As if. Mr.

Speaker, as this Premier may know, the state of California has just introduced legislation so that any complications in a private hospital are not allowed entrance to the public hospitals. Is that provision going to be in his private hospitals bill tomorrow? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, the bill has yet to be tabled in this Legislature. I would advise the hon. members, as I advise everyone, to wait and see what the bill says. Surprise, surpri se. She might even support it. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last night a CBC Calgary broadcast to a national audience revealed questionable practices taking place in existing Alberta day surgery clinics. The program suggested that some entrepreneurial doctors may be putting financial considerations ahead of the best interests of patients, yet the College of Physicians and Surgeons seems to be doing little or nothing about it.

To the Premier: how can the government justify under its planned legislation going back to the dark ages by giving sole jurisdiction to the College of Physicians and Surgeons to accredit and monitor his proposed private, for-profit hospitals and excluding other health professions, such as nurses, from the process altogether? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, I take exception to the use of the phrase “private, for-profit hospitals.” Secondly, I take great exception to his assessment of the ability and the expertise of the medical experts who make up the college.

He is saying that these people as medical experts are not qualified? Would they rather see Raj Pannu, you know, in charge of determining what is right medically than a team of well-qualified and highly respected doctors? I find that statement to be quite astounding, that he would presume that the College of Physicians and Surgeons, probably one of the most highly respected organizations of any jurisdiction in this country, is not capable of adjudicating what is right and what is wrong relative to the delivery of medical procedures. I think he should apologize. DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

I hope the Premier stops focusing on Raj Pannu and starts answering questions. As revealed last night by CBC, why is this government failing to properly monitor existing private clinics like the Gimbel Eye Centre before legalizing private, for-profit hospitals to do major surgeries? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I didn’t see all of the program. I saw part of the program. And I will have the hon. minister respond. The CBC is one news outlet. The other day the hon. member

192 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 alluded to the National Post as being that awful right-wing newspa- per. Do I take it from his question that the only news outlet that he abides by and believes in is the CBC? Is that where he gets all his information? I’m sure it’s totally and absolutely unbiased. [interjec- tions] Right. Mr. Speaker, relative to the case in question I listened to the elderly gentleman, and he said: I’ve got no complaints; I was quite happy with the treatment I got. I’ll have the hon. minister respond.

Speaker’s Ruling Questions about Media Reports THE SPEAKER: Well, first of all, hon. members, it seems to me that on several occasions now I’ve pointed out that the purpose of question period is not to verify something that was in some newspa- per or some television program. I think I have access to something like 80 channels, and if the purpose of this question period in the province of Alberta is to verify everything that was said or not said on a particular program on a particular channel – the purpose of this is to deal with government policy, not to verify what was said on some TV program.

Private Health Services (continued) DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to say that I do respect Sharon Basaraba, who is a noted Alberta journalist. My last question, Mr. Speaker: how can the government justify letting the College of Physicians and Surgeons monitor wanna-be private, for-private hospitals when the college doesn’t seem to have the resources or the will to prope rly monitor existing private day- surgery clinics like the Gimbel Eye Centre? MR. KLEIN: Mr.

Speaker, the college has the very grave responsi- bility of monitoring the quality of medical health care as it is delivered in this province and indeed as it is delivered in every jurisdiction across this country. All provinces have a College of Physicians and Surgeons. These are people who are experts in their field. They’re medical practitioners. They know better than anyone else what is right and what is wrong with respect to the delivery of medical services. I’ll have the hon. minister supplement. MR. JONSON: If I might, Mr.

Speaker, the thing that’s important to add to the Premier’s answer is that we have contacted the College of Physicians and Surgeons with respect to this alleged situation. In terms of resources we have been working with the Heritage Founda- tion for Medical Research.

They have been assembling information with respect to the ongoing evolution of the treatments of various eye conditions, and that information, which of course is out of a foundation supported by the government, will be provided to the college so that they will have th e most up-to-date best scientific information available when they review this particular case. The college and the support of Alberta Health and Wellness is there to investigate, to follow-up on any a lleged violations, if that’s the proper term, of this type.

There is a process in place handled by very credible people on the basis of very credible evidence. THE SPEAKER: The Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. 2:30 Housing for Victims of Family Violence MS PAUL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. While touring a number of women’s shelters and speaking to social service agencies across the province over the last four months, the number one issue that has been continually brought to my attention is the difficulties families leaving shelters face with regard to reasonably priced housing.

Social service payments are not sufficient to cover the costs to start up a new home in a decent accommodation. These families are being set up for financial failure. My questions are to the Minister of Community Development. What will the government do to address the financial crisis these families face upon leaving the shelters? MR. WOLOSHYN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government has taken a leading role in working with people who are looking for what one I believe would refer to as transitional housing.

We have a concern that these families and individuals who are in need the most have access to what you might call basic shelter. There’s a whole variety of community service resources available to families and individuals who need assistance. Community Development doesn’t necessarily run them all, and I would ask the Minister of Human Resources and Employment to address some of the financial assistance and support services that are available through his department. MR. DUNFORD: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. We try to address the problem in two ways.

We have direct services to families in shelters but also income assistance to families in need. Now, under the direct service, intake workers will regularly visit families in the shelters. Of course, we’re dealing with these clients in our offices right across the province whether or not they are in a shelter. Through agencies, actually here in Edmonton, we also help women move from abusive situations or shelters into their new homes. We class this as one of the innovative programs that has come with the welfare reform of previous ministers, and we think it’s a proper thing and a right thing to do.

Of course, the financial benefits: they may apply, then, for payments under supports for independence, or the SFI program. Also, we do provide assistance in housing. It is this situation, hon. member and other members here in the House, that you may find of interest. This is a time when we will actually provide a damage deposit, and that is to help the fa mily that is being abused. If we can’t get the perpetrator out of the house and the family then has to leave, we’ll help them move into new accommodation. MS PAUL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I really wasn’t talking about the abuser being taken out of the household.

I was talking about financial crisis. As these families are often financially forced to reside in substan- dard housing run by unscrupulous landlords, what will the govern- ment do to eradicate that problem? MR. WOLOSHYN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are a few initiatives that are happening. I really hope that the unscrupulous landlord situation is not as widespread as some may think, but I don’t really know.

What we’ve done to this point, we’re again, if not the only province, one of the first provinces in Canada to come up with something called a government policy framework on homelessness, wherein we’ve defined the people. These would be the individuals who would come out of these situations, hon. member. We’ve put a definition on what we would consider to be folks who are home- less. These are basically individuals – children, youth, and families – who currently have no housing or are sheltered in emergency accommodations and will be out on the street at the end of the day,

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 193 if you will. We do recognize that in order to address this particularly complex problem, there are a wide range of needs that these families face in moving out of shelters. There has to be a continuum of housing fac ilities which could address this particular instance, and there have to be support services. We need transitional housing; we need special-needs initiatives. There are programs that the hon. minister of human resources has referred to that are in place.

What we are doing also: the federal government in December a nnounced some initiatives, and we’re trying to work co-operatively with them so that we could in fact end up addressing some of the problems that may be faced by these folks. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Third question. MS PAUL: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister. My third question was going to d eal with new initiatives that the government is going to implement to address affordable second- stage housing. I would emphasize the words “new initiatives,” because what is in place now is not working. MR.

WOLOSHYN: Mr. Speaker, I’d like to say that the people who were paying attention to the estimates would have noted that we have $3 million a year over the next three years committed to supporting community-based initiatives to assist the homeless. That’s a new program in there. As well, although the hon. member may say simply new programs, I think it’s important to note that the department that I represent currently funds over 9,000 family and special-purpose housing units and provides grant funding to qualified applicants with an annual budget of 82 and a half million dollars. That is significant.

I’d also ask the Minister of Children’s Services, who is in this area, to supplement. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark, followed by the hon. Member for St. Albert. Private Health Services (continued) MS LEIBOVICI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, it’s been said in here before, and I’ll say it again: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck. The Premier said this afternoon that it’s time to look at the facts, and here’s one fact that we’d like to look at.

The Premier’s own handpicked blue-ribbon panel on Bill 37 said that a private health care facility or nonhospital surgical facility was in fact a private hospital. My questions are to the Premier. Can the Premier explain what the difference is now between a private, for-profit overnight surgical facility and a private, for-profit hospital? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, again I would say to this hon. member: wait and see what the legislation says when it’s tabled in the Legislative Assembly. Mr.

Speaker, I don’t want to sound f acetious on this particular matter, but if the hon. member wants to know what a hospital looks like, I would suggest that she go to the Royal Alex or University hospital or the Grey Nuns or Misericordia and see for herself what a hospital looks like. If she wants to know what a clinic looks like, I would suggest that maybe she go to the Morgentaler therapeutic abortion clinic or an eye surgery clinic, and she will see a clinic.

MS LEIBOVICI: Will the Premier’s spin campaign be clear and honest with Albertans and say that this government’s legislation is going to allow contracting out with private, for-profit hospitals? It doesn’t matter what you call them. An overnight clinic is a private, for-profit hospital. MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, wait and see what the legislation says relative to this particular issue. They’re so caught up in

definitions that they tend to forget – well, maybe they don’t tend to forget. Maybe they are deliberately ignoring what we want to achieve. What we want to achieve are very strict and stringent regulations relative to contracting out by regional health authorities and, at the same time, provide some options to alleviate pain and suffering. That’s what it’s all about.

MS LEIBOVICI: Will the Premier admit that the only thing he wants to achieve is the allowance of private, for-profit hospitals in this province, and that what he needs is the propaganda machine to ensure that that product is sold in this province right now? 2:40 MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, that is absolute nonsense.

We want to do what is right in terms of addressing what has become not a provin- cial crisis but a national crisis relative to the delivery of health care and finding new and effective ways of delivering medically necessary services and still doing it within the publicly funded health care system as we know it today. That’s what it’s all about. Nothing more, nothing less. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for St. Albert, followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Federal Transfer Payments MRS. O’NEILL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Albertans and indeed all Canadians were given the news in the federal budget this week that the federal government will be rest oring or returning to the prov- inces some more money previously cut from the health and social transfer payments. The federal government claims it is restoring significant amounts of money to the provinces for health care. My question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Could the minister explain to this Assembly exactly how much the federal government has actually increased health transfers to the provinces? MR. JONSON: Mr.

Speaker, the federal government did provide some increase in the health and social transfer provision in the budget. It was announced as being, as I recall, $2.5 billion over four years, and that will mean $1 b illion in the first year and then $500 million in the next three years. Just to put it in context, that would be an amount of money that would provide for about six days of funding for the current Alberta health care system. The point here though, Mr.

Speaker, is that this is not by any means a restoration of the very, very significant reductions that were made by the federal government about the same time or shortly after they were endeavouring to balance their budget and took the pattern or example of Alberta. So while the money is welcome, it will amount to about $100 million for Alberta in the coming year when we get the money, which I think is June, and we will certainly apply it as wisely as possible within our health care system, education system, and social programs. That is the situation with respect to the federal budget. MRS. O’NEILL: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. My second question is again to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Could you please explain how Alberta will spend this additional money allocated for health?

194 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 MR. JONSON: Well, as I’ve indicated, Mr. Speaker, we will give considerable thought to the best areas in which to apply the health care portion in the provincial budget to the Health and Wellness program. Certainly we’ve highlighted before this Assembly and for Albertans our six-point plan with respect to our priorities in health care.

The area of reducing waiting lists, the area of providing for frontline staffing, and the area of healthy aging, long-term care, and associated services would be at least three, I think, of the top considerations that we would be looking at when we know exactly when the money is going to be available and under what terms. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East, followed by the hon. Member for West Yellowhead. St. Michael’s Long-term Care Centre DR. NICOL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Early last month the Chinook health region released an update for their business plan which would implement significant changes in the delivery of long- term care in Lethbridge. My questions are to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Minister, why did you put a hold on the imple- mentation of this long-term plan and create uncertainty for St. Mike’s and the families who are expecting to move into that new facility in May? MR. JONSON: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think the hon. member would recall and certainly people in southern Alberta and particularly in Lethbridge would recall that there was a major dialogue, to put it in its constructive sense, over the decision to build the St. Michael’s long-term care centre. Alberta Health and Wellness – it was Alberta Health then – worked very dilig ently with the participants down there to bring that project into becoming an actual in-the-ground project and now a building about to be opened.

The point here, though, that I think has to be understood by folks in the south – and I’m sure they do – and by the Assembly is that the agreement that was arrived at at the time that project was approved was for a new 200-plus-bed long-term care centre with long-term care type services within it. Now, as we come into the new year and we’re in the position of being able to open the actual physical structure, the regional health authority feels that they want to change the program for that particular building to assisted living and some other programs, Mr. Speaker. This is quite a dramatic proposal.

It’s one that I’ve had my officials journey to Lethbridge to discuss. It was their advice to me that we should put it on hold and get more answers and look very carefully at the legislative requirements of making this rather dramatic change in the designation of a facility. Therefore, I did indicate to the regional health authority that any action of this particular type should be put on hold. We have asked them a number of questions. We’ve asked them for information. I and my officials will be visiting Lethbridge in the fairly near future to follow up on this. DR. NICOL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My supplemental is to the same minister. The families want to know: what are the standards for the level of registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and personal care attendant staffing that are required in assisted-living situations? Will their loved ones have RN support 24 hours a day? MR. JONSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, without wishing to alarm anybody in answering this question . . . MRS. SLOAN: Don’t worry; they’re already alarmed. MR. JONSON: I know you’re alarmed already, but that’s okay. I meant the people in Lethbridge. Mr.

Speaker, the assisted-living model or policy does not by definition provide for 24-hour care. Certainly there’s the possibility that with creative thinking and planning there could be an assisted- living service established that would provide 24-hour attention to the residents. That’s one thing that has to be looked at and examined. Long-term care, of course, by definition does provide the 24-hour coverage.

Then we have other matters to discuss with respect to the necessary staffing models and staffing ratios, which, as reported to me by my officials on the first visit, really need to be discussed more and clarified. So once again I have the same conclusion, and that is that we are aware of the situation, that we do want the best for the elderly people of the Chinook region, and we are following up on it with the health authority. DR. NICOL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My final supplemental, again to the Minister of Health and Wellness, is: will it cost the fam ilies more because of user fees or different room charges under the assisted-living model? MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, there is in long-term care, because that is what we are making the comparison to, a standard formula, a standard rate, a maximum charge per day. In the assisted-living model services – health services, home care, Meals on Wheels, all those types of services – can vary depending upon the needs of the individual, in terms of the services required by the individual.

Yes, there is the ability to vary the charges in assisted living according to the package of services being provided by the health system. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. 2:50 Private Health Services (continued) MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There have been some claims made by some critics that the government’s policy on delivery of surgical services will trigger certain clauses of the North American free trade agreement and will allow foreign corporations to take over the health care in this province.

My question is to the Minister of International and Intergovernmental Relations. Will the government proposal on the delivery of surgical services pose any difficulty under NAFTA? MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr. Speaker, I’ve spoken on this issue previously. I am confident that the government of Canada has negotiated under NAFTA a carve-out that protects public health in this province and in Canada. The policy statement does not provide American service providers with any automatic right to establish a clinic in Alberta. This is based strictly on a misreading of the NAFTA obligations.

To try and clear that up and ensure that people had the information, I did table in the House about a week ago the actual reference with all of the sections referred to, and I invite hon. members to look at that. It’s interesting that NAFTA has been in place for 10 years, has proved to be a great benefit to this province, incidentally, and we have never had a challenge or a request under NAFTA, although private clinics have existed, funded by the public system, for many years. Mr.

Speaker, I know that NAFTA does not challenge the government’s sovereignty or ability to control who provides service in this province. I am confident, as I said, that the government of

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 195 Canada has negotiated a protection, a triple protection really, with the primary protection under the carve-out, that protects the health delivery system that we have in this province, that we will continue to have, and that we have in this country. MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplementary question is to the same minister. If we’re protected under NAFTA, are there any concerns that the policy may leave us open to action by the World Trade Organization? MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr. Speaker, some critics have given up on the NAFTA agreement.

They’ve recognized that there is a carve- out, and now they’re talking WTO. Let me tell you that there is no threat to Alberta’s publicly funded health system posed by the World Trade Organization. First of all, the government of Canada, who is our negotiator, as I tried to explain last night, has made no commit- ments in health under the WTO or in the health services sector. Alberta has absolutely no obligations in the WTO in this area. MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second supplementary question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness.

Some people are suggesting that if the private sector gets a foothold in Alberta, it will just be a matter of time before it expands into a two-tier health system. Will the government policy on delivery of surgical services open the door for large American care companies to move into Alberta? MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr. Speaker, first of all, Albertans and their government won’t let that happen. It’s not what anyone wants, and it is certainly not what the policy statement that this government released last November indicates in any way.

Under the policy statement as it’s laid out, surgical clinics in this province would only be able to provide services if they were contracted by the regional health authorities. There will be limits in the legislation, and as the Premier indicated earlier today, the legislation will be in the House soon. I hope that some hon. members who have made some rather widespread statements on this will admit or at least suggest that they may have been mistaken when this legislation is here. [interjection] Well, I doubt it too. Mr.

Speaker, the policy statement that was laid out on the delivery of surgical services sets out the criteria that would need to be considered. It is not who owns the building that is important under NAFTA or under WTO or to Albertans. It is the service that is provided. It is that it is an insured service and that it is funded by the public system. That is why there is no threat under trade obligations. Interestingly enough, although there have been some 40-odd private surgical clinics in this province for years, set up some time ago, there has never been a challenge by the Americans to the NAFTA obligations.

THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Health Services for Immigrants MR. DICKSON: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Each year 7,000 new immigrants move to the city of Calgary, but they’re not likely to get access to our public health care system in a timely way if they can’t speak English. An impressive coalition of health care providers, community agencies, ethnocultural groups in Calgary have now produced their final report on what’s needed to improve access to health care services in the city of Calgary, and I tabled the report an hour ago.

My question this after noon is to the hon. Premier. Why is it that access to health care by new Canadians is not even identified as an issue in the three-year business plan of the Department of Health and Wellness? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, our health care system in this country is universal, and it is accessible to all people who hold a health care card in Alberta. It’s an Alberta health care card.

I commend the organizations who are working with new Canadians to advise them as to how they access the health care system and to assist them in dealing with their difficulty with the English language, but again, I remind the hon. member that the Canada Health Act itself speaks to the fundamental principles of universality, accessibility, and comprehensiveness. MR. DICKSON: Mr.

Speaker, why is it that access to health care by new Canadians in the city of Calgary has not been identified as an issue in the Calgary regional health authority three-year plan, in the People First 1999-2002 plan, in the highlights of health services delivery, or in that transition business plan? Why would that be? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, relative to the business plan for the Department of Health and Wellness I’ll have the hon. minister respond. MR. JONSON: First of all, Mr.

Speaker, I think it is well acknowl- edged that the government of Alberta has a more thorough business planning and reporting process on what the initiatives are in the health care system and other departments as compared to any other province. Nevertheless, in the Ca lgary health care system there is provision, particularly with respect to the acute care side of health care, for translation services, for supports when needed. I’m not saying, however, that they could not be improved, that they could not be expanded further. The other thing of course, Mr.

Speaker, is that we do have an education system in Calgary which recognizes the multicultural nature of the city and provides information, provides advice and knowledge to people on the operation of government generally but on the health care system in particular. Further to that, I think that in all locations, be it Toronto, Calgary, Edmonton, or a rural part of Alberta, you do have people who can speak the language of origin, and they are usually the first people that are looked to for a linkup with the health care system or the education system. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Speaker, my final question.

Since I’m going to respectfully suggest that ne ither the Premier nor the health minister understands the urgency of this – and I go to the Minister of Health and Wellness specifically – how much longer are these Calgarians going to have to be denied timely access to public health care? When can we expect appropriate, targeted action? MR. JONSON: If I might take the question, Mr. Premier. First of all, these individuals are not being denied timely health care in Calgary.

We fully appreciate the difficulty, the challenge perhaps to understanding the details of the health care system and whom to go to and when and so forth. We acknowledge that that can be worked on and improved, Mr. Speaker, but new Calgarians who are new Canadians are being cared for in Calgary. 3:00 MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, I’m advised by one of my colleagues in government who is closely associated with this project that indeed it is offered at the Peter Lougheed hospital in Calgary. It raises multicultural awareness to elimin ate the language and cultural

196 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 barriers that new Canadians face when a ccessing our health care system. Mr. Speaker, I’d like to point out that funding for this program was provided by the Human Rights Commission and the multicul- tural education fund advisory committee, and I would like to thank the hon. Minister of Community Development for expressing his concern and having his department deal with this situation in a very, very human way. head: Reading and Receiving Petitions THE SPEAKER: Hon. members, in 30 seconds from now we’ll call upon the first of seven members today to participate. The hon.

Member for West Yellowhead. Kevin Reid MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to recognize Edson athlete Kevin Reid, a snowshoer who recently competed in the Canadian Special Olympics Winter Games in Ottawa. Kevin began snowshoeing three years ago and has been coached by an Edson and area Special Olympics club volunteer, Marlene Miller. His first competition was in Calgary last year at the Alberta Special Olympics Winter Games. As a member of Team Alberta, Kevin very successfully competed with approximately 100 athletes.

He won gold in the 800-metre event and silver in the four by 100-metre relay and bronze in the 400-metre event. I would like all members of the Assembly to join me today in extending our congratulations and best wishes to this West Yellowhead Special Olympian, Kevin Reid. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. Opponents of Private Hospitals MS LEIBOVICI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to recognize the thousands of individuals that this government has to date ignored, those who have written, e-mailed, phoned, attended forums, and signed petitions to tell this government not to proceed with its plan to allow private, for-profit hospitals. These citizens have spent considerable time and energy researching the government’s proposal and have come to the conclusion that public health care must be protected from this government. These people are not part of any special-interest groups but are individual Albertans who cross political party lines to protect our public health care system.

As MLAs we have all taken an oath to represent to the best of our abilities the wishes of our constituents . It is not only this govern- ment’s responsibility but also each MLA’s responsibility to listen and care about what their constituents are saying. It’s now time for this government to respect the wishes of Albertans to maintain and protect our health care system. We should thank all those Albertans who are fighting for our public health care system. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Clover Bar-Fort Saskatche- wan. 13th Alberta Winter Games MR. LOUGHEED: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m privileged to rise today to bring recognition to the 3,500 Albertans who came forward to share their time, energy, and ideas to make the 13th Alberta Winter Games another Alberta success story. The games, which were held in Strathcona county in February, saw an entire commu- nity unite in the spirit of volunt eerism and help co-ordinate, plan, and implement the games from start to finish. Each volunteer played an important role in offering young, developing Alberta athletes an experience of a lifetime. From preparing meals to chaperoning athletes, each volunteer was an integral

part in making the Alberta Winter Games a reality. Volunteers are the backbone of such events as these, and I offer my compliments to the people of Strathcona county for a strong volunteer spirit. You have set a standard for other communities to follow. In recognition of their contribution to the 2000 Alberta Winter Games, I invite all members of the Assembly to join me in acknowledging the volunteers that helped make this event a success. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. Ukrainian Bilingual Program MR. BONNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At city hall today I joined a number of Members of the Legislative Assembly in helping to celebrate the Ukrainian bilingual program’s 25th anniversary. This is a remarkable program in several aspects, and after a quarter of a century it is very appropriate for us to celebrate its success and to reflect on the unique characteristics of the program. To appreciate the success of this program, we need to look no further than to the over 4,000 graduates, many of whom have taken on leadership roles in virtually every walk of life.

What is particu- larly remarkable about the Ukrainian bilingual program is the integration of language skills training into the broader context of culture. In doing so, the richness of language and the richness of culture are fused into an integral view of life. With this enriched experience early in life it is no wonder that so many graduates have gone on to lives of success and fulfillment. Today over 1,000 children follow in the footsteps of these graduates. Congratulations to all those involved, and may the Ukrainian bilingual program continue to grow and enrich the lives of our children and our province.

Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Sherran Dermott MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today to recognize a member of the Wetaskiwin-Camrose constituency, Ms Sherran Dermott of Ohaton. Ms Dermott was presented with a national rescue award at the annual lifesaving investiture ceremony by Her Honour Lois Hole, the Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, on Monday of this week. Sherran acted with selfless heroism when she saved an eight-year- old boy from drowning in a swimming pool filled with melted snow.

She crawled through a hole in the fence surrounding the pool and jumped in without consideration for her own safety. Young Stewart Kerr was very lucky someone like Sherran was close at hand, or the situation might have had a tragic end. For Sherran Dermott’s selfless and heroic deed I would like to honour her today. Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Roy Hassan Jamha DR. PANNU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to recognize the many tireless contributions of a great Albertan, the late Roy Hassan Jamha.

Roy was born on April 15, 1923, and passed away on February 20, 2000, at the age of 76. Roy was a warm and compas- sionate person working for the betterment of the poor and disadvan- taged until the day he died. He was a major force in the CCF, the New Democratic Party, and Alberta’s labour movement. He was a

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 197 New Democrat candidate in provincial and federal elections. Roy’s personal integrity, his dedication to his fellow human beings, his commitment to social change grounded in the values of social justice and fairness, and his practical idealism earned him deep respect among Albertans. Mr. Speaker, I wish to salute Roy’s life and work, his many contributions to Alberta and Canada, and wish to convey on behalf of everyone in this House our condolences and sympathies to Roy’s wife, Alice, and to his son and daughter-in- law, Douglas and Bonnie. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. St. David’s Day MRS. LAING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today, March 1, is St. David’s Day. St. David is the patron saint of Wales. People of Welsh ancestry around the world celebrate this special day. The Welsh people have a great gift in the field of music. Several special instruments come from the Welsh tradition, including the lyre, the harp, and a form of the bagpipes. Wales is noted for the beautiful music of their world-famous choirs. St. David, or Dewi Sant, as he is known in the Welsh language, was a Celtic monk, abbot, and bishop who lived in the sixth century.

He was the archbishop of Wales and one of the early saints who helped spread Christianity among the pagan Celtic tribes of western Britain. There are many stories regarding St. David’s life. It’s said that he once raised a youth from the dead. It’s claimed that he lived for over a hundred years and died around 589 AD. His last words to his followers included: be joyful and keep your faith and your creed; do the little things that you’ve seen me do and have heard about. “Do the little things” is now a well-known and treasured phrase in Wales and has proven to be an inspiration to many.

I ask the Assembly to join me today in wishing the hon. Minister of Government Services and Mrs. Grace Ballard and all other Albertans of Welsh ancestry a very special St. David’s Day. 3:10 THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo on a point of order. Point of Order Factual Accuracy MR. DICKSON: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I’d cite as my authority Standing Order 23(l).

I’ve always understood in the time that I’ve been a member of the Assembly that it’s been a clear practice that when somebody stands up to say something that’s not true or accurate and has been corrected, then they don’t persist in republish- ing the matter that’s inaccurate. That’s certainly been my experi- ence. Now, what I refer to here is that in the exchange of the first set of questions with the Premier, he persisted in suggesting that the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act prevents him from sharing the information that was blanked out on the document. He talked about it on February 23.

On February 24 he said: we’re protecting the anonymity of focus group participants. He said it again on February 28. Most recently, on February 22, there was some material that was brought to his attention to show that in fact the only three exceptions claimed are sections 21, 23, 26. Sections 23 and 26 are discretionary exceptions, “advice from officials” and “privileged information,” and were used some 56 times. The only mandatory exception was

section 21(1), used only three times. So out of all of the more than 50 blanked-out pages, they were discretionary exceptions, which meant that the minister or the head of the public body is perfectly able to share that information. His hands are not tied, as the Premier indicates. I know that the Premier takes pride in his flagship bill. I know he would want to not persist in republishing something that is just plain wrong, so I wanted to raise that as gently as I could, Mr. Speaker, and ensure that this inaccuracy is not further republished. Thanks very much. THE SPEAKER: The hon.

Deputy Government House Leader. MR. HAVELOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ll be very brief. There is no point of order. The simple point the Premier is trying to make when he refers to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is that this government has complied with the provisions of the act, whether the government has exercised its discretion in disclosing information or not. We are bound by the terms of the act. We have acted in accordance with the terms of the act, and what the Premier is saying is entirely accurate. Therefore, there is no point of order. In any event, this is a question of

interpretation with respect to how the act applies to certain provisions. The Premier’s perspective is consistent with th is government’s, and that is that we have complied with the provisions of the act. THE SPEAKER: Well, this important debate on what the freedom of information act is all about is really quite timely at this point in the afternoon. The Blues say the following. This is the response from the leader of the government. Mr. Speaker, all the information that was asked for and all the information that was released was in accordance completely with the rules of the freedom of information legislation.

Mr. Speaker, there is a process. If they’re not satisfied with what they receive, there is a course of appeal. I would remind the hon. leader of the Liberal opposition that they know how to use FLIP legislation. They use it more than anyone else. I’ve listened very attentively, and it seems to me that in essence it was a point of clarification. Much of this had to do with the discretionary versus the mandatory association with respect to it. I’ll view this as another one of those many, many points of clarification that we seem to have.

Heaven forbid that one day there might even be an introduction of a piece of legislation in this House so that we’ll actually have a reason for question period. We’ll have something to talk about. head: Orders of the Day head: Written Questions THE SPEAKER: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. MR. ZWOZDESKY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Following appropri- ate notice having been given yesterday, I move that written questions appearing on today’s Order Paper now stand and retain their places. [Motion carried] head: Motions for Returns MR. ZWOZDESKY: Once again, Mr.

Speaker, following the notice that was given yesterday, I rise to move that motions for returns appearing on today’s Order Paper now stand and retain their places also. [Motion carried]

198 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 head: Public Bills and Orders Other than Government Bills and Orders head: Second Reading Bill 204 Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Amendment Act, 2000 [Debate adjourned February 29: Mr. Fischer speaking] THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Wainwright. MR. FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We find ourselves at an interesting point in our history. On one hand, technology is showing us the limited possibilities there are in the agriculture industry, and on the other, corporate amalgamation and global economics are a harsh reality of this new century.

So we’re at a crossroads where a direction and a plan for the agriculture industry must be chosen, and that direction and plan must include a competitive opportunity in the world marketplace. Until some of this puzzle is solved, I would hesitate to limit expansion and take away one of the main tools used for the survival of both big and small producers. I look forward to the wisdom of the ag summit in June. I wish to compliment the Member for Little Bow for bringing Bill 204 forward, because it’s a serious issue for every member in this House and for all Albertans. Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon.

Member for Lac La Biche-St. Paul. MR. LANGEVIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to talk about an issue that’s important to Alberta’s agricultural community. I would like to commend the Member for Little Bow for making many of the members of this House aware of the importance of this issue to Alberta farmers. I would also like to commend the sponsoring member for the intent of the bill: to help the small, independent farming operation in this province. The objective is to preserve the family farm in Alberta, something I think we would all like to see.

In the past few decades we have seen a decline across Canada in the number of family farm opera- tions. The global economy and unpredictable weather conditions have taken their toll on the viability of independent family farms in this province. Adding to the condition, large corporate enterprise and communal farm operations have been able to outcompete the family farm by employing economies of scale in their own opera- tion. While in the global economy production efficiencies bred by competition are desirable, in rural Alberta this trend can lead to depopulation.

What often results is a migration from rural areas to urban centres. This adds pressure to roads and infrastructure within the urban centres. In addition, Mr. Speaker, agricultural land is monopolized by a few multinationals and corporate farming enterprises to the exclusion of all others. Bill 204 attempts to address the issue by preventing this from happening. The Alberta government recently released its economic develop- ment strategy, Get Ready Alberta.

The strategy builds on the province’s strength and sets bold targets for moving forward in science, research, education, and competing in the global market- place, making Alberta the best place in the world to live and to work. We need to be ready to respond to trends in the global economy, where virtually anyone can market their products and expertise around the world and move quickly to get the best return for their investment and the dollars involved.

One of our goals is that Alberta internationally be recognized as a good pl ace to invest and do business and that Alberta business compete and succeed in the global marketplace. The Alberta government is continuing to maintain a competitive tax advantage in the province and to promote a positive business climate that attracts investment. This is the reason that Bill 204 raises such an important and timely issue. Agriculture is a major sector of growth and employment in our economy, and we must maintain this sector as a viable and produc- tive part of the Alberta advantage.

We do this by making sure that our production techniques are the best in the world, that our producers are efficient, and that agriculture remains a viable and productive industry in the province. We need to thoroughly address the issue of landownership in this province and to continue the viability and sustainability of the family farm.

This issue is ideally suited to the upcoming ag summit, and I’m hopeful that the organiz- ers will make it a priority to ensure that landownership is on the agenda. 3:20 I’d like to commend the Member for Little Bow for being bold enough to bring up an issue that can be so easily misunderstood. Our family farms are important here in Alberta, and we need to address the issues surrounding their preservation. A healthy agriculture industry means a healthy province. In addition, Alberta’s farm industry is important to the whole country. Farm production is Alberta’s largest renewable resource-based industry.

In 1998, the primary sector generated $6.4 billion in farm cash receipts. This represents 21.7 percent of Canada’s primary agricul- tural output. Alberta averaged 20 percent of Canada’s primary output between 1989 and 1993. Secondary agricultural processing, including the food and beverage processing industry, is Alberta’s largest manufacturing sector. Shipments set a new record for output in 1998 at $7.5 billion in sales. Alberta now accounts for over 12 percent of Canadian food and beverage shipments, up from the 10 percent in the previous period of ’89 to ’93.

As outlined in the 2000 budget, agrifood business offers significant potential for expansion ahead. This industry could grow to $20 b illion in va lue-added shipments and to $10 billion in farm cash receipts by the year 2010. One of the expressed goals of the ministry of agriculture is the “increased diversity of commodities, products and services.” I imagine that one way of achieving this goal is to create an environ- ment where the small farms, the family farm operators can continue to survive and thrive in this provin ce.

That is the intention of Bill 204, to help level the playing field for small farm operators. Consolidation of landholdings in the hands of fewer farm operators diminishes the diversity of Alberta’s agricultural production. Limiting landownership to 15 percent of any municipality would prevent huge regional monopolies. The idea of having massive foreign ownership of our agricultural production is a big concern to myself and to my constituents. We live in an era of globalism, and as such we relinquish some of our sovereignty at the whims of the global market.

As we develop policies that set our course in the future, globalism is an issue that we must be mindful of. We have to be there to capitalize on the opportunity it brings as well as defend against the threats to our rich farm traditions. As others have mentioned in this House, we are at a unique point in our history in this province. The most recent budget set the stage for unpr ecedented growth and prosperity in this province. The people of Alberta are now seeing a tremendous reward that comes from sound fiscal policies and good government. Our debt is being paid off, and our tax burden is being reduced.

We have a growing high-tech industry, the oil sands development is giving a boost to every aspect of our economy, and we’re leading the provinces in overall employment. Our agriculture industry is not faring nearly as

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 199 well as other key industries. There are a number of reasons why some of our farmers are struggling, perhaps too many to discuss in this debate. Mr. Speaker, the upcoming agriculture summit should prove to be a great forum to discuss the issue of landownership in the province of Alberta. I’m hopeful that we can get some good discussion going about the issue and try to build some consensus. At the very least, consolidation of landownership should be recognized as a major challenge facing the farming industry in this province, especially the family farm. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Stettler. MRS. GORDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the Assembly for the opportunity to rise today and speak to Bill 204, sponsored by the Member for Little Bow. It’s no secret to anyone in the Legislature today that Alberta’s rural communities are in crisis. Of course there are a variety of reasons: one of these reasons was identified by the minister this week as he headed to Ottawa; we’ve seen a decline in the family farm; we’ve seen a decline in their commodity prices; and a number of other reasons. The cards are stacked today against the Alberta farmer.

The product of their work, the quantities we export have been cheapened by government policies in Europe. Large multinational corporations are creating a vertically integrated system of agricultural production, that squeezes out the independent farmers. Corporate farms also use competitive advantages to acquire land and slowly form regional monopolies that, again, squ eeze out the family farm. If anyone wants to take a look at this, just look in various states in the U.S. Alberta farmers are struggling against transportation issues and a bureaucratic federal government that seems unwilling to change.

Add to this the challenge of struggling against the whims of Mother Nature and the world’s economic climate, and you get a pretty clear picture of the tremendous challenge facing Alberta farmers today. Mr. Speaker, I realize we can’t do a great deal about what other countries are doing or what Mother Nature does. However, we do have control over the laws regarding the land, and Bill 204 attempts to address some of these concerns. What is the cost of inaction?

What will happen should this government decide to not do anything to help create an environment where the much-talked-about Alberta advantage is available to farmers in the farming community? Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, our government is listening. Unlike other governments, we aren’t asking the farmers to chase to Ottawa themselves to ask for support. We have acted, as identified by the minister being down there today. Members like the hon. Member for Little Bow are doing a good job of ensuring that this government remembers those who have helped build this province.

This Member for Little Bow also helps remind the members of the Assembly of the importance of farming and family farms. It’s taken a lot of courage for this member to come forward with this proposal and withstand the barrage of criticism and personal attacks that have been flung his way. I have constituents that are supportive of the hon. member’s bill, and as such I have an obligation to speak to their concerns. This is not an easy issue to address. It’s not an easy issue to talk about. It’s not an easy issue to go public w ith, but it is a concern to many farmers, especially in this day and age.

I really appreciate the hon. member’s attempt to bring his concerns, his constituents’ concerns to the floor of this Assembly. What I have learned from some of my constituents is that they have great concerns with multinationals buying up land and property in my community and in my constituency. Landownership is a very, very important part of farming. That being said, limiting landowner- ship may not be the best solution at this time, but it is something that we need to talk about.

It is one of the problems facing the independ- ent farmer in this province, although right now the independent farmer has many, many problems. I think we need to take a good, long, hard look at this problem and try to flesh out a more comprehensive approach to solving the problems in rural communities. The trend today, Mr. Speaker, toward integrated farming is one that threatens our existing agricul- tural industry. Integrated American companies as well as European companies come to Alberta and have the ability to buy tracts of land and limitless cattle.

When corporations come to this province and set up shop, it’s very hard to say what the end result will be. One result that is of great concern to some of my constituents is that these corporations tend to control pri ce. When a million dollar outfit comes in with all the buying power they have, someone is going to lose. As agricultural resources and the market for agricultural products are gradually owned and operated by corporations, the small independent slowly loses his ability to determine his own destiny. He is now at the mercy of the larger corporation. 3:30 This issue, Mr. Speaker, is very complex.

It’s something that many countries around the world have struggled with and are struggling with. We need to take a good look at some of the things done in the U.S. and Europe and see if they apply to our situation in Alberta. We need to have an open mind. We need to explore all options. Before we jump in and limit landownership, we have to study this problem, talk to those who have seen what has happened firsthand, and look for solutions. By establishing a policy that addresses the issue of land use, we would be one step closer to addressing the issues that face the agricultural industry as a whole.

It’s clear that this issue and others facing the agriculture community must be explored. It’s absolutely essential that we put our best minds together and try to come up with a comprehensive plan to help address the needs of rural Alberta before it’s too late. Mr. Speaker, the coming agriculture summit is an ideal place to explore options for a comprehensive land-use policy, if needed, in this province. It would be a great medium for exchanging informa- tion and collecting information from all the stakeholders in the agriculture community. We could see in what part of the province this is a problem.

I strongly believe this issue should be on the agenda of the agriculture summit. I believe that those are the people in the know, the people in the business, and the ones that should be talking about it. The more people we get involved in this discussion, the better the outcome. That’s why I’m glad that I’ve had the opportunity to speak on behalf of some of my constituents and bring this issue before the House today. Most of my constituents who have phoned and identified that this is a problem and asked me to speak up regarding the hon. member’s bill have been hog producers.

I think we need to have the debate, and I think industry has got to be part of the debate. In the end we might see that we can make a difference with some co-operation and some collaboration among stakeholders, that being the farm community. I believe that our province’s farmland may be one of our most precious resources in years to come. That’s why it’s so very, very important that we be good stewards of the land to ensure that young Albertans, young farmers will have the opportunity to benefit from this great resource.

If we invest time and effort into trying to formulate a policy that is fair, that is equitable, and that has involved consultation with key stakeholders, our farmland could be protected for future generations, and as a result we will enjoy a huge return on that investment. The world’s population is growing every day. The day will come

200 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 when farmland is the most valuable commodity this province has to offer. This being said, that is so very, very true in some countries around the world. Farmland is indeed at a premium, and very few anymore can farm. We want to ensure that farmland stays a valuable commodity. This province has to ensure that. Our farmland needs to be here long after the conventional oil has been tapped and a number of other resources.

The best way for us to capitalize on this, to ensure that the agriculture industry is strong and diverse, that the independent farmer is still part of the mix – we must have a discussion regarding land. We must ensure that the independent farm operation can remain viable in the future. The independent farm operation, farming families, and farm communities basically make up a large, large part of rural Alberta. The agriculture industry is changing. New technologies and new challenges are changing the way we do things. New technology enables us to do more with less.

Vertical integrations in the industry have found new efficiencies and are revolutionizing the food production industry. We find ourselves at an interesting point in our history on many fronts. On the one hand, technology is showing us the limitless possibilities that can be done and can be seen and can be considered in the agriculture industry. On the other hand, the very heart of agriculture, the land, could be up for grabs and for stakes. It’s a huge reality that must be talked about as we enter this new century. I have no idea, Mr.

Speaker and hon. members, what would be the outcome of these talks, but I think it’s time we have them. So we’re at a point where we can make a stand and choose the direction that the agriculture industry in the province will take. I strongly believe we should make good on this opportunity because it well could affect everyone in this province for a long time to come. I stand behind the hon. member but suggest that the principles involved in his bill go to the agriculture summit, where the agricul- tural community can discuss and debate the merits accordingly. Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon.

Member for Livingstone-Macleod. MR. COUTTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise today to address Bill 204, the Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Amendment Act, in second reading. As an MLA for a rural community I would like to thank the hon. Member for Little Bow for bringing forward an interesting concept to try and address a very important issue today for all rural members, indeed for all members of this Assembly, as well as for our agricultural commu- nity and our rural communities’ viability in general. Today, Mr.

Speaker, the agricultural communities of our province and of Canada are at a crossroads. Every day farmers, particularly grain farmers, face many real and severe problems, problems stemming from fluctuating commodity prices, inclement weather, high input costs, and regular commodity transportation. It’s not easy to remain on a farm these days.

With our cities booming as a result of unprecedented economic growth and new and exciting job opportunities for many Albertans, it is very tempting for many young people in smaller communities to leave their rural roots and uncertain futures behind them for new lives in the city. I have seen it happen in my constituency too many times.

Although I applaud and encourage my friends to take advantage of the many opportuni- ties that await them in the city, it is always sad to see families that have been your neighbours for generations leave. [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] Many of the farmers that have chosen to stay have had to take drastic steps to continue to earn a living. Many have sold off their assets, including their land and their equipment, just to stay afloat.

Others have had to diversify their farm operations to include ranching or other agriculture-related opportunities such as trucking, greenhouse operations, llama, elk, and buffalo ranching. Some others still go into country v acations and bed-and-breakfasts or tourism initiatives. Still, entire farm families have had to take second jobs in nearby towns and cities or contract out their services to other farmers in the area. Thankfully, this diversification has helped some, but it has hurt others as well. Many farmers have gone deeper into debt in an effort to get out of the red. Mr.

Speaker, people commonly refer to this phenomenon that rural communities are experiencing as the farm crisis. However, I’m not sure if that statement is entirely accurate, because one out of every three jobs in Alberta today is dependent on the agriculture sector. From the farmer in the field to the person working in the supermarket in downtown Calgary, Red Deer, or Edmonton, the so- called farm crisis affects everyone. However, I’m not sure if the full extent of the problem is really appreciated by Canadians as a whole.

While more than 1 million Canadians derive their living from fertile land, we have yet to be able to engage in a full-scale debate on the value of the food production in our province and the value of rural communities and farmers as they support their local service community. So, Mr. Speaker, I commend the hon. Member for Little Bow for raising this important issue. Bill 204 may be one way to solve the current problems farmers in Alberta face.

The debate may involve the principles of Bill 204, but it may and should extend itself into something more positive, maybe right-to-farm legislation. 3:40 As a Conservative and, more importantly, as an Albertan I recognize the right that each and every Alberta resident has to own property. Mr. Speaker, the right to own property and to make a living at that property is a fundamental belief and guiding principle of our government.

Any legislation that seeks to limit the right of an Albertan to own his or her own property might send the wrong message not only to entrepreneurs who see Alberta as a prime location to set up a business but to any Albertan who sees our government as a defender of the rights of individuals and property. Limiting the ownership of land also poses other problems. As I mentioned earlier, in our current agricultural economic climate the only way to survive as a farmer is to increase the size of your operation.

If we close off the only avenue farmers have to build a viable operation, what does that say about our government’s commitment to farmers? I want to point out that our government has been a leader in our country for farmer-friendly policies for some time now. Programs like the farm income disaster program and the crop insurance program administered by the Agriculture Financial Services Corporation have supplemented the incomes of farmers suffering disastrous income declines as a result of low commodity prices or weather-related crop damage.

But any farmer will tell you – and they have told me in my constituency – that the last thing he or she wants to do is earn their living through annual government handouts. Moreover these policies, while necessary, cannot begin to solve the real farming problem in Canada. Mr. Speaker, farmers and ranchers as primary producers are price takers, not price makers. Farmer s in my constituency continually raise the issue of commodity prices as the number one reason why they’re having problems making ends meet. Many of them continu- ally single out the Canadian Wheat Board as a major hindrance to their well-being.

This out-of-date monopoly has put tremendous pressure on grain farmers of Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatche-

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 201 wan, and Manitoba by forcing them to sell at a price the Wheat Board sets. Oddly, while farmers in Ontario and Quebec are able to operate their own provincial marketing boards or don’t participate in one at all, Ottawa maintains st rict control over the marketing of wheat in western Canada. The farmers have said to me: give me the opportunity to market my product at a fair price, and things will get better; I will get out of your way. Farmers also face problems dealing with the increased costs of running a farm.

Every year new and better fertilizers, seed, fuel, feed for animals, parts and upkeep for machinery, and maintenance for buildings have to be covered by decreasing profits from the sale of goods. It is important to recognize, Mr. Speaker, that farmers really know how difficult it is to keep their input costs from rising. Mr. Speaker, I can assure all the farmers in Alberta that their provincial government is very concerned about the real problems and the farm prices, and we’re acting on their concerns. This spring our government is holding Ag Summit 2000.

Ag summit is a broad- based consultation of all participan ts in the agriculture sector to address industry concerns and find ways to strengthen our agricul- ture sector. Many MLAs will be holding consultations and meetings in their constituencies and w ill be reporting their findings to an ag summit wrap-up in June. I have already solicited opinions from the many farmers in my constituency, and I certainly invite additional input from my constituents.

Our government will also continue to lobby for the reduction and the elimination of trade barriers that hurt Alberta farmers; in other words, make the market available to them at lower costs. As we enter the new millennium and near the centennial of our great province, it is important to recognize the important role that farming has played in Alberta’s development. Farming is part of our history, but it is also a part of our future. I share with my colleague for Little Bow the desire to find a long-term solution for our agriculture industry.

We must do it with the co-operation of the farming and ranching communities, and I hope that the farming and ranching community of Livingstone-Macleod will be part of that. Bill 204 is one way to go, but there are others, and a greater discussion should take pl ace. I hope we can work together on all and any solutions that will benefit Alberta farmers. Thank you very much. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Minister of Government Services. MRS. NELSON: Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker, and thank you for the opportunity to rise and speak to Bill 204, the Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Amendment Act, sponsored by the Member for Little Bow. This statute actually falls under the responsibility of the ministry that I’ve been put in charge of in conjunction with the foreign ownership of land regulations. Mr. Speaker, I’d first of all like to thank our members who have risen in this House to speak to this bill. They have done a tremen- dous job articulating some of the important issues that are there for rural Albertans.

While they may be issues that directly affect rural Albertans, they actually directly affect all Albertans because agriculture and our rural communities are the lifeblood of this province and have been from day one. The issue of landownership is a very important issue for all of us to review as Albertans, and I would like to agree with the Member for Wainwright when he suggested that we need to develop a long- term policy that sets the course for Alberta’s agriculture industry for the next 50 to 100 years.

The reality today is that the farm opera- tions are getting bigger, and the tr aditional methods of transporta- tion, distribution, and marketing of agricultural products are slowly fading away. Change is happening. Bill 204 speaks for many Albertans who are worried that our farmlands are being monopolized, and the bill has served the very good purpose of bringing the dialogue and discussion into this Legislature. I believe it’s long overdue.

However, I must say that the objective of the Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Act itself is to limit the acquisition of nonurban lands, both cultivated and noncultivated, by foreigners and foreign entities. I believe that the objective of Bill 204 appears to limit the taking, acquisition, or holding of cultivated land by both foreigners and Canadian citizens. So I think we have a bit of a conflict between the objectives of the two acts: one, the original act, and the other, the amendment of the act.

Once we get into the area of foreign ownership, we have other statutes that must be brought into the arena of dialogue before we can move forward. I agree with the hon. members who have spoken before me, Mr. Speaker. I think that dialogue must take place, and there’s a tremendous opportunity with the upcoming agriculture summit to draw the players together and sit down and talk about this issue, talk about it as Albertans. Where do we want to go? What do we want to see happen with our very precious lands? How is it going to fit into the agriculture of the future?

Keeping in mind that this is the lifeblood of our province, our agricultural community, I would ask the organizers of that summit to seriously look at making that dialogue and discussion a part of that summit process so that we can hear from the grass roots, so we can hear from the people of Alberta to find out what they truly believe is important for the future in agriculture. Because of some of the concerns I’ve raised, because of the dialogue that I think is necessary, and because I believe there has to be more work done on the bill, Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward an amendment to the bill.

I gather the amendment is being circulated. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Let’s just take a moment. MRS. NELSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe the amendment has been circulated to all hon. members, but I will read it into the record.

I’d like to move that the motion for second reading of Bill 204, Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Amendment Act, 2000, be amended by deleting all the words after “that” and substituting the following: Bill 204, Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Amend- ment Act, 2000, be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months hence. 3:50 THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is what’s known as a hoist amendment, and it’ll be called amendment A1. The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. MR. DICKSON: On the amendment only, because I had spoken at second reading on the bill.

I’d just like to say, Mr. Speaker, how disappointed I am to see this amendment brought in at this time. We heard all of these excellent speeches that have been spoken, at least on the face of it, with great passion and great conviction, and dollars to doughnuts when it comes time to vote, we’re going to see each one of those speakers line up to support this. I think, Mr. Speaker, that this amendment should be defeated. I think we should deal with this bill on its merits.

I would expect that all of those people in rural Alberta that we’ve been hearing from about those concerns and those issues would want to see matters addressed and dealt with squarely in this Chamber. This is supposed to be a place for determination and decisions, not a place for waffling, indecision, and buck-passing. When I see this kind of amendment, that’s exactly what it is.

202 Alberta Hansard March 1, 2000 I didn’t share the view, for example, of the Member for Lacombe- Stettler, but I respected the conviction in her speech. When I heard the comments of the mover of the amendment, up to the point she moved it, I thought she obviously believes very strongly about what she says, but the reason proffered for the amendment is shamelessly transparent, Mr. Speaker. There’s no good reason to do it other than political reasons that we can speculate about, but my suggestion to all members is that we defeat this and get on with the debate. Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Stettler, on the amendment. MRS. GORDON: On the amendment. I don’t know, hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Do you know what assumption does? I stood up in this Assembly talking on beha lf of my constituents, many of whom are hog producers that are very, very concerned about landownership. However, they are the people in the know. They are the experts. They are the farming community. I think it is a wonderful, wonderful idea that we hoist this bill so that the Agricul- ture Summit 2000 with all of the stakeholders present can deal with this issue.

They are the experts. They are the experts. I don’t like it when someone assumes what my intentions are, because my intentions were good. Those people that have talked to me want to have the debate take place. I don’t think this is the best arena. The best arena is where the people in the know will be, and that’s at the agriculture summit this year, the new millennium, where a number of issues will be discussed, one being exactly what happened with the federal government this week, to bypass Alberta but give dollars to Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

This is one more thing that the farming community wants to talk about. They don’t want me to talk about it without their input. I want their input looked at and talked about at the agriculture summit. I support this amendment. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Livingstone- Macleod on the amendment. MR. COUTTS: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would also like to speak to the amendment. We’re getting a sense from the opposition that this is a delay for some obvious reasons. It’s too bad that we didn’t hear too much on this bill coming from the Official Opposition other than one speaker.

A number of speakers from this side of the House have stood up for their rural communities and pointed out the problems that we do have in the farming industry today. Not only did they show their support for the hon. member and his concern for what’s happening with land use today; they also gave a number of instances of solutions, solutions that came only from this side of the House and absolutely no solutions from the other side of the House.

Now, some of these solutions should be discussed, definitely discussed, at the agriculture su mmit – this hoist would allow that type of conversation to happen – by the industry players that are going to be at the agriculture summit.

I’m hoping that those industry players take a look at the Hansard and take a look at some of the solutions and at some of the problems that were pointed out by members from our side of the House, members that are really, really concerned about rural Alberta, about the viability of our small communities in rural Alberta, and take a look at the people that stood up in the debate on this Bill 204 and made those kinds of suggestions happen. They didn’t happen from the opposition’s side. They only happened from the government’s side. So, Mr.

Speaker, I urge all members of the Assembly, particularly the Conservative members, to stand up for this bill and to stand up for rural Alberta and to stand up for farmers and the agricultural industry that has some difficulties but is so viable in this province today. Stand up for farmers. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton- Riverview. MRS. SLOAN: I’ll be pleased to stand up for farmers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have several remarks to make with respect to the hoist motion this afternoon, and I will speak with some authority, having had a rural upbringing and being the daughter of a farmer.

The problem this government finds itself in is that it has not got the political courage to confront the issues facing farmers and our rural communities today. I would ask you: how many agriculture summits, consultations , meetings has this government conducted in its term of offi ce? How many times have we gone around this province? Do you know what I would say this afternoon, Mr. Speaker? Farmers are sick and tired of telling their elected representatives about their problems.

They want the leadership in their government to take on the issues that they are facing every day, whether they’re facing it in the fields, in the bank manager’s office, or at their kitchen table when they see their operations going down the drain. The reality is that we don’t have the leadership in this House, in this government to do it, and that is exhibited by the fact that we’re going to hold another summit on the issue and that we’re going to hoist a bill.

I may not have agreed with its intent or the arguments made to support it, but at least it brought it to the floor of the Legislature to debate, and that is not something we’ve seen from the cabinet of this government. This is a bill that was s ponsored by a private member. The reality is that that issue about food production becoming corporately controlled or the majority of our rural land being held by corporations is not going to go away and it’s not going to get smaller while we sit around a summit table.

That issue has been growing for years, and regrettably we have not seen the initiative, the courage, the leadership in this province to take it on. Now, there are all kinds of implications. We see monopolies, and it’s not just monopolies in hog producing. Fertilizer, the additive companies, the companies that have an interest in modification and genetic manipulation – it is huge, and every day that we sit here or we sit in a summit somewhere else those companies have their act together and are strategizing about how they might further their market share in our agricultural communities. 4:00 Mr.

Speaker, I don’t agree with the hoist motion. I may not have agreed with the primary arguments made for the bill, and quite frankly I believe the type of framework we should have been looking at in this province for our rura l communities needed to be much, much broader than what this bill proposed. But that would have taken government initiative, and this government has not had the ability, for whatever reason, to do that. Now, this is the challenge that I put before the members of this Assembly. We have to answer the question: what do we value more? The future of our rural communities or our political future?

It is the root of that question th at’s causing the immobility, if you will, the paralysis within this Legislature. We’re too concerned about what? It doesn’t matter what your partisan position is. This can apply to any member regardless of their political affiliation. If

March 1, 2000 Alberta Hansard 203 you value your political affiliation more than you value the strength and spirit of our rural communities or our urban communities, we will find ourselves paralyzed to challenge it. Now, we had a very lively discussion last night about WTO, NAFTA, and all the trade agreements. This government has been going to those negotiations along with the federal government, and agriculture is impacted by those agreements along with all of the big service sectors. Health care is impacted. Agriculture is impacted. Telecommunications is impacted. Resources is impacted.

We don’t see information being shared by this government on those negotia- tions and the commitments being made at those tables. There are proposals and submissions being prepared now by staff in intergov- ernmental affairs in an advisory capacity to the negotiations that are going to commence in September. We have not had a discussion about that in this Assembly. To hoist a bill, in my opinion – I mean, you should call it a hot potato motion, because really what it is is just a mechanism to try and toss it somewhere else. Toss it out to the back.

The reality is that we need to talk in this province and in this Legislature about the health implications of food production and landownership. That’s why I’m speaking against the hoist. We need to speak about the health implications of food production becoming corporately controlled and landownership predominately being corporately owned. We need to talk about the municipal implications and the regulatory implications. We need to talk about community impacts and the impacts to the schools, businesses, and hospitals in those communities, the environmental impacts and, perhaps least of all, Mr.

Speaker, the electoral and population impacts when you see rural communities dying because family-based or single-operator- based farms cannot compete. So I oppose the motion, and I look forward to the day when there will be some political leadership in this province to actually bring forward a comprehensive plan for the future of our rural communi- ties in Alberta. Thank you. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Little Bow. MR. McFARLAND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the sponsor of the bill I have a couple of comments that I would like to make.

The first is to thank those that stood up and spoke on behalf of their constitu- ents in support of the bill. The second thing that I would like to make reference to in speaking to the hoist motion is that as the sponsor I do endorse and support the whole idea of this discussion taking pl ace in a forum that’s more comfortable to th e consti