May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1539 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, May 8, 2003 1:30 p.m. Date: 03/05/08 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon and welcome. As we pray, let us also commemorate Victory in Europe Day with the words of Winston Churchill, given in London on May 8, 1945: God bless you all. This is your victory! It is the victory of the cause of freedom in every land. In all our long history we have never seen a greater day than this. Ev eryone, man or woman, has d one their best. Everyone has tried.

Neither the long years, nor the dangers, nor the fierce attacks of the enemy, have in any way weakened the independent resolve of the British nation. God bless you all. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introducti on of Visit ors The Speaker: Hon. members, I hav e the gre at pleasure tod ay of introducing to you the Hon. Ted St affen, the rece ntly elected Speaker of the Yukon Legislative Assembly. Mr . Staff en i s accompanied by his sister Anne and brother-in-law Reg Bukowski from St. Albert, and they’re seated in the Speaker’s gallery.

Speaker Staff en was first e lected to the Yu kon Legislati ve Assembly in th e general election of November 4, 2002, and was elected Speaker on February 27, 2003, when the first session of the 31st Legislature convened. Mr. Staffen is the 22nd Speaker to serve in the Yukon s ince the Y ukon Territorial Council became a full y elected body in 1909. He represents the constituency of Riverdale North in the Legislature on behalf of the Yukon Party. I’d ask members to join with me in welcoming the hon. Speaker Staffen to our Legislature. head: Introduction of G uests Mr. Jonson: Mr.

Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly 20 students from the Countryside Christian school, located near Edberg in my constitu- ency. They are ac companied by Mr. C hester Isaac, teacher, and board members Mr. Ralph Thiessen and Mr. Randy Friesen. They are seated in the members’ gallery, and I would ask that they stand and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Lund: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

It gi ves me a gre at deal o f pleasure to introduce to y ou and through y ou to mem bers of t he Assembly Berhanu De meke. He is a recent g raduate of Gra nt MacEwan College in public relations. He’s currently doing an eight- week practicum in my department’s communication division, where he’s involved in a varie ty of projects. Berhanu is origina lly from Ethiopia and has lived in our grea t province for 10 y ears. He is seated in the me mbers’ gallery, and I woul d ask him to rise a nd receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr. Lougheed: Mr.

Speaker, in the members’ gallery today is Jason Yaremchuk, whom I’d like to intr oduce to yo u and to me mbers assembled. Jason w ill be wor king this summer with the Legisla- ture’s information systems. Jason is accompanied by Greg Pelletier, who also works with information systems. I’d ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert. Mrs. O’Neill: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of this A ssembly the vice- president of corporate affairs for Eli L illy Ca nada, Mr.

T erry McCool, and Mark P atton, the Alberta mana ger of go vernment affairs. Eli Lilly Canada was born of a collaboration with Canadian research heroes Ba nting and Be st to bring i nsulin t o the ma rket. Since then the company has l aunched powerful antibiotics, intro- duced Prozac, and pioneered drugs to treat such desperate conditions as cancer, schizophrenia, and osteoporosis. They are in the mem - bers’ gallery, and I woul d ask that they rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Klein: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m pleased today to introduce to you and thr ough you to m embers of the Assembly two summer STEP students, Natasha Dhillon and David Wheeler. Natasha will be working at McDougall Centre in Calgary. She is an energetic University of Calg ary s tudent who ju st finished her third year studying international r elations a nd religious studies. N atasha speaks both French and English and is active in campus volunteer activities. David will be working in my constituency office. He is currently pursuing a degree in political science at the University of Calgary.

David speaks both Spanish and English, is an activ e skier and hockey player, and is a m ember of the political science students’ association. Mr. Speaker, it’s a pleasure to have these two fine young Alber- tans join my staff for the summer, and I know that they will find the experience both rewar ding and cha llenging. I would as k that our honoured guests rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Mr. McClella nd: Thank you, Mr . Speaker .

On behalf of the Member for Medicine Hat, who expressed to me his sincere regret at not being able to mak e the introd uctions himself, I’m pleased t o introduce to you and through you to all members a number of guests who have j oined us today. Please joi n me in welcoming approxi- mately 100 students, t eachers, and parents from Crestwood school in Medicine Hat who have made the six-hour bus trip from Medicine Hat to join us in the Leg. today. Despite the tremendous amount of work and organization involved, Crestwood school has a tradition of having its grade 6 classes visit the Legislature every year.

They are seated in both the members’ and the public gallery, and I’d ask that they rise so that they may receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr. Speaker, if I could, I’d also like to acknowledge that St. Louis school from Medicine Ha t also had gr ade 6 student s visit t he Legislature this morning but were unable to join us this afternoon. The Member for Medicine Hat asked me to let both g roups know that he looks forward to joining them at their respective schools in the very near future. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to introduce to you and thro ugh you to al l hon. members of this Assemb ly a constituent of Edmont on-Gold Bar , Mr. Dougla s Combs . Mr . Combs, who is present in the public gallery, is an employee in the

1540 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 security industry and has taken the time from his busy

schedule to come to the Legislative Assembly to vi ew the pr oceedings of the House. I would now ask Mr. Combs to rise and receive the wa rm and traditional welcome of this Legislative Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: Are there other s? The h on. Member for Calgary- Shaw. Mrs. Ady: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I’d also like to introduce to you and through you today my STEP student. I believe she’s in the members’ gallery, and her name is Jen Smith. She just returned from a year at Brigham Young University and hopes to be a teacher some day.

I k now th at the cons tituency of Calg ary-Shaw will be wel l served by Jen this summer. I ’d like her to stand and r eceive the warm welcome of the House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m happy to rise today and introduce t o you and through y ou to mem bers of t he Assembly a constituent of mine in Edmonton-Highlands. Her name is Carmen Macklin. She’s here to observe the proceedings today, and she is se ated in the public gallery.

I would ask her to rise and receive the warm greetings of this Assembly. head: Ministerial Statements The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Economic Development. Alberta’s Economic Outlook Mr. Norris: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to talk about some great Alberta economic stories, specifically about the great cities in Alberta, and today it’s Calgary and Edmonton that we’ll be talking about. The Conference Board of Canada says that Alberta’s overall gross domestic product will be 5.5 percent this year and 4.9 percent in 2004, whic h out paces all growth in other provinces in Canada.

As a result of this, employment growth will benefit from the Alberta population growth, pushing unemployment rates well below 5 percent. Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Economic Development in Alberta I have met with entrepreneurs, international exporters, and business leaders from across this province w ho have m ade the A lberta advantage work for them and continue to do so in their communities. The economic success that we have enjoyed today is a tribute to all those hardworking and dedicated Albertans.

At the sam e time, t he outstanding perform ance of Alberta’s economy is also a tribute to the leadership of Premier Klein. Over the past decade Premier Klein has laid the foundation for outstand- ing growth in Alberta with a number of programs that have contin- ued to give the Alberta advantage to the business community in ways that are now producing huge dividends. Alberta’s increasing growth in manufactured goods and business services has reduced the effect of commodity prices and led to a n increasingly diverse economy.

Today Albertans look upon the entire world as their export market for Alberta goods, and Alb erta has beco me a most attractive investment destination. In short, Alberta is claiming its place on the global economic stage. 1:40 Now for the really great new s, Mr. Speaker. The Conference Board of Canada ranked Calgary, the great city to the south of us, as the number one growth city in the country of Canada f or this year and for the next three years running. That growth is closely followed by the great city of Edmonton for the years 2004 to 2007.

I would like to offer my con gratulations to all Al bertans i n the business community and to this government for having the dedica- tion to understand that business fuels this economy and will continue to do so. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you v ery much, Mr. Speaker. The Of ficial Opposition is also please d to hear tha t the Confe rence Boa rd of Canada projects t hat Alberta’s GDP will cont inue to grow in the immediate future. However, it is important to remember that there is another side to this story about Alberta’s economy.

The Minister of Economic Development and this government need to start taking into account all the factors that contribute to Alberta’s economic well-being. For years con sumers and b usinesses alike have been struggling under the we ight of outr ageous energy bills caused by this government’s deregulation boondoggle. We are now seeing the postponem ent of up graders, deferrals, and a general economic slowdown. Deregulation is turning the Alberta advantage into an Alberta disadvantage. Education is the key to future economic prosperity in Alberta as it fuels economic growth.

However, a recent study conducted by TD Economics highlights the deficiencies in Alberta’s education system. Years of inadequate funding for education has led to large class sizes and some of the highest tuition rates in the country for postsecondary students. Action must be taken now to restore Alberta’s education system so future gen erations of Albertans don’t h ave to suffe r. Through chronic underfunding, this government is creating a social deficit that is affecting our quality of life and our capacity to attract and retain individuals and industry.

Yes, we are lo oking at a short-term gain, but the real questions are: will it be sustainable, and what will our long-term quality of life be? The Speaker: Hon. members, it appears that the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands would lik e to partic ipate. T hat will require unanimous consent. [Unanimous consent granted] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank y ou very much, Mr. Speaker , and I woul d indeed like to thank members of the Assembly for the opportunity to respond to the ministerial statemen t that we just heard.

I regre t, however, that I cannot join in the cheerleading and apple-polishing, because it seems to me that the Minister of Economic Development has glossed over a number of proble ms plaguing Alberta’s longer term economic prospects. For example, the TD Bank has highlighted Alberta’s underinvest- ment in education resulting in participation rates in postsecondary education below the Canadian average, which threatens our future competitiveness and prosperity.

Other comm entators express concern that Albe rta is il l equipped to de al with t he inevita ble decline in our natural wealth of oil and na tural gas resources as a threat to our future economic well-being. Then there is the botched energy deregulation scheme, which has transformed Alberta from having the lo west nonhydro electricity rates in No rth America to having the highest electricity costs of any Canadian province. We’re indeed for tunate, Mr. Spea ker, to liv e in a bea utiful

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1541 province endowed with so much natural wealth, but we must do a better job of conserving these resources, safeguarding our air, land, and water, and educating our youth if this prosperity is to be secured for future generations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Before the next item in the Routine a comment will be made at the conclusion of the Routine about the violation of the rules presented by the first speaker. We’ll do that at the end. head: Oral Quest ion Peri od Electricity Deregulation Dr. Nicol: Mr.

Speaker, the Premier is commissioning yet another study on electricity deregulation despite the fact that he already has at least four reports by four different committees collecting dust on the shelf. To the Premier: why do we need another report to tell us what the report of the Advisory Council on Electricity has already told us? There is a lot wrong with electricity deregulation. Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, there’s not a lot wrong with deregulation per s e. There is something wrong w ith the way in which som e companies in some areas of the province bill.

Indeed, there has been in place for some time an Advisory Council on Electricity, and this advisory coun cil has tremend ous knowle dge about the energy industry. It has been in place I think for something like two years and is the best group to conduct this review of consumer concerns, not deregulation. We are not going back on deregulation, but if the Liberals want to go back to a totally socialized, regulated format, then let them stand up and say so.

What we will do is expand the mandate of the committee to look at some of these consumer issues, and to do that, we will be adding two Members of the Legislative Assembly to that committee. The hon. Member for Whit ecourt-Ste. Anne and the hon. Member for Leduc will be added to the committee to represent consumers and to get to the bottom of why there are billing discrepancies throughout the province. It has nothing to do with deregulation. It has a lot to do with billing practices and maybe some other matters that may be deemed fit by the advisory committee to review. Dr.

Nicol: To the Premier: so this commission will not be looking at the issues that you’ve created in this electricity deregulation that in themselves are contributing to higher prices for Albertans? Mr. Klein: Mr. S peaker, tha t is an as sumption tha t I believ e is entirely false. Deregulation – and the hon. leader of the Liberal opposition knows this – has brought many benefits, but it’s so typical of the Liberals not to talk about the benefits and only to talk about the negatives. That’s why they have seven and that’s why we have 74: because they only want to talk about the negatives.

We’ve never said that deregulation would be easy, but we have said that its long-term effect would be positive for the province. Now, I’m going to tell you, Mr.

Speaker , for th e benefit of the opposition Liberal leader, t hat dereg ulation has br ought ma ny benefits to electricity consumers, including about 3,000 megawatts of new power, an increase of 30 percent with no debt to the taxpayer; another 5,200 megawatts of new power being planned, representing an investment of about 6 billion private-sector dollars, again with no debt to the taxpayers; security of supply for today and for the future; and growing availability of new product options a nd packages for retail customers as more marketers come onto the Alberta scene.

So we do need – and I hope the Liberals will agree with us – a free and competitive market to create new electricity generation in Alberta, or we run the risk of brownouts or blackouts. Under the regulated environment that we had before . . . [interjections] The Speaker: Please. Let’s go on to the third question here. Dr. Nicol: Again to the Premier: will you admit that this commission is not going to l ook at the pr oblems that your regulatory changes, your flip-flops on regulation are causing, increasing the price o n deregulation as well? Mr. Kl ein: Mr.

Speaker, first of all, t he commission has ha d the authority all along, for the past two years, to look into many aspects of the generation and the transmission and the selling of electricity.

The committee will be expanded to include issues such as why some parts of Albe rta are paying higher p rices than other are as, billing practices of utility companies, fairness of all line items on the bills, consumer accessibility to competit ive market opti ons, lo ng-range forecast for consumer prices, realistically and independently, current and future be nefits of deregula tion for cons umers, impacts of government and EUB dec isions on consumer prices, and other consumer issues identified by the council. Now, Mr .

Speaker , not withst anding wha t the Libe rals try to portray about deregulation, the bottom line is t his. Martha and Henry out there in Alberta do not generally understand power pools. They don’t understa nd electrons . What t hey u nderstand is the bottom line on their bill, and when they see an unrea sonable bill, they want to know why, and we want to get to the bottom of it. 1:50 Dr. Nicol: Mr. Speaker, if the y wanted to get to the bottom of it, they’d give that commission the power to deal with all of the issues that ar e affecting the pr ice of e lectricity in this province. Mr.

Premier, why are you not allowing the commission to look into all of those issues? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, they have that already. The committee has that already. All we are doi ng is expanding the ma ndate of t he committee. Dr. Nicol: To the Premier: why is it that this committee has made many recommendations to this government and you’ve yet to act on them? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, that i s an assum ption that I be lieve is incorrect, but I will have the hon. Minister of Energy respond. Mr. Smith: Well, Mr. Speaker, the mem ber is abso lutely wrong.

One recommendation from the Bolger commission, or the advisory council on electr ical issues, that was s truck in the first qua rter of 2001, was to deliver transmission that delivered overall lowes t competitive generation in the provi nce. We did that. T hey didn’t like it. I mean, are they opposed to the commission? Dr. Nicol: To the Prem ier: given that the Minister of Energy has made such a mess of deregulation, why does he still have his job? Mr. Klein: First of all, Mr.

Speaker, he has a job because h e has done a good job with deregulation under very difficult circumstances and with, I believe, undue and unwarranted an d unso licited, certainly, criticism from the Liberal opposition. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar.

1542 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 Electricity Transmission Policy Mr. MacDon ald: Thank you, Mr. Spe aker. D uring the 2001 election campaign the Premier when discussing electricity deregula- tion looked up from his briefing notes and shrugged, quote: I have no idea what all this means. End of quote. Customer s acro ss Alberta certainly know what this means. It means sky-high power bills, expensive, unreliable service, and they want answ ers. They want electricity deregulation unplugged. My first question is to the Premier.

Give n that now c onsumers are fa ced with at least an additional $3 billion – that’s $3 billion – in transmission costs in the next 10 y ears, where will these costs now appear on consumers’ power bills? Mr. Klein: Well, first of a ll, Mr. Speak er, for t he recor d he has added $2 billion. I know that they don’t think $2 billion is signifi- cant the way they like to spend, but $2 billion, albeit Canadian, is a very significant amount indeed.

It is $1 billion, and when spread out through the provinc e and all t he consumers of t he province, both individual and industria l, it is ve ry little considering that over the long term deregulation will bring about and has brought about many benefits, and I’ve already alluded to those benefits: 3,000 megawatts of new supply , an increa se of 30 pe rcent w ith no debt to the taxpayer. T hat’s important.

I k now that pe rhaps they admire the socialist framework that they have in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and perhaps they even adm ire the hug e debts tha t have be en accumulated in those provinces, but we don’t. So no debt to the taxpayer; another 5,200 megawatts of new power being planned, representing an investment of 6 billion private-sector dollars; again, no debt; security of supply. This is important. Yes, there are some billing problems, and we’re going to look at that, and those billing problems exist in certain areas of the province.

But the one thing that needs to be mentioned – and this is what I was going to mention, Mr. Speaker – is that under the totally regulated system we were in danger of brownouts or black outs because the EUB decided when new power was to co me onstr eam. That was the regulated portion. I t was entirely up to the EUB. The power companies were not allowed, without the decisions of the EUB, to bring on new power, so there was a critical shortage of power. Now we have security of supply. Albertans can rest assured there won’t be blackouts or brownouts, and that is important. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We know that electric- ity deregulation may cause brownouts, it may cause blackouts, but it’s also going to cause a PC political wipeout. The Sp eaker: I’m assuming, hon. mem ber, that tha t was t he question. Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, in his dreams. In his dreams. The people of this province, albeit not understanding all the intricacies – and I know that this hon. member doesn’t understand all the intricacies of power generation, distribution, and sale; it’s a highly complex issue – underst and one thing.

They understand entrepreneurship, they understand free enterprise, and they understand the ability of being able to think and plan for themselves rather than having government do it for them. Mr. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, to the Premier: what circumstances have changed between November of 2002, when the EUB made the decision to share transmission tariffs equally between generators and customers, and now that enabled the M inister of E nergy to com- pletely change government policy and pull the rug out from under- neath the EUB? What circumstances have changed to allow that to happen? Mr. Klein: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I’ll have the hon. m inister supple- ment, but the simple answer is that the consultants who were retained to make that recommendation are no longer consultants. Perhaps the hon. minister can respond. Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, absolutely true. I mean, the member has been here now since T hursday a week ago, Thursday of the wee k past. He’s read the spee ch on Mo nday. He’s been in the House Tuesday and Wednesday. He’s heard that we’ve responded to the report of the advisory council on electrical issues.

We’re doing this in the interests of Alberta consumers, because there would be certain consumers paying more for transmission in Alberta than others. This is a province of 3 million people. We want everybody to be treated the same on transmission. They will not be paying twice. They will not be paying a billion dollars over a week and a half, as the member would li ke to say. These are preposterous distortions that are i n effect going to come back and land squarely on that member. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner.

Electricity Deregulation (continued) Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Albertans don’t want minor tinkering with the Tory deregulated electricity system, that is rotten from the ground up, nor do they want a phony review designed to buy time for the government and distract attention from the shock- ingly high bills consumers are paying. The Tory solution to all of this is to add two Tory MLAs to an existing council. My questions are to the Prem ier. Why won’t this council ha ve the a uthority to fully ex amine de regulation and the possibi lity of a return to a regulated market? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, there is nothing stopping this committee from making those recommendations, but I doubt very much if they would be adopted, be cause it is the polic y of t his gove rnment, supported by the Liberals at least through legislation, to head down the path of deregulation, and we’re well into deregulation. As I said in my media scrum yesterday, there are some bumps along the road. We want to smooth out those bumps. Whenever you try something new, there are going to be bumps. 2:00 You know, Mr. Speaker, this government has always prided itself on having the co urage to t ry som ething dif ferently.

Unlik e the Liberals both provincially and federally we are not stuck in the box, and we don’t think that the way to solve a ll problems is to simply throw money at them . We lik e to think things through. I often allude to 1993-1994, when it was deemed unconventional or, indeed, un-Canadian for provinces to operate without a deficit. The Liberals were screaming at that time, “ Oh, you can ’t do government that way.” My God, they were organizing protests and everything else. “You’ve got to have deficits. That’s the Canadian way.” Dr. Nicol: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Klein: Well, we eliminated the deficit, Mr. Speaker. We got this province on the road to f inancial prosperity because we were prepared to think differently.

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1543 The Speaker: There was a point of order raised by the Leader of the Official Opposition during that last exchange, and I would ask that the Premier remain for the point of order. The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that jurisdictions like California have m oved away from deregulation, why does the Premier stubbornly cling to a policy that will cost consumers billions and has driven Alberta to have the highest cost power in the country? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, I’m sorry. I wasn’t addressing the Liberals. I was addressing the NDs.

It was the NDs that were doing it, not the Liberals, I think. Dr. Nicol: I withdraw my point of order. Mr. Klein: It was the NDs because it was certainly ND and socialist thinking that you have to borrow, borrow, borrow, and borrow more – right? – to sustain government spending. Mr. Speaker, I forgot what the question was. The Speaker: As I understand what transpired there, the Leader of the Official Opposition has now withdrawn his point of order. Dr. Nicol: Yes, Mr. Speaker. He clarified the accusation as being against the NDs and not the Liberals. It’s not a point of order.

The Speaker: This is rather unusual, but we’ll go on to the leader of the third party for his third question. Dr. Pannu : Mr. Speake r, my second ques tion is gone? I’ m surprised. Why am I getting punished for it? The Speaker: Well, considering it’s Thursday, hon. member, please proceed with your second question. Dr. Pannu: Oh, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that jurisdictions like California have moved away from deregulation, why does this Premier stubbornly cling to a policy that has cost consumers billions already and driven Alberta to have the highest c ost power in the country? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speake r, I’ll hav e the hon. Minis ter of Energy supplement, but as I ex plained to p revious questi oners, the m ain reason we went to a deregulated environment is to provide consum- ers with more choices but, more importantly, to ensure that we get needed generation onstream, and that indeed has happened. I’ll have the hon. minister supplement. Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, the member continues to distort, so let’s just put it in perspective. The Aquila/EPCOR network is the area that he’s talking about.

If he’d looked at the ATCO network, he would find that those prices after deregulation were in fact low er than what they were before deregulation. In fact, if he looks at Enmax and EPCOR, he’ll find minor changes. Now, if he talks about the California example, Mr. Speaker, he’ll find that California has a hundred billion dollar budget with a $35 billion deficit. That’s socialist heaven. If you look at Ontario, they took a $38 billion debt, froze electricity prices, and what happened six months la ter? T hey added another billi on dollars to tha t $38 billion. That’s good socialist thinking.

The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Pannu : Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. My last quest ion to the Premier: given tha t it was this Tory govern ment wh o gave us deregulation and high-cost power, how does the Premier expect his advisory council to be believe d by Al bertans tha t T ories wi ll investigate themselves fully anyway? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, I take great exception to the allegation that these individuals are Tory hacks, s o to speak.

Len Bol ger i s the chair, a well -respected individual who’s connected to the Alberta Research Council and ASRA; Dan Astner, the Alberta Federation of Rural Electrificat ion Associ ations; Jim Beckett, rep resenting an investor-owned utility; Fred Gallagher, a small independent power producer; Jack Hayden, the president of the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties; Robert Hemstock, a retailer; Karl Johannson, a large independent pow er producer; Jack J oys, th e Alberta district D irect Conne ct Consum er Association; A lbert Klapstein, yes, the MLA for Leduc and a special appointee and, I’ll say, a very, very strong and committed advocate for the consumers in his constitue ncy; R ick Kline, no relation, Independent P ower Producers Society of Alberta; John McGowa n, Alberta Ur ban Municipalities Association; Dale McMaster, Alberta independe nt system operator; Norman Mills, a large industrial consumer; Robert Nicolay, a municipally owned utility; Stan Schellenberger, a public member; Mike Smyth, a public member; George VanderBurg, again another committed MLA representing not only his own constituents but, indeed, the people of this province; and Jim Wachowich, who, by the way, has been highly critical of government policy, represent- ing the Consumers’ Association of Canada.

That is the list. I can’t think of a broader and more representative

section of Alberta society than these people listed previously. Speaker’s Ruling Referring to a Member by Name The Speaker: Hon. Government House Leader, would you kindly advise the members of your caucus what the rules are with respect to names and the use of names in the Assembly. The hon. Minister of Economic Development has advised me in written form that his speech writer will be fired later this afternoon, and perhaps there’s some advice there for others as well. The hon. Membe r for Cards ton-Taber-Warner, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Agricultural Industry Mr. Jacobs: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. Many of my constituents are curious about the agricultural industry’s potential goal of $20 billion in value added and $10 billion in primary production by 2010. My first question is for the M inister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. Given that Alberta is still recovering from the worst drought in recorded hi story, what steps a re we taking to help the industry meet this goal? Mrs. McClellan: Mr.

Speaker, it is true that Albe rta endured the worst drought in re corded history last year, but it’s also true that agriculture has played an important role, does play an important role, and will cont inue to play an import ant role in t his province ’s prosperity. Unquestionably, things are looking brighter – at least they will when the sun comes out – with the moisture we have had over much of the province, although I would say that there are still some areas of concern. Mr. Speaker , we ar e fortunat e to have had a review of the agriculture system in this province through the ag summit.

We are fortunate t hat industry leaders have tak en a leade rship role in

1544 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 providing us with recommendations for growth in this province. We are fortunate that we have a very, very positive relationship with the Ministry of Econom ic Development, which will sell the prod ucts that our Alberta en trepreneurs produce, and w e are fortunate with initiatives like the incubator program at the Leduc processing centre, which will assi st o ur e ntrepreneurs to p roduce tha t hi gh-quality, much-sought-after food product and get it out into world markets. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My first supplemental, also for the minister of agriculture: in light of the agricultural industry’s production goals, what is the minister doing to ensure that Alberta’s economy is not negatively impacted by Alberta’s unpredictable water supply, especially in southern Alberta? 2:10 Mrs. McClellan: Well, Mr. Speaker, certainly, my colleague has hit on a very key point: Alberta’s quality of life and, i n fact, life itself depend on having a healthy and sustainable water supply. The hon.

Minister of Environment has embarked over the last y ear on a consultation process w ith Alber tans on a w ater str ategy for our province. We have a history of exceptional water management, both on managing the supply of water and the quality of that water, but I think it is cl ear that today with demands on our system we have to manage our water on a wa tershed-by-watershed basis. I think the review, the consultation that will continue under that process that the minister has outlined, is impe rative.

I encourag e all A lbertans, whether they be comm ercial, dom estic, or recreational users o f water, to be involv ed in that. I t is probabl y the m ost important initiative that this government could undertake with Alberta sitting on the largest supply of fresh water, indeed, in North America. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question is to the Minister of Energy. Given that Alberta producers are subject to the volatility of energy prices, what can they do to manage the cost of electricity and natural gas?

The Speaker: Hon. minister, we’re talking about a lot of opinions here now. Mr. Smit h: Well, Mr. Speaker , let me just say , then, t hat ou r agricultural community i n Alberta understands how commodities work better tha n anybody else in the province. They d eal with it every day. They’re subject t o the com modities price swings, and they know that natural gas is a co mmodity, in f act, which is pro- duced on much of their land, that is subje ct to price swings, as is electricity. They are in contact with their utility companies. They’re watching the marketplace as it unfolds.

They are going to have more choices, more options about leveling their costs, about being able to buy hedged power, and about being able to take control of the price of the commodities of natural gas and electricity. Holy Cross Hospital Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, the Libe ral opposition ha s learned t hat a building once recommended for demolition at Calgary’s Holy Cross hospital will now be lease d to the Al berta Cancer Board. As the Premier knows, t he Holy Cross was sold to a company owned by well-connected Tories for one-quarter of its value just a few years ago.

That com pany is now fa cing sev eral cha rges in c ourt for endangering workers’ safety through asbestos contamination. To the Premier: how does th e Premier ju stify the Alb erta Cancer Board doing business with a company that is in court for exposing workers to a cancer-causing agent as dangerous as asbestos? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, first of all, one has to assume and, indeed, one has to take for granted that th e people who are responsible for the administration of the Cancer Board, particularly the board, are intelligent, good-thinking people, and the last thing that they would do would be to put in danger the lives of those who are already in some danger through disease. So they’re acting in the best interests of the patients.

They’re acting in the best interests of the taxpayer, and if the deal is a good deal, I would assume that the Cancer Board made the deal on the basis of what is good for the patient and what is good for the taxpayer. Dr. Taft: Given that this same individual who chaired the disposi- tion committee that sold the Holy Cross is now a director of the Cancer Board, that is leasing it back , will the Premier ask that this deal be suspended until a full, independent review is done? Mr. Klein: No, Mr. Speaker. We don’t get involved in the business of the Cancer Board.

If the hon. member wants to go back to former members, there’s a sitting MLA w ho is a for mer member of the disposition committee. When the disposition was made, it was made on the basis o f the best bu siness case being made. T his has been thoroughly investigated, and there was dee med to be absolute ly nothing wrong. Everything was totally aboveboard relative to the disposition of th at site. The only person who for som e reason, perhaps political, is making a fuss over this is the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr.

Taft: Given that the Calgary health region disposition committee assigned zero value to the specific space in question when it was sold – they gave it away – will the Premier finally admit that the sale of the Holy Cross was nothing less th an a rip-of f of the Alberta taxpayers? Mr. Klein: Of course it was not a rip-off – was not, and I underline and stress “not” – for the Albe rta taxpayers. Mr. Speak er, as the hon. member pointed out, this hospital, this site, was earmarked for demolition. Now it is a fully active site.

As I understand, there is an adjunct campus for Mount Royal College to study certain aspects of medicine. There is a long-term care centre at the site. T here is a wonderful library for alternative m edicine at the site. There is an ophthalmology clinic. I believe there are numerous other medical clinics at the site. The site is being fully utilized. Now with this deal that apparently was made between the Hol y Cross Centre a nd the Cancer Board, there will be even further utilization of this site. Casino Wait Lists Mr. Lougheed: Mr.

Speaker, a group from Strathcona county who would like to do some fund-rai sing by working a cas ino are ve ry frustrated by the three-year wait that exists at the St. Albert casino. They’re very frustrated, of course, and they have questions that they would like me to ask of the Minister of Gaming. How come the wait list is so long for the St. Albert casino? Mr. Steven s: Mr. Speaker, as you know, in Alberta we have a unique charitable gaming model which allows charities and not-for- profit groups to make application to the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission for a licence to run casinos.

Generally speaking, those groups which receive licences are allocated to a casino within their

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1545 area. In the case of Strat hcona county , as we know, the re is no casino, and as such they are allocated to the closest casino, which in this particular case is one located in St. Albert, which is designated as a rural c asino. Tha t allows for the l east travel time for those groups. The casinos located in Edmonton are available for the not- for-profit groups that are licensed within Edmonton proper and also for the provincial groups that offer services throughout the province. Mr. Lougheed: Well, Mr.

Speaker, then the question that I would like to ask: w ould the boundarie s be adjuste d so that Stra thcona county groups could be allowed to go into the Edmonton region, or as new ca sinos are being added, will w e see thos e bound aries adjusted? Mr. Steven s: Mr. Speaker, I’m glad that the hon. member has mentioned new casinos. As of March of 2002 we lifted the morato- rium with respect to the expansion of gaming within the province. Since that point in time several expressions of interest in or around the Edmonton area and also in the central Alberta area with respect to new ca sinos have come f orward.

I f some of those recei ve ultimately a licence to operate a casino, there’s no doubt that that will offer some assistance to those who are waiting. The fact is that the reason there are waiting lists is that each day the AGLC receives approximately five new applications for licences, and there are far more applicants who are seeking licences to operate casinos than there are available within a given year. 2:20 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lough eed: Thank you, M r. Sp eaker.

Again to the sa me minister: could he let us know how long the wai t lists are in other casinos around the province as compared to the St. Albert casino? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. At this point in tim e in Calgary the wait list is approximately 21 months, in Edmonton 24 months. In Red De er it’s somewhere in the vicinity of 21 to 24 months. Lethbridge is about 27 months. So in all areas throughout the province the wait lists have been going up, once again, as a result of growing interest by charities.

I can sa y that the AGL C, in considering new app lications, will be lo oking at w ait lists in the areas in question as one of the important considerations with respect to new casinos. There is some positive w ith respec t to this w ait l ist for t he charitable groups. In 1995 slot machines were added to the casino mix. As a result, the take by the charitable groups has increased. In 1994-95 the aggregate amount for the charitable groups was some $19 million,

whereas today it’s $114 million. That would mean that over that eight-year period the charitab le groups who run two-day casinos will be receiving today as opposed to ’95 ap proximately twice as much. Edson Schools Amalgamation Dr. Nicol: Mr. Speake r, this afte rnoon’s constituency que stion comes from the parents in the tow n of Edson . These parents a re concerned that the school planning process in both th e public and separate school systems has been disruptive to their children and has gone ahead w ithout proper cons ultation.

To the Minis ter of Infrastructure: why weren’t parents consulted before this minister ordered the transf er of Jubi lee junior hig h from the public to the separate school system? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the closure of schools, the school board has the authority . The sit uation in Edson w as one where if you looked at the overall school population, if you looked at the capacity in the schools within the town of Edson, there was enough capacity to handle all the students in the town.

The problem was that there was overcapacity in the public system and not enough capacity within the separate system. The public school board passed a resolution that they would close Jubilee school. We do no t get involved in the issue of whet her in fact a school boa rd is going to close a school. In this particular case, when they decided that they were going to close the school, it just made all the sense that we in fact would then allow the sep arate b oard, who incidentally was running in excess of 110 percent in their current facility, to take over Jubilee, and that would accommodate their needs. Dr.

Nicol: To the Minister of Learning: does the government have a long-term plan for the students at A.H. Dakin school who are still using a facility that was officially closed two years ago? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. What happened in Edson and Hinton was essentially an amalgamation between the public and the private systems. What we saw there was a very difficult situation in Hinton where we had students that probably for the last three or four years were actually being schooled in the ice arena.

What the Minister of Infrastructure and I did was take a very careful look at what was happening. The Minister of Infrastructure i s absol utely r ight. In Eds on Jubilee school, I believe it was – and I may or may not be right on the name – was set to be closed by the public board, and there was a new school to be built f or the Catholi c board. It di d not mak e sense to close one school, on one hand, and build another school, on the other hand. So they were subsequently amalgamated.

I under- stand that there were a lot of misunderstandings in the community over that, but I believe that the majority of it is straightened out. It was done in the best interests of the students of Edson, and we really feel that it will work out in that manner. The Speaker: To supplement? Mr. Lund: Yes. Specifically dealing with the A.H. Dakin school, it’s true that it was officially closed a couple years ag o. It has continued to be used, and now with the situation we will be upgrad- ing and modernizing and expanding Pine Grove and also Parkland high school. A.H.

Dakin will stay open until the modernization and expansion have occ urred. At that ti me it w ill be clos ed, and the board will dispose of it. Dr. Nicol: The final question is again to the Minister of Learning. These parents would like to know if the minister and your colleague the Minister of Infrast ructure will join them and listen t o their concerns before going ahead with further changes to the school; in other words, go out and visit them. Dr. Oberg: Well, Mr.

Speaker, what happened in this particular case was that shortly af ter the budget was announced, t he Minister of Infrastructure and I went to Edson to deal with these issues. We felt that it would be relatively easy because, on the one hand, they were closing the school a nd, on the other ha nd, we were s topping construction. We amalgamated the two, and we thought it would be fine. From my personal point of view, I have no problem in talking to

1546 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 the people of Edson about w hat happened. I underst and, though, that it has been resolved. Perhaps the Minister of Infrastructure can allay those concerns, but I would have no problems with going up again and talking to them. Mr. Lund: Well, Mr. Speaker, we have said that we will be prepared to go and meet with a representative of the parent or school councils and make sure that the transition will occur with the least amount of disruption.

It’s always the situation when a school is closed that people have some misg ivings a bout it, but I believ e that in the overall picture both the o peration and ma intenance of the public schools will be well served by the plan, and the separate board will now have the capacity to handle their students. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Youth Sport, Fitness, and Recreation Programs Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recently there have been a number of articles and reports that show that children are becoming increasingly more obese because they lack the proper am ount of physical activity in their daily lives. In fact, many reports state that there’s a serious problem in Canada with ch ildhood obesity that needs to be addressed. Becoming involved in sport is a great way for children to not only become active but have a lot of fun at the same time. My questions are to the Minister of Community Development. What steps is th e minister taking to get chi ldren more involved in sport in this province? Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the short answer is that the Department of Community Development works collaboratively with a number of other gove rnment departments such a s Learning and Children’s Services, certainly Health and Wellness, and eve n Infrastructure on facil ity capacity expansion. Through those amalgamations and consultations we’ve developed some s pecific programs that address specifically what the hon. member is asking. For example, we have the Ever Active program for young people, which occurs thro ugh and with the c ollaboration of the health department right at the school level.

We have the Live Outside the Box campaign and program, which is also focused around younger members of our po pulation. Tomor row I’ll be announcing the launch of the annual Summer Active program at St. Kevin school. I’ll be joined by an Edmonton Oiler, who will serve as a great role model, I’m sure, to help promote activities among our youth that are focused around fitness, recreation, and sport.

We also provide a number of funding opportunities through our Alberta Sport, Recr eation, Parks & Wildlife Foundation that help enable young people to participate in things like the Alberta Summer Games, the Western Canada Games, the Arctic Games, and so o n and so on. Mr. Johnson: To the sa me minister: what approaches have been made to the federal government concerning bilateral agreements to develop sport in Alberta? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, in fact I have written recently to the Hon.

Pau l DeV illers, who is the secret ary of st ate in Ottawa responsible for sport, fitness, and recre ation programs, and asked that he consider a possible bilateral arrangement, an agreement as it were, between the federal government and the province of Alberta that would help address increa sing o ur program ming a nd our activities for y oung people pri marily and, at the same time, al so would look at som e of the underrepresented groups who are for whatever reason not pa rticipating to t he le vel we would all like. Young girls, f or exam ple, are unde rrepresented.

Indige nous individuals and aboriginal people are underrepresen ted in our participation levels, as are disadvantaged individuals, as are certain segments of the disability community. That would be very consis- tent with our national sport policy, the national sport program, which ministers responsible for sport across Canada recently endorsed, and I believe it’s also consistent with some of the recommendations that have been put forward by the task force that was pla nning the Alberta sport plan.

So ther e are a number of things of that nature that we’re trying to get going with the federal government, and we are having some success in that regard. 2:30 Mr. Johnson: My final question to the same minister: what are you doing to address the physical activity concerns as referenced in the Mazankowski report? Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think the Mazankowski report and the discussions that ensued after it certainly pointed to the fact that if we could increase participation levels primarily by young individuals at an early age, they would retain those habits perhaps as lifelong habits, and the result would be probably a savings of about $5 billion to the health care costs that are currently facing Canadians. We only need to increase physical activity by about 10 percent to get there. In the Mazankowski report that

section isn’t vivid in my mind right at the moment, but I think it focused more on the wellness side and the aspect of getting good habits started earlier. In fact, from our side, just in the budget that was approved here for Community Development two nights ago, we increased funding for the Alberta Sport, Recreation, Parks & Wildlife Foundation by something like 2 and a half million dollars, for a total budget now of almost $20 mill ion. As a result of that incre ase, Mr. Spe aker, ongoing programs will be continued, and w e’ll see a trem endous amount of increased activity. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Electoral Boundaries Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We will soon see legislation introduced which would make the proposed changes to the electoral boundaries of Alberta permanent. This government claims that they support an inde pendent process in redrawing the electoral bound- aries map. However, off ers have bee n pu t on the table to allow individual pleadings for changes to the boundaries, which potentially could lead to ge rrymandering. T he hon.

Mem ber for Edm onton- Beverly-Clareview stated in his speech on Government Motion 13 that there is “a process in place where we can ask for small changes to our constitue ncies by applying to the Justi ce mini ster.” My question is to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Where can individual Albertans pick up application forms to apply for these minor changes? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the hon. member knows that no one applies for amendments to a bill in thi s House, but t here are processes whereby in the d iscussion in committee on any bill that comes before the House members of the House can bring forward amendments. The hon. member would also know, at least I assume that she would know, being a member of a caucus, that before any amendments are brought before the House by an individual member

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1547 of a caucus, they would probably discuss them with members of the caucus. The hon. member would also k now that on an in formal basis I approached the Libe ral caucus a nd indicated, as I do on all bills before the House, that if t hey had a mendments for bi lls that they wish to have the government consider during discussion, it is useful to know about them ahead of time.

If they would give them to me as House leader, I would make sure that the minister involved with the bill or the sponsor of the bill would consider them and, if prepared to accept them, would bring them to caucus for caucus approval so that they could be appropriately discussed in the House. They rarely avail themselves of that opportunity, but it is an opportunity that’s open to them as well as to any other member of the House.

So in specific response to the question about electoral boundaries, all citizens of Alberta know that we debate bills in this House, that we have opportunity in Committee of the Whole for amendment of bills.

The electoral boundaries act is a little different than other bills in that th e b ill that com es befor e the House comes out of the Electoral Boundaries Commission report, but it’s open for amend- ment in committee, and I as the minister who’s respon sible for the act have received submissions from many Albertans, certainly from many communities across the province who are conce rned about certain aspects of the bill.

In response to every single one of those people that have contacted us, we’ve written back and said that when the bill comes before committee, we’ll be considering amendments and will consider their submissions. Ms Carlson: Mr. Speaker, to the same minister: is there a process where the citizens of Edmonton could apply to have the seat that is being taken away put back? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, of course, when we’re bringing forward a b ill to put in plac e the boundarie s proposed by the Electoral Boundaries Commission and when the House has actually approved the report of the boundaries commission by a resolution of this House, one would assume that amendments that come forward would have to be within the scope and the philosophy of the report.

The adding of a seat w ould require e ither the a mendment of the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act itself to add another seat to the number of seats that we have, in other words taking it up on e seat, or would require a very, very significant change to the philoso- phy of the re port that was brought in by the E lectoral Boundaries Commission and adopted by a resolution of this House. So it would not fall within the normal scope that one would expect.

Any member of the House, obvi ously, c an bring f orward a ny amendment that they want to bring forward, but it would be hard to see how an amendment to add another seat to Edmonton, as much as I agree with the concept, would be in keeping with the report that the Electoral Boundaries Commission brought in and that this House approved by resolution. Ms Carlson: Mr. Speaker, will t his minister tell t he House, the n, how many of the ag reements with regard to the boundary changes have been made and who they have been made with? Mr.

Hancock: Well, it’s for this House to determine whether there’s any agreement with a mendments that ar e being broug ht forward.

The process which I have undertaken is to hear from anybody who wants to rais e an issue with m e as the carrier of the bill and to recommend to caucus when I thin k th e proposed am endment fits within the scope of the Ele ctoral Boundaries Commission report, whether the adjustment meets a test of reuniting communities that perhaps ought not to have been split; whether the shift in population, if there is a shift in population, leaves the res ulting constituencies within the range and scope that the Electoral Boundaries Commis- sion set out for cities, for major urban areas, for urbanized areas, for rural areas; whether the representatives from those constituencies affected would agree wi th the changes; those sorts of tests to determine whether or not, prior to recommending any amendment to the House, it falls within those scopes.

So there’s no agreement with respect to any amendment. There is simply a process whereby towns have written to me as the minister responsible for the bill, where municipalities have written to me with respect to concerns that they have. I’ve raised those concerns with the respective MLAs, or they’ve raised them with me, including in fact members of the Liberal caucus. If there is agreem ent that an amendment could be made which would fall within the scope of the commission’s report, I would bring forward those amendments to the House at the appropriate time. That’s the process we’ve followed.

The appropriate time has not come yet because the bill itself hasn’t been introduced, a lthough I anti cipate introducing it toda y. Cer - tainly, for anyone who has any suggestions with respect to appropri- ate amendments which would fall within the philosophy and scope of the commission’s report as accepted by this House by resolution, I wou ld be happy to mak e recom mendation to the House with respect to amendments of same.

Speaker’s Ruling Oral Question Period Practices The Speaker: That last series of questions was a most unusual series of question s and had abs olutely not hing to do wi th governm ent policy, but as there is leave for notice to introduce a bill on the Order Paper, Bill 42, which has not been introduced yet, the chair decided to allow those three questions to go, not knowing what they would be. But the clarification should be very obvious now to everyone in this Assembly on what the process is. This is not in the nor mal course a gov ernment bill that w ill be coming.

It will be a bill caused by, in essence, the Constitution of the province of Alberta. This Assembly passed a motion after it had created an independent commission, and the process will be that the bill will be introduced and should follow the results of the motion, and there will be an opportunity, as through the course of any bill, to have amendments brought to the Assembly. It’s only coinciden- tally that the Government House Leader is the minister talking about this particular bill, and there has to be someone from the government to introduce a bill, pending some other alternative solution.

So not a normal course to have this series of questions discussed here, but it was good clarification for everyone. head: Members’ Statements Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month Mrs. Gordon: May is MS Awareness Month. Canada has one of the highest rates of M S in the world, with Alberta having the highest prevalence in all of Canada. Where I live, a neurologist practising in Red Deer estim ates that betwee n eight and 10 residents are diagnosed with MS each month. My neurologist in Edmonton, Dr.

Mary Lou Myles, estimates that her busy practice is 98 percent MS related. 2:40 Although the cause of MS is unknown, its course unpredictable, and its cure as yet undiscovered, many exciting strides have been made. We now have many exc iting new dr ug therapie s that are helping many afflicted with relapsing/remitting MS. T he Alberta division, which is part of the MS Society of Canada, has sanctioned

1548 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 many fund-raising events across Alberta this mon th and next f or fund-raising: bike tours, Super Cities Walk tours, golf tournaments, and of cou rse the annual Carnation Day campaign. The central Alberta

chapter is excited and appreciative as once aga in this year the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness has enthusiastically agreed to participate in their annual bike tour, cycling some 76 kilometres from Lacombe to Sylvan Lake and back again on June 22. Last year he raised over $2,200. This year’s goal is $3,500. I would also like to take this opportunity to publicly thank the MS Society of Canada, Alberta division, for presenting me with the 2002 Maureen Allen Social Action award. I am and was truly honoured. MS lives here. Can we count on you? The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands.

Electricity Deregulation Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Conservative government’s power deregulation scheme lurches from one disaster to another. T he late st turn on this torture d road is the Energy minister’s unilateral decision to stick electricity customers with the total cost of new transmission lines instead of the 5 0-50 split between generators and consumers promised earlier. This is simply the latest in a long list of broken promises and betrayals. The most pernicious defence of deregulation is that this province has gone too far down the road to turn back.

By this logic, if you are driving down the highway right into the path of a semitrailer truck, you should just keep right on motoring along. Why is it that other jurisdictions like Ca lifornia a nd Texa s are abl e to reve rse their disastrous experiments while Alberta cannot? Why should Albertans trust this government when it says that reversing deregulation is too expensive when every other promise m ade about deregulation has ended up being wrong?

Only a truly independent, no-holds-barred public revi ew in which deregulation itself is put on the table can answer the question of why deregulation has failed and how much it will cost to return to sensible regulation. Adding two Tory backbenchers to an existing c ommittee just doesn’t cut it. This rewarmed committee fails the test of independ- ence that the Premier himself acknowle dged earlier this week was necessary. This committee will not provide the answers Albertans are seeking on why deregulation has failed.

Rather, it is designed to limit the political damage to the Tory government, not the financial damage to Albertans’ pocketbooks. The government needs to set clear terms of reference for this so-called review and table them in this House before it adjourns for the summer. Six months ago, Mr. Speaker, we asked Albertans to send us their power bills bef ore and af ter dereg ulation. Many responded. I n every c ase thei r bill went u p sharpl y, in many cases doub ling. We’ve held several public meetings throughout Alberta and will hold more.

The blunt message from these Albertans is clear: we need to pull the plug on deregulation. Ranking of Schools Mr. Lougheed: Mr. Speaker, I’m critical of the Fraser Institute and other organiza tions that ra nk schools ba sed on the academ ic performance of students. Ranking schools is one of many ways the focus can shift away from the factors which are really important for student achievement. A cademic success is, I be lieve, a result of three factors: the abilit y and effort of the student, the support and encouragement of the family, and the skill and commitment of the teacher.

When these three factors converge, students will hav e considerable academic success. I believe there’s more harm than benefit to be found in s chool rankings. These rankings speak m ore about the school’s program offerings and management decisions than they do about predicting academic success for prospective students. In fact, even the ranking methodology is subject to criticism. For example, one criterion is the difference between the sc hool-assigned mark and the diploma mark.

Si nce the dif ferences above and below are average for the school, the marks o f one tea cher who evaluates well above could balance off the marks of another teacher who evaluates below. The result is a good score for the school even though the Fraser Institute criticizes teachers who mark too high or too low relative to diploma exam scores. Learning can be better served by focusing on what’s really important instead of being distracted by school ranking, which tallies up student t est scores to see which scho ol attracted the most h igh achievers.

Many other factors do influence student achievement, but class size, homogenous grouping, the physical setting, technology, curriculum fit, and quality of textbooks are lesser determinants of academic achiev ement t han are the student, the family, and t he teacher. Thank you. Mental Health Week Dr. Taf t: Mr. Speake r, May 5 to 11 is Menta l Health W eek in Canada. The goal of Mental Health Week is to promote awareness and understanding of the prevalence of mental illness and to combat the shame associated with it. The e ffects of me ntal illness a re staggering.

Approximately one in fiv e Canadians will experience mental illness at some point in their life, and almost every Canadian will be affected by mental illness either through a family member, a friend, or a loved one. While mental illness costs the Canadian economy $14.4 billion per year, the cost to our physical health and personal well-being is immeasurable. Being a healthy individual is more than just taking the right m edications or eat ing the rig ht foods. It ’s also a bout looking after our spiritual and mental well-being. Nowhere in this country is that a more important lesson than right here in Alberta.

According to the Can adian Mental He alth Association, Albertans have one of the highest ra tes of a nxiety and de pression in the country. Albertans with mental health problems and mental illnesses need better support and treatment within their own communities. Over the past decade Alberta’s mental health services like all health services in our province have suf fered from unsta ble funding and errat ic policy leadership. It’s time to put things right. Stable funding and long-term planning nee d t o be restore d to mental health ser vices.

This should include a community-based system of treatment and support with renewed emphasis on income and employment support, appropriate housing, and adequate crisis response. With better supp ort people with mental illness can lead fuller, happier, and more productive lives. Thank you. head: Present ing Report s by Standing and Special Committe es The Speaker: The hon. Member for Bonnyville-Cold Lake. Mr. Ducharme: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As deputy chair of the Select Special Ethics Commissioner a nd Ombudsman Search Committee I would lik e to table

part 1 of the com mittee’s report recommending the appointment of Mr. Donald M. Hamilton as the Ethics Commissioner for the province of Alberta.

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1549 head: Present ing Pet itions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present a petition signed by 178 Albertans petitioning the Legislative Assembly to urge the government to “not delist services, raise health care premiums, introduce user fees or further privatize health care.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I would lik e to prese nt a petition as we ll today. It ha s over 27 0 signature s from around Alberta.

They are ur ging the L egislative Assembly of Albe rta to urge the government to “immediately withdraw the draft manage- ment plan for the Evan-Thomas Provincial R ecreation Area and revise it so as t o disallow any f urther com mercial or resi dential development of the Kananaskis Valley.” head: Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Community Development. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Normally I’d be rising at this tim e to mov e a mot ion of notice regarding que stions and motions for returns possibly standing and retaining their places on the Order Paper, but there being none, that motion is not required. I thought I should advise the House of that eventuality nonetheless. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank yo u very much, Mr. Speaker . Pursuant to Standing Order 40 later this afternoon I plan to move to adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly to deal with the following motion of urgent and pressing necessity.

The Speaker: At this time it’s only important to give notice. head: Intro duc tion o f Bills The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Bill 39 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would request leave to introduce a bill being the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2003. As is norma l, Mr. Speak er, with miscellaneous st atutes the contents have been circulated to the two opposition caucuses.

The contents of the bill reflect only those that have been agreed to by all three caucuses. [Motion carried; Bill 39 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. 2:50 Bill 42 Electoral Divisions Act Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As was of course given a precursor during question period, I request leave to introduce a bill being the Electoral Divisions Act. Bill 42 encompasses the report of the boundaries commission with a few sections t hat are nor mally in the act , that are standard w ith respect to all electoral divisi ons acts, and then the

schedule which lists all of the 83 constituencies and boundaries as provided for in the boundaries commission’s report as approved by a motion of this House earlier . I ant icipate that during c ommittee there may be amendments brought forward. [Motion carried; Bill 42 read a first time] head: Tabling R eturns and R eports Mr. Cardinal: Mr. Speaker, I have six copie s on the fishe ries to table, the appropriate number of copies. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker.

I rise toda y to table the appropriate number of copies of a minori ty repor t, a disse nting opinion of the spe cial sel ect Sta nding Committee on Legis lative Offices signed by myself and the Member for Edmonton-Centre. It expresses strong concern with the process around that committee. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With permission I table the appropriate number of copies of four letters that I’ve been asked to table.

The first is from Darlene Vinge, who is really upset with the funding for educa tion in the prov ince and the lack of purchasing power that the lack of increases has brought about. The second letter is from Ruby Stone, who urges the province to do the right t hing and fully fund the teachers’ imposed arbitrated settlement. The third let ter is f rom Brenda Lemoine, aski ng the Le arning department to provide the additional funds to schools to cover the shortfall as a result of the teachers’ arbitrated settlement.

The fourth one is from Victor Dorian, again very concerned about the situation at Westglen school and the cuts that are going to, as he indicates, greatly harm both children and teachers at that school. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I hav e one tabling . It’s a letter that I received from a constituent of mine dated May 7, 2003, regarding the deregulation of the electricity industry. Like thousands of other Albertans she wishes to convey this message to the Premier: “Deregulation was a mistake. Admit it, correct it, and move on.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling a letter from Mr. Tim Belec of Westerose, Alberta, dated the 7th of May 2003. He says in terms of electrical deregulation: “I feel it is time to cut our losses and re-regulate. Some public services just don’t operate to the public benefit in the fre e market. El ectricity is one of those s er- vices.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Clover Bar-Fort Saskatchewan. Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to table the 2002 annual report of the Premier’s Council on the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

1550 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 head: Tablings to t he Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following document was deposited with the office of the Clerk. The hon. Mr. Cardinal, Minister of Sustainable Resource Development, returned to order of the Assembly MR 5 requested by Ms Carlson on March 10, 2003. head: Pro jected G over nmen t Busin ess The Speaker: The Official Opposition House Leader. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this time I would ask the Deputy Government House Leader if he would s hare next week’s projected business with us. The Speaker: The hon.

Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d be very happy to do that. We are projecting the following government business for the week of May 12 to May 15. On Monday afterno on we w ill be dealing with the private members’ business, of course, and should there be any written questions and motions for returns, followed by Public Bills and Orders Other than Government Bills and Orders. In the even ing on Mo nday we will deal w ith Motions Other than Government Motions, unless otherwis e agree d to , followe d by Committee of Supply, who will consider Aboriginal Affairs.

Then we will revert to Introduction of Bills and introduce Bill 40, which would be an appropriation or main estimates act, followed by second reading of Bill 42, Electoral Divisions Act, followed by third reading of the following: Bill 18, Energy Statutes Amendment Act; Bill 20, Alberta Municipal Fina ncing Corporation Amendment Act, 2003; Bill 25, Class Proce edings Act; B ill 26, Correc tions Amendment Act, 2003; Bill 28, Fre edom of Inform ation and Pro tection of Privacy Amendment Act, 2003; Bill 29, L aw of Property Amend- ment Act, 2003; Bill 31, Local Authorities Election Amendment Act, 2003; Bill 34, Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act, 2003; Bill 35, Tobacco Tax Amendment Act, 2003 ; and otherwise as per the Order Paper.

On Tuesday, May 13, 2003, in the afternoon we w ill deal with Government Bills and O rders and Private Bills in third reading as follows: Bill Pr. 1, Sisters of St. Joseph of the Province of Alberta Statutes Repeal Act, and Bill Pr. 2, Forest Lawn Bible College Act. Under second rea ding we will dea l with Bil l 39, Miscel laneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, and Bil l 40, Appropria tion A ct, 2003. Under Committee of the Whole we will do Bill 42, Electoral Divisions Act, followed by third reading of bills 18, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 34, and 35, and oth erwise as per the Order Paper.

On Tuesday evening we’ll deal with Government Bills and Orders and Government Motion 20, which would be concurrence in the Legislative Offi ce’s report regar ding the Et hics Commissioner appointment, then second reading of Bill 40 and Committee of the Whole on bills 39 and 42, followed by third reading of bills 18, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 34, and 35, and otherwise as per the Order Paper. On Wednesday, May 14, in the afternoon under Government Bills and Orders we will do third reading of Bill 39 and Bill 42 and as per progress that likely will be made on Tuesday an d as per the Order Paper.

On Wednesday, May 14, in the evening we’ll proceed with Government Bills and Orders under Committee of the Whole Bill 40 and third reading of Bill 39 and Bill 42 and again depending on the progress from the afternoon preceding that. We will also deal with Government Motions. On Thursday, May 15, in the afternoon we will deal with Govern- ment Bills and Orders including third reading of Bill 40 and also Government Motions. I believe that concludes our projected and estimated business for the following week. The Speaker: The chair must admit that he was getting rather tired just listening to this work

schedule for the next several days. Hon. members might like to know that you have already spent more hours in this Leg islative Assembly in the year 2003 than you di d in the spring session of 2002. So you w ill be adding significantly more according to this very enriched schedule. Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of G uests (reversion) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Stettler. Mrs. Gordon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce to you and through you to me mbers of this Assembly some guests that are seated in the public gallery.

These ladies are representatives of the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, Alberta division. Today they are here with thei r carnati ons, and I wish to th ank th em. Carnation Day is an annual event, and it does raise significant dollars that go towards MS, and we hope someday those dollars raised could well blossom i nto a cure. Earlier t oday t hey met with t he hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. I woul d like to introduce them.

Wanda Dennelly is the director of public relations and social action; Adeline Blumer, director of client services; and Suzanne Deschamps is from Bonnyville and will be biking in the bike tour coming up in June. She told m e earlier that thus f ar she’s raised $10,000. So thank you very much , ladies. Would you pl ease give them warm welcome of the Assembly. 3:00 The Speaker: Hon. members, the point of order raised today by the Leader of the Official Opposition was withdrawn, so that covers that matter. Admonishment was given to violators of our often-violated rule about naming people.

That admonition was given to the Minister of Economic Development, and advice was given to the Government House Leader with respect to conveying this message of the rule to other members of his caucus. head: Motions under St anding Order 40 The Speaker: So now we’re left with only one application. That’s the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands on a Standing Order 40 application. Electricity Deregulation Mr. Mason:

Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to conduct an immediate and thorough public review entirely independ- ent of go vernment and ind ustry i nto the failure of elec tricity deregulation to deliver fair and reasonable electricity rates for individuals, farms, business es, muni cipalities, and public ins titu- tions. Mr. Mason: Yes, please, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much. I understand that I m ay make a f ew brief comments relative to the urgency of this matter, which with your permission I’ll now begin to do. This is urgent both in the sense that it is vitally cr itical for Albertans and that it is time sensitive.

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1551 *See p. 1476, left col., para. 2, line 13 Let me deal fi rst with the importance of this issue. Electric ity deregulation has become one of the most expensive boondoggles in Alberta’s history. Estimates of what it has cost Albertans range from between $5 billion to $10 billion. Mr. Speaker, this will continue to cost Albertans individually hundreds and tho usands of dollars for their homes and businesses, and it is urgent that this Assembly deal with this quickly and before it adjourns for the summer rece ss.

Given the government’s actions today and the announcement of the review, it is clear that it will not meet the test set out in the motion. Mr. Speaker, it’s very important that this review be both independ- ent of the government and of industry and that it deal with the root causes of the problem of high electricity prices, and that is deregula- tion itself. What the government has put forward today does neither, and therefore it is urgent and pressing that this Assembly deal with this matter this afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: Well, I w ant to congr atulate the hon. mem ber for succinctly following the description of the word “brief.” That is very helpful. Approximately a minute to a minute and a half. That’s very commendable. Now, this application requires unanimous consent of the Assem- bly. [Unanimous consent denied] head: Orders of t he Day head : Co mmit tee o f Sup ply [Mr. Tannas in the chair] The Chair: I wish to call the Committee of Supply to order. First, I would lik e to recognize the hon. Mem ber for Edm onton-Centre before we begin the actual discussions. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I’d like to clarify my remarks during debate in Committee of Supply for t he estimates of Community Development on Tuesday evening, May 6, 2003. The ev ent I wa s trying to reme mber was the 2001 W orld Championships in Athlet ics, and the reference for that is on page 1476 of Hansard.* Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. head: Main Est imate s 2003-04 Sustainable Resource Development The Chair: Are there any comments or questions with res pect to these estimates? The hon. minister. Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I’m pleased to be here today to talk to you about Sustainable Resource Develop- ment’s 2003-2004 budget. Before I start, I’d like to introduce some of the sta ff that are sitting in t he mem bers’ gallery: Dr. Bob Fessenden, our deputy minister; Crystal Damer, executive assistant to the deputy minister; Ray Duffy, director of budgets, forecasts, and financial statements; Daphne Cheel, executive director of policy and planning; Donna Babchishin, direc tor of communications; Susan McManus, assistant director of communications; and Donna Ballard, my executive assistant.

I’d like to take o ne moment before I get to t he details of the budget just to thank the staff for all the hard work they do through- out the year. I’m not that easy to work with, I know. I have a policy that has a 24-hour return on most of the stuff that comes through my office. So if anyone ever tells you that it’s at the minister’s office, it’s not true. It might be at the deputy’s office or the ADM’s but not the minister’s. So keep that in mind. They do a heck of a job. At Sustainable Resource Development, Mr.

Chairman, our job is to ensure that Alberta’s natural resources are sustainable for future generations. There are a number of economic, recreational, cultural, and social activities on our public lands, and through the hard work of departm ent staf f, of c ourse, we mainta in a bala nce between activity and conservation. We have a variety of programs and services in our ministry, and there are basically five c ore businesses: one is, of course , a very important one, forest protection; forest land and resource manage- ment; fish and w ildlife management; rangeland management; and land use disposit ion management.

As w ell as the Department of Sustainable Resource Development our ministry also includes the Natural Resources Conservation Board and the Surface Rights Board and the Land Compensation Board. At SRD our job is to ensure t hat Albe rtans benef it from the development of their public lands and renewable resources both now and for the future. The work our ministry does in a c hanging and growing Alberta is so very important, and inde ed Alberta is a very quickly growing province. For instance, since 1991 our population has incr eased b y about a half million people.

Now we hav e a population of more than 3 million in Alberta. So, of course, there is a need for increased services for Albertans. Increasing population means more Albertans require more of our services and are us ing the re sources tha t are i n the mini stry’s management. For example, 98,000 hunters participated in the 2002 hunting season, about the same as in 2001. T hese hunters bought more than 250,000 diff erent licences. T here were about 217,5 22 sportfishing licences sold for the 2002 angling season. C urrently there are about 565, 000 active wildlif e identif ication n umber cardholders.

These are the W IN numbers. This i s abo ut 58,000 more than at this time in 2002. 3:10 This increased interest, of course, by Albertans in recreat ional hunting and fishing is very positive for our province. However, we need to have the proper system in place to deal with these increases, and this means that our staff and ministry need to have the resources to do this. Therefore, we are pleased that this year’s budget remains stable and that we will continue to have the necessary staffing and monitoring programs in place to take care of our fish an d wildlife resources.

Another area where we have seen a great increase is in the number of land dispositi ons provided by our p ublic lands di vision. For instance, during last year’s fiscal period over 176,000 dispositions were provided by this divis ion for ag riculture a nd industri al dispositions. This is quite a large number and speaks to the volume of work that our ministry is able to turn around on a daily basis. Another highlight in delivering increased services to Albertans is the Natural Resources Conservation Board.

The year 2002 was very busy for the Natural Resources Conservation Board, the first year it assumed responsibility for regulating confined feeding operations. Business conducted in 2003 so far indicates that the board will also be busy in 2003. In 20 02, its fir st yea r of res ponding to com plaints rel ated to livestock operations, the NRCB received a total of 981 complaints relating to 431 separate operations throughout the province. NRCB inspectors issued a total of 36 enforcement orders, and an additional 122 operators received a verbal directive, a warning letter, or notice of noncompliance.

In 2002 the NRCB received 169 applications for confined feeding operations or manure stor age m anagement

1552 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 facilities. It issued a total of 70 decisions, that included 60 approvals and 10 denials. The board is awaiting additional technical informa- tion on another 67 of the applications received in 2002. Overall, the number of complaints the NRCB received during the first three months of 2003 was up 30 percent over the same period in 2002. So you can see , Mr. Chairm an, that the additional $2 m illion we are providing to the NRCB this year in their budget will ensure that they can fulfill their mandate to Albertans.

The last area I wish to speak about in terms of increased services to Alberta ns is cer tainly i n the fore st protecti on area. A s all members here today know, we have had a very busy fire season the last number of years. In fac t, just to give you context of what we consider busy, we had o ver 1,450 fires last year and wildf ires threatened over seven comm unities and forced t he evacuation of thousands of Albertans. Most people don’t know that 40 percent of fires in this provi nce are human caused and that the rest are from lightning.

We need to get this number down, and we’re committed to doing that through our work in the community and through public education processes. Industrial, residential, and recreational demands are also increas- ing on Alberta’s lands and resources. We are working with Alber- tans to find the right balance between economy, en vironment, and the community. We consult extensively with Albertans about issues affecting natural resources.

Consultations continue to be critical in our work to manage Alberta’s fish and wildlife, for example through the Endangered Species Conservation Committee and groups such as the conifer managem ent group in west -central Alberta. We’ve involved st akeholders rec ently in three ve ry suc cessful recove ry efforts of piping plover, swift fox, and the western blue flag. We consult Albertans regularly on things such as allocation and fisheries management. This cont ributes to our important work on species at risk as well as our m anagement objecti ve of our other species.

M any of you a re aware, for e xample, of the prov inces’s excellent work on the new recovery team for grizzly bear manage- ment. In the area of public lands we have held consultations to develop access management pla ns for the Bighorn bac kcountry. We ar e currently asking for public input on plans for the Ghost-Waiparous area located jus t northwes t of Cochra ne, a n area of about 1,500 square kilometres, just one and a half kilometres outside of Calgary. So there’s a lot of pre ssure f or the area .

The G host-Waiparous access management plan w ill provide governmen t-approved direction for recreational off-highway vehicle use as well as other uses. We w ill be wor king w ith stake holders and Albe rtans to achieve a balanc e that protects the environment and provides opportunities for recreational uses in the area. As another ex ample we continue to work with the industry to integrate pla nning an d re duce imp acts. In dustry is res ponding favourably as shown by more joint planning and partnering agree- ments.

A monitoring process is also being established to ensure that local in volvement in future decisions a bout the trail s and the backcountry happen. It is no secret that Alberta’s forest sector is also facing some very serious challenges. The current softwood lumber dispute, of course, with the United States is having a significant negative impact on our forestry here in Alberta. Industry and government have been very busy working on allocating the financial resources that are necessary to defend forestry practices here in Alberta.

At the s ame time t he industry h as had to deal with near record low commodity prices. These factors have let uncertainties and doubts into the marketplace. These issues make it more important than ever that government and industry work together as a team to address today’s challenges and to look at the future. During this challenging period I am proud of the leadership that the Alberta Forest Products Association and the Alberta forest industry continue to show. Despite these challenges this industry continues to show the ir comm itment t o innovatio n.

T hey have introduced new technologies and leading-edge practices that allow them to do their job more effectively, efficiently, and with concern and sensitivity for the environment and wildlife. The forest sector truly shares the concern of Albertans that our forests are sustainable. Through this period the fores t secto r continues to play an important

part in diversification of our province and the prosperity that all Albert ans enjoy. Forestry is more than trees . It’s about people. It’s about t he nearly 54,000 j obs that for estry creates in Alberta. It’s about the more than 45 com munities in Alber ta that depend on for estry as their primary industry, and it’s $8.4 bi llion revenue for the province. A healthy forest is critical to our future for the en vironment and the economy.

Our department rea lizes that the re are m any chal- lenges t o be fa ced, but thank s to our car eful planni ng and the dedication of our staff we are prepared to meet these challenges. Our tot al budget r emains quite stabl e this y ear, clos e to $192 million, which is up by $8.5 million from last year. The increases are quite simple. We need to put funding in those areas that need additiona l support. For ins tance, I spoke earlier of the $2 million increase to deal with heavier demands being placed on the NRCB. As well, an additional $2.2 million will be for existing staffing and the cos t pressure s there.

T he major ity of other funding wil l b e spread through the ministry to support other key service areas and programs that Albertans expect us to deliver. Again, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank all of you for your attention here today, and I will be open for questions now. 3:20 The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the minister. I’d also like to thank the staff that joins us here today and the rest of the staff in the department. They are immensely helpful when I have questions.

We don’t always agree on the direction that the ministry should take, but then we don’ t agree on the nam e. Sustaina ble Resource Development in my mind should be just sust ainable resources. That leads us down a path of different opinions on some issues, but it is ve ry helpful to have the frank and open discussion that we have and the many briefings that are available to us through the minister with this department. So I thank them all for that. I also would like to acknowledge that this department offered to brief us on the budget, and we j ust di dn’t have enough time this week to get there.

So perhaps we can organize that next year. That would be great. I’d just like to put on the record in advance that if we don’t get through all of our questions, we’ll submit them in writing and ask for those back. For my first questions I’d just like to deal with a couple of issues. The first one is the grizzly bears. Mr. Minister, in your commen ts you talked about a recovery plan for the grizzlies. There’s been lots of pressure to put them on the endangered species list at some level. Can you talk about why y ou are resi stant to that i dea and w hat is actually happening with the recovery plan?

The Chair: The hon. minister. Mr. Cardinal: Yes, Mr. Chairman. You know, we had formed the committee to look at that specifically and develop a rec overy plan. Of course, the other thing that I’ve changed in that particular area is

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1553 reduced, in fact, the hunting of the grizzly bear to a manageable size. You know, we r educed the number hunted here in Alberta by 20 percent, I believe. When you look at the map of the hunting areas, zone 1, zone 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 4C, 6, and 7, in some of those areas, like 6 and 7, we’ve reduced considerably the number hunted because there’s added pressure in those particular areas. You know, when you look at the number of licences provided to hunt grizzly bear, we’ve reduced from 129 to 101 in 2002 and also changed where the hunting will take place.

Only about 15 are taken out each y ear. On the other hand, y ou kno w, you look at the government next door to us . B.C. actually in this year is allowing the hunt of 200 to 250. So, you know, when you look at both B.C. and Alberta, there’s only a boundary not noticeable by grizzly bears, so they could move around. I think wha t we’re doing is proba bly reas onable at thi s time. I think we’ve done a lot of work in grizzly bear management, research, monitoring, and monitoring the problem bears also.

Our grizzly bear management objective in Albert a is to m aintain a healthy grizzly bear population, following up, of course, on the recommendations the member me ntioned of the Endangere d Species C onservation Committee. Alberta took immediate actions and steps to deal with the issue, and I mentioned earlier that at my request the department established the recovery team to evaluate the current grizzly bear management and identif y are as for i mprovement a s w ell as a technical committee.

I have also requested that the department look at op tions for inc reasing poaching f ines, for an exam ple, for poaching grizzly bears because that is a concern, so we’re definitely looking at that. This year, again, I said that we restricted grizzly bear hunting in fact even further especially to protect the adult female population in some areas. The Endan gered Species Conservation Committee believes that Alberta’s grizzly bear population is fairly stable. Our data reports that information even with the current mortalities.

The committee also identi fied that the curre nt regulated hunt is not a primary concern for the mortality of the grizzly bear. Habitat issues will likely be the greater concern for the future well- being of the grizzly bear in A lberta. We h ave a c hallenge, Mr. Chairman, you know, to always keep the balance because a grizzly bear is definitely not a friendly animal. One of the things we find is that more and more animals are becoming urbanized, and they start to go into towns and communities and also parks where there are a lot of people.

There always seems to be a conflict either between a grizzly bear, especially, but also the black bear, the elk, the deer, the cougar, and the coyotes and the wolves, so ther e is alw ays the challenge of ensuring that these wild animals remain wild. To have some form of a hunting season, I believe, maybe keeps the animals healthier than not to hunt them at all because, really, a grizzly bear does not fit into a town or a hamlet se tting. They’re not a safe animal. On the other hand, the y have their environment that sometimes we interfere with, so it’s a challenge.

Definitely, that is a very good question; it’s a very important one. As a government we will continue working very hard to ensure that we try and recover the population. After this year’s hunt again we’ll review the targ eted hunting a reas and m ake the necessary adjust - ments that are required so that we can ensure that the population of the grizzly bear is s ustained, at the same time keeping the balance between keeping the animals wild and protected, and of course the protection of people is also important.

If you do walk into a grizzly bear if you’re out hiking or out hunting or out on your trapline, in most cases it’s either you or the griz zly bear. Ther e are no if s or buts. They’re a littl e different animal than the black bear or the cougar. A grizzly bear will actually hunt out a perso n that’s out there, so we have to be very, very careful in how we manage that in the future. There has to always be a balance. Ms Carlson: To follow up on this line of thought, Mr.

Minister, we’ve had some concerns from the southwest foothill regions that they’re seeing greater numbers of predators, particularly wolves and coyotes, and that they’re concerned that this is going to cause or is currently causing a decrease in elk and deer and other animals that outfitters normally would hunt. So can you comment on that? Are you doing any studies? Are you hearing those concerns as well, and do you have any plans to deal with this issue? 3:30 Mr. Cardinal: That’s another very good question that ties in quite a bit with the first question.

Definitely we have been informed of that, and we a re dealing with it. The problem w e have he re is of course to ensur e that we do p roper monitoring, that we’re not off when we monitor the actual numbers of wolves, for an example, and other animal species, that we keep that b alance.

That’s how our allocation is done in m ost cases for hunting – you know, the bear, hunting the wolves, and also elk – is monitoring the population and trying to determine, keeping a healthy balance and a healthy growth of animals and at the same time reducing the populations of certain species where it is required to keep that balance. It’s a challenge, but we need more work on that on a constant basis. It’s a good question. Ms Carlson: Mr. Chairman, I’d now like to speak ab out invasive species for a moment if we can.

We know that there’s the ongoing problem with the beetle infestation in the forests between the B.C. and Alberta borders. What’s the status of that right now? How is it being managed? Does it look like it’s going to be controllable? In addition to that, w hat other spe cies are you lo oking at as bei ng invasive, particularly with regard to our forests, for this coming year? The Chair: The hon. minister. Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much. T he mountain pine beetle infestation is an important forest management issue for Alberta, like B.C. B.C. has I think a serious problem in some areas.

You know, this problem will potentially cost the province millions of dollars, affecting potentially the sustainability of our forests. I believe that in British Columbia, from what I understand, it’s already cost over $9 billion in damages to the p rovincial economy. So it is serious. It’s right next door to us. Pine forests in Alberta are getting older and are vulnerable to mountain pine beetle outbreaks.

Banff national park is currently experiencing a mountain pine beetle outbreak, and the department will continue to work closely with forest companies and othe r agen cies, incl uding the n ational p arks, to ma nage the mountain pine beetle problem as effectively as possible. Sustainable Resource Developmen t, o f course, ha s an effective beetle monitoring and control system in place, and we will continue to play a key role in minimizing the effects of mountain pine beetle through early detection and control of new infestation.

If you go on highway 1 past Cochrane and west towards Banff, you will see areas where there w as some clear-cutting done to try a nd separate the movement of the pine beetle into new ar eas in the forest. It is a challenge because, from what I understand, if the right wind or the wrong wind comes up, the beetl e can be carried a long way into a new direction and therefore continues to be a challenge. So, yes, we’re aware of the problem.

It could potent ially be a serious problem, but we w ill ensure t hat we ha ve the ne cessary financial and human resources to work with other jurisdictions to ensure that we manage that problem. The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie.

1554 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. I ’d now like to get an update on the Carseland fish ladder if we can. Initially we had the problems with the ladd er having to be repaired during a spawning time, and then there was a huge outcry in fact from that area to us about the scre en that w as on the top of the la dder. I know the minister has said that the fish were able to spawn downstream, but those actually managing to get up the ladder and then hit the screen had the potentia l for being damaged and not be ing able to spawn downstream.

If the minister could tell us if that problem has been resolved and what practices you may be putt ing in place to ensure that that doesn’t happen again in the future. The Chair: The hon. minister. Mr. Cardinal: Yeah. Thank you very much. In fact, I understand that the screen has been removed now. The fish ladder beside the Carseland weir is operational, and the fish are able now to get to the river on the upstream side of the weir. Of course, high water levels are delaying total completion of the l adder project. For safet y reasons the wat er leve ls need to s ubside b efore w ork can be completed.

Further, the contractor is waiting for some components to be delivered so they can be installed by the end of May. Condi- tions caused by some of the unfinished work may be making it more difficult for the fish to find openings in the river. However, I guess nothing at this time impedes their eventual passage, especially with the screen being removed. I can give you assurance that in the future we will ensure that the work that needs to be done is co-ordinated with the spawning season of our fisheries.

It may be necessary to try and do it late fall or later on in the summer not to, you know, hit the spawning season at the same time. So tha t is a ver y g ood que stion, and I k now the Mini stry of Transportation continues to w ork with us closely on that, and you can be assured that we will be looking after that. Again, I’d just like to say that even with some of the difficulties we had with the screen and the inability of fish to move certain portions, they still were able to spawn below the weir and also above.

If there is damage done, no doubt it will be very minim al, but in the future w e’ll definitely monitor it a lot closer. The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now I’d like to talk about woodland caribou for a few moments. It’s a species that we don’t actually spend a lot of time talking about in this Legislature, yet their numbers are diminishing at a rap id rate, in fact perhaps faster than other endangere d species like rhinoc eroses a nd those kinds of animals. Woodland ca ribou are st arting to g ain an inter national reputation.

They are diminishing in this province not only because of a lack of ma ture forest area but because there’s more human presence in their habi tat, particula rly in the wintert ime w ith the larger numbers we’ve started to see in high-country winter activities like heli-skiing and so on. What’s your department doing to address this particular issue? Mr. Cardinal: We do have, again, a good monitoring program and a plan. In a lot of areas we work with industry; for example, in my constituency, Alberta-Pacific, who holds a large forest management agreement.

Within the ir fores t manag ement a greement are, y ou know, natural g rounds for the caribou to be, and in fact Al-Pac jointly with us ha ve collared some animals to track the movement and try and count the numb er of ani mals and what im pact their forest-harvesting may have. They seem to be reasonably stable, but it’s a challenge, again, to keep the population strong. It is not a food source for aboriginal people. I don’t think it ever was here in Alberta. I think that maybe there are a few people that hunt, but very, very few hunt caribou, so it’s not a food source for the aboriginal people.

The threat of opening roads and right-of-ways for oil and gas and fores try development in relation t o aboriginal hunting of the caribou is very, very limited. It’s almost nonexistent, maybe one or two throughout the winter, at least in the north. 3:40 The biggest challenge, of course, is the wolf population. That’s their main food source, between that and deer, and of course the wolf population has grow n. We es timate a fairly high population, and wolves are rea lly w ild. That’ s one anim al that re mains w ild. They’re a wild animal; they remain wild.

In fact, there are people that trap 60, 70 yea rs in northern Alberta and may not see a wolf ever, maybe once or twice in their whole lifetime. They do remain wild in certain parts of the province, and they’re hard to trace. It’s hard to track the numbers. On the other hand, we have to keep trying to monitor and count the number of wolves out in cer tain areas where there may be caribou and also keep track of the caribou, again to try to keep the balance. It may be necessary to make some adjustments on the wolf population in order to deal with the situation of the caribou. So we’re working on it.

It’s a chall enge; it’s not easy. But you can be assured that we’ll try our best. The Chair: Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We continue to hear about and experience from an economic perspective the impact of oil and gas on forest ry prac tices, a nd I particula rly hea r from forestr y companies who are very concerned still about the amount of timber the oil and gas companies are taking out of the forests and how that impacts inventory.

Now we’re starting to hear a number of inde- pendent studies also coming back with recommendations that there should b e b etter co- operation, tha t the fore st practic es in this province are archaic, that they need to be revised. I’ve heard from the industry for a long time that those issues need to be addressed. Can you tell me what progress you’re making on that and whether or not you’re going to move beyond any voluntary compliance by the oil and gas industry to just manage their cuts in a more sustainable manner? Mr. Cardi nal: That’s a v ery g ood question, a v ery im portant question for Alberta.

Sustainable Resource Development, of course, continues to revie w and im prove for est an d land ma nagement practices in Alb erta. Alberta forest products and the oil and gas industry do work together to co-ordinate activities on the landscape, resulting in of cours e a smaller environmental footprint and fewer impacts from activities such as road construction, seismic line, and pipeline activities. Forest company management plans incorporate into their plans protection of sensitive wildlife habitat, biodiversity, and so on.

New forest management planning guidelines are being developed to strengthen these requirements, and, again, some of it is at the request of the industry and municipalities. Of course, as you’re aware, each year we plant about 75 million seedlings in Alberta. In Alberta of course we determine the volume of timber available for sustainable harvest according to what we’ll grow, so we a lways have to keep tha t in mind a s we ha rvest our resources to ensure t hat proper c o-ordination and proper manage- ment of our public lands in relation to oil and gas, forestry, tourism, and other developments takes place.

We manage over a hundred million acres of public lan d, and I believe 85 million acres of that is in the green area, or the protected

May 8, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1555 area. Theref ore, whatever you do as fa r as oi l and g as activities, forestry, agriculture, tourism, and other activities , t hey will have some impact on the environment. We are working hard to minimize that. In fact, I believe that in the eastern slopes, for example, about 75 percent now of the o il and ga s activities are low impact, which means that there’s a lot less damage to the environment. In fact, I believe we’ve reduced some of the seis mic la nds, if I remem ber right, from 10 metres down to 4 or 5 metres now. Some of them you can’t even s ee.

In th e foothills I’ve flown over where there was some seismic activity, and the only thing you can see is a small line through the bush, which really you can’t drive on because it’s just a line that’s cut, and of course the exploration that takes place is done with a helicopter. So we are working hard. In other are as, of c ourse, Al-Pac with t heir fores t management work very closely – the forest management agreements have to have a long-range plan.

One, they have to have a 10-year plan, which the ministry approves, and they have to have an annual operating plan, and those annual operating plans have to be done through a public hearing process. What happens there, of course, is that there is co- ordination now between th e oil and ga s industr y and the FMA holders to ensure t hat they co-ordinate the development of a road network, for example.

In fact, they try to co-ordinate even the work plan for each year, because some of those FMAs are large and they could have two or three different areas that they harvest their wood from each year and those could be different from what the oil and gas industry plans. So they try to co-ordinate the activity so that they can be in an area at the time and may be in fact use the sa me roads even to access the resources that they want to develop. So it is a challenge, but I think it’s something that we have a good handle on. The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr.

Chairman, for the opportu- nity to joi n in the Com mittee of Supply debates on Sustainable Resource Development. I’ll refer the minister to pag e 368 of the business plan book for the Alberta 2003 budget. I’m looking under goal 2. It seems that the annua l allowable cut m ay be starting to decrease, as projected by the 2003-06 target appearing here, and I’m wondering if this is a trend. Does it indicate the declining viability of our forest resources? I mean, you’re dropping from 24 million cubic metres to 23 million cubic metres.

Now, can the minister explain the goal 3 outcome measurement for species at risk, which is th e next goal ap pearing on the sa me page, 368? What does “percentage of species at risk” mean? Is this the number of all species at risk over the total number of species in Alberta? Also, can the minister release a more detailed breakdown of this measurement, please? W hy is the ministry expecting the percentage of species at risk to go up, and what are they doing to make sure that this doesn’t happen? I’m also wondering why there is no output measurement for goal 3.

I see output measurements for goal 2; I see output measurements for goal 4. I don’t see any output measurement for goal 3. Now, why a re ther e fewer and fe wer rangeland leases in g ood standing? What exa ctly does it mean for a ra ngeland not to be in good standing, and what is the ministry doing to change this trend? How does the ministry hold the Natural Resources Conservation Board to account for its spending habits and the achievement of its stated goals? 3:50 The Surface Rights Board, the SRB, ha s a reputa tion for bei ng very pro oil and ga s.

I’m wo ndering w hat steps t he minis try is taking to ensure that the SRB delivers totally equitable and unbiased decisions. What steps is the ministry taking to improve the reputa- tion of the SRB among landholders? Can the minister also tell me – actually, probably in writing; these are pretty detailed. What are the caseloads for the NRC B, the SRB , and the LCB? How have these numbers varied over the past few years, and why would there be a variance? Where does the minister expect these numbers to go in the future?

My next s eries o f questions for the m inister ar e related to the Auditor General’s report and specifically to the

section dedicated to Sustainable Re source Dev elopment starting on page 245 of the annual report of the Auditor General of Alberta, 2001-02. No w, there is a numbered recomme ndation here, and the number ed recommendations are the ones we are taught to pay special notice to. They’re numbered because the Auditor General wishes to m ake a point of them and is also expecting a response from the government as to exactly how the government plans on responding to them.

So I know that this is recommendation 48: We [the A uditor General] recommend that the Departmen t of Sustainable Resource Development improve: 1. the plann ing, d ocumentation, a nd repo rting o f res ults f or its timber production audit group. 2. the timeliness of its timber production auditing. As a bit of a background here, with the province owning most of the forests in northern Alberta, it does allocate those forests to private forestry companies through dispositions.

The companies are expected to manage their disp ositions on a sustainable basis . . . [They do] pay timber royalties and fees to the Department based on the volumes of timber harvested. Timber royalties and fees are the largest source of revenue for the Depar tment. To e nsure p rompt a nd accurat e re porting by forestry companies, the Department’s Forest Management Branch conducts timber production audits. The Minister of course knows all of this. I’m really reading this into the record for other people that are following along with the debate.

Therefore, the Auditor General notes that the purpose of a ti mber production a udit is to verify that correct volumes of ti mber are reported and that the correct royalties and fees are paid. Accurate timber harvest volumes are also important in ensuring that forest use is sustainable. So it’s of s ome conc ern when I see thi s recommendation that improvement is needed in the planning , document ation, and reporting of results and the timeliness. The Auditor General is finding that the timber produ ction audi t group succes sfully me t five of the eleven criteria. So they didn’t even hit 50 percent.

Timber auditors understand the forestry business that they audit, as well as th e leg islative and contra ctual requirements th at govern forestry operations . . . However, six of the criteria were not met. They go on at length on pages 246, 247, and 248 on the implications, risks, and findings of the inability to meet that numbered recommen- dation. There’s also a rese rvation of op inion for c onsumable inve ntory. Fol lowing corporate government accounting policy, consumable inventory has been expensed when purchased and has not been recognized as an asset in the accompanying statements of financial position.

T he value of consumable inventory not recorded at March 31, 2002 is estimated to be at leas t $4 million. A s a result, n et assets are understated by the same amount. There’s also a c oncern – ac tually, this is a pr etty s tandard reservation of opinion on ca pital assets, because the department is immediately expensing acquisitions un der $15,000 instea d of amortizing them ov er their us eful liv es. Tha t conc ern actually appears in a number of departments.

1556 Alberta Hansard May 8, 2003 I’m looking to see what specifically the ministry is doing in this fiscal year under discussion in this budget to address these problems and what progress has been made. I w ould also like to see a time line of exactly when the ministry anticipates all these issues that have been raised by the Auditor General being resolved. This is a fairly substantial comme nt from the Auditor Genera l. As I sit on the Public Accounts Committee, I ha ve opportunity to see a bout 50 percent of th e min istries that we examine in any given year. We don’t have tim e to exa mine more of the m.

The concerns be ing expressed under recommendat ion 48 are substantial. So I am expressing some concerns about how the ministry plans to address those concerns. In fact, I don’t have it with m e, so maybe the first question the minister can answer under that is: has the government accepted that recommendation and made a commitment to address it? I’m sorry I don’t have the government’s response back on those ones, so I’ll just have to put that up front and ask specifically if the government has responded favorably to doing this, in which case the rest of my questions flow.

If for some reason the government has said that it will not be wil ling to acc ommodate this re commendation, then I would like a very thorough explanation of why not, because this is pretty serious. We’re talking money, but we’re also talki ng use of resources, and we’re also talking sustainability. So thank you very much for the opportunity , Mr. C hairman, to bring those concerns forward under this debate. I look forward to either an oral resp onse or, I suspect, given some of m y questions, perhaps a written response to some of my questions. Thank you. Mr. Cardi nal: Mr.

Chairm an, becaus e some of those que stions require numbers that I probab ly would not have with me here, my staff will re view Hansard and respond in w riting t o most of the questions, because there were a lot of detailed questions a sked in relation to numbers and perfor mance measures and ca seloads and stuff. We will provide those. One area I c an address offhand right here is in rela tion to the timber allocation and the annual allowable cut. The member mentioned that we do have in the province an estimated 44.5 million cubic metres in annual growth in our forested public lands.

The total net allowable cut within the green area is about 24.1 million cubic metres. So althoug h we are almost nearing the point where all the avail