Alberta Hansard — 21 July 1989, Morning sitting (10:00) (Legislature 22, Session 1)

19890721

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 921 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Friday, July 21, 1989 10:00 a.m. Date: 89/07/21 [The House met at 10 a.m.] [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] PRAYERS MR. SPEAKER: Let us pray. Each day in this place each one of us is expected to face the ongoing challenge of representing the concerns of all Albertans. May God grant us strength and wisdom to carry out our responsibilities. Amen. head: READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS MR. McINNIS: Mr. Speaker, I move that the petition I pre sented yesterday signed by 6,100 Albertans now be read and received.

CLERK: Petition to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta The undersigned request legislation to delay all proposed pulp and other forestry developments in the province of Al berta until such time as: 1. a class environmental assessment that reports the cumulative impact of all existing and proposed forestry developments has been completed, and 2. full and complete environmental impact assess ments, equivalent to the federal Environmental As sessment Review Process (SOR/84-467) including public hearings, have been completed for each pro posed forestry development. MR. MITCHELL: Mr.

Speaker, I ask that the petition I pre sented yesterday be read and received, if that's in order.

CLERK: Petition to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta The undersigned request legislation to delay all proposed pulp and other forestry developments in the province of Al berta until such time as: 1. a class environmental assessment that reports the cumulative impact of all existing and proposed forestry developments has been completed, and 2. full and complete environmental impact assess ments, equivalent to the federal Environmental As sessment Review Process (SOR/84-467) including public hearings, have been completed for each pro posed forestry development. head: NOTICES OF MOTIONS MR. McINNIS: Mr.

Speaker, I rise under Standing Order 40 to provide notice in view of an incident which sent three people to hospital yesterday. I will move that the Legislative Assembly appoint a special select commit tee to consider, hold public hearings, and make recommen dations regarding regulations designating routes for hazard ous cargo in rural areas, safety standards relating to the construction of containers for hazardous cargo, training and safety procedures for operators who handle such cargo, and emergency safety procedures for dangerous occurrences involving the transport of hazardous cargo.

It's Motion 203 on the Order Paper. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MS M. LAING: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to the members of this As sembly the son of the Member for Stony Plain, Chris Woloshyn, who is a grade 10 honours student in Spruce Grove. Would he please rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure this morning to introduce some representatives from the Alberta Weather Modification Co-op who are here to watch question period.

I might say with a great deal of pride that for the most part they are from my constituency. As I call their names, I'd ask them to rise. First, we have Mr. Harold Howe, who is the chairman of the Weather Modification Co-op; Jim Christie, who is the former chairman of an advisory group that we had to this government on weather modification; Mr. Dick Page -- I would note that Dick and his family are recipients of a master farm family award -- and Mr. Jim Bishop, who has shown untiring efforts to promote this particular area.

I'd like us to give them the traditional welcome of the House. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Code Inquiry Report MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. In the Code in quiry clearly the former Consumer and Corporate Affairs minis ter -- the term that was used was "negligent" Frankly, this whole government was negligent, including the Premier of this province right now. I have a memorandum here dated Novem ber 18, 1985, more than two and a half years before the govern ment finally pulled the licences of FIC/AIC.

The Premier re ceived a document from the then Treasurer Lou Hyndman which reported three important findings. Number one, the com bined capital impairment of the companies was $12.8 million after combined losses of the previous six months of $13.6 mil lion. Number two: The situation may call for the suspension or cancellation of . . . the companies. And finally, three: It is possible that the regulators might have to invoke the provi sions of The Act with respect to receivership and/or liquidation of the two companies. Mr. Speaker, that's what the Premier knew back in 198S. My question to the Premier, Mr.

Speaker. How is it that in his sworn statement to the Code inquiry, the Premier said that he had no knowledge of the difficulties of FIC/AIC until February 1987? MR. GETTY: Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. members may want to relive the Code report, but we've taken two years . . . [interjections] MR. SPEAKER: Order.

922 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 MR. GETTY: Mr. Code has handled it, I think, in a very effec tive fashion in all details. The lawyers from both sides brought together all the evidence they felt they possibly could, including evidence from members of cabinet As the members know, I asked the hon. Lieutenant Governor to release ministers from their normal oath of secrecy on cabinet matters. So, Mr. Speaker, I find it strange that the hon. Leader of the Opposition now wants to redo the Code report. We've handled all of the testimony in the report MR. MARTIN: Mr.

Speaker, we were told day after day that they'd answer questions after the Code report came down. This has been a tragedy to a lot of little investors. It's going to cost the taxpayers . . . MR. SPEAKER: The question is? MR. MARTIN: . . . probably millions of dollars, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Premier again. Why is it, then, they said in the Code report that he didn't know anything about it in '87 when he clearly knew in 1985? Tell the people of the province. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member can go through all the indignant poses that he wishes.

All of the facts were pre sented to the Code inquiry, all of them. The hon. Leader of the Opposition is not able to run his own now. We've provided them with all the facts. MS BARRETT: You said you'd answer. Liar. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, another nonanswer. MR. SPEAKER: Pardon me? Order please. Not you, hon. leader. Did the Chair hear "liar" called across this House? MS BARRETT: Yes. MR. SPEAKER: Would the member care to retract please. MS BARRETT: Yes. MR. SPEAKER: Would you stand up and do so, please. MS BARRETT: He didn't tell the truth. He said he would answer . . . MR.

SPEAKER: Hon. member, please don't make it any worse than it is. The Chair now recognizes the leader for the final supplementary. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious matter, and I want the Premier to tell the truth to this Assembly. It has to be one or the other. Was he not telling the truth to the Code in quiry, or was it that he didn't bother to read the memo? Which was it? Tell the people here, because the eyes of Alberta and Canada are upon you. MR. GETTY: Again, Mr. Speaker, I've just told the House.

The hon. leader can twist himself in all kinds of contortions along with his House leader, but I've told the House that all of the testimony, the accurate testimony from our government was made to Mr. Code. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, it's a very sad day. MR. SPEAKER: The second main question. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, to the Attorney General. The At torney General has reassured us in this House that the Cormie family and other Principal executives will be brought to justice without delay. In fact things seem to be going so well, he's sort of rejected any personal intervention on his part.

But on Wed nesday the Attorney General confidently told the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, and I quote: I can assure the hon. member that the police do know the whereabouts, maybe not from minute to minute but generally know the whereabouts, of all the players in this. Well, yesterday, Mr. Speaker, the federal investigators appar ently couldn't find Mr. Donald Cormie. Now, I want to ask the Attorney General this. I take it that he has been in touch with the federal investigators, which would be his job as Attorney General, and I want to know today if the federal investigators have been able to locate Mr.

Donald Cormie. MR. ROSTAD: Mr. Speaker, I don't have any idea where Mr. Cormie is today, as I'm sure the hon. Member for Edmonton- Norwood has no idea from moment to moment where his wife might be. The situation is that Mr. Cormie has been served or they are going to serve him with papers that have a returnable date for Monday. His solicitors have publicly stated they expect Mr. Cormie to be here today. Mr. Connie's location really is irrelevant to this whole matter until Monday, and if Mr.

Cormie is not there Monday, a Canada-wide warrant would be put out for his arrest A person who has been accused of something as serious as what is before discussion in this House and what is before the public right now in this very, very serious matter would be compromising his whole position of his proclaimed innocence if he didn't show up. I think we should wait until Monday to find out if, in fact he is men served with the docu ment. Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition should try not to incite great public unrest for something that isn't there yet.* MR. MARTIN: Mr.

Speaker, this is one of the most appalling performances I've seen, and I've seen a lot. An answer like that -- I expected more from the Attorney General. Now, Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Attorney General, because he made the statement that they knew where the players were. Now he says, "Well, I'm not sure." I want to ask him this question then: when was the last that he knew the whereabouts of Mr. Donald Cormie, because they are supposed to be having an investigation on it? MR. ROSTAD: Mr. Speaker, first of all, it's irrelevant whether I know where Mr. Cormie is. I am not like the hon.

Leader of the Opposition, who wants to have everybody under a magnify ing glass, put a string on everybody. Centralized action is what they go for. Mr. Cormie was at his cottage before. Where he is right now, I don't know. I said before that the relevant time is Monday; again, we shall wait till Monday. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I want to know who's in charge here. You said on Monday you knew the whereabouts, the po- *see page 943, right col., para. 11

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 923 lice knew, and you could check that any time. Now you don't seem to care, in answer to my point. My question is: has the Attorney General even been in touch with the federal inves tigators to find out what's going on? MR. ROSTAD: Mr. Speaker, we care. We all care. This is a very, very serious matter. In fact, it's so serious that we've spent over $25 million to try and get to the bottom of it. We are now planning our response, a very considered and reasonable response. The matter of where Mr.

Cormie is in relation to this specific action, first of all, is not the responsibility of the Attor ney General or any member here or any member in the As sembly. The law courts have processed paper which is to be served on him, and it's returnable on Monday. If Mr. Cormie does not show up Monday, which is the relevant time, there will be a Canada-wide warrant for his arrest. That will take place; that's the process of the law. It is not for the Attorney General and certainly not for the Leader of the Opposition to be so pom pous as to think that you're going to have anybody at a specific time. MR.

FOX: Maybe he's at the bull sale in Red Deer. MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Member for Vegreville, that's uncalled for as well. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry, leader of the Liberals. MR. DECORE: Mr. Speaker, yesterday when I addressed the issue of the discrepancy between the memo with the two-page

summary that the Premier received in 1985 from the then Provincial Treasurer and the statement that he set out in his statutory declaration in 1987, I thought that the Premier would come forward and reconcile and explain why all of us are hav ing difficulty understanding what appears to be two statements that are not in sync. We're not getting that information, and I'm dismayed that we continue to get thwarted and stonewalled on this issue. I'd like to put this question to the Premier. I'm going to, sir, allow the benefit of the doubt in saying that you probably didn't read the memo.

On that basis, sir, do you feel that the regulators, that your deputy ministers, that your ministers owed you a duty to come forward and to explain that there was a very serious situation facing Alberta with respect to FIC and AIC? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I have to repeat for the House that we have a very important matter . . . [interjections] MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Kingsway, order please. That's enough. [interjections] Excuse me a moment, hon. members. Just hold it. Thank you. A question is asked.

The heckling can at least wait until the first sentence is out by whoever has asked the question rather than starting to natter away before the person even gets a chance to get going. As for Edmonton-Kingsway, that's another matter. Thank you. Mr. Premier. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, as I've told the House on quite a few occasions, particularly this week, we have received a very important report on a very important matter, and the government will be making a review and assessment in a logical, reasoned way and then making a statement regarding it, a statement of our reaction and action that we plan.

We've told the House that time after time. If the hon. members want to try and dissect the report here in advance of that, I'm sorry, they are not going to be successful. MR. DECORE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Premier this question. In the course of time between the memo coming to you in 1985 and your statutory declaration or even the closure of FIC and AIC by the Provincial Treasurer, you made three minis terial appointments.

Did you not ask the ministers that were leaving and those that were coming to discuss with you the ma jor issues of that ministerial portfolio, the concerns, the prob lems that you should be informed of? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, even the hon. leader of the Liberal Party surely knows that discussions between the Premier and members of cabinet are not matters for public discussion. MR. DECORE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to put the question one more time because I think it's so important to the people of Al berta.

Please reconcile the obvious discrepancy that exists in the Code report between you getting the memo in 1985 that clearly sets out the difficulty of FIC, knowing that you have a securities and a Royal Bank background, and the steps that you knew or should have taken. Why didn't somebody tell you what to do? Why didn't you do something? Please give us some guidance on this. I think the people of Alberta are entitled to know that. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member re viewing some of my background regarding the Royal Bank and the securities business.

But I would only draw to his attention that there is no discrepancy except in his mind. There's cer tainly no discrepancy in Mr. Code's report. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Smoky River. Training Initiatives for Tradespeople MR. PASZKOWSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. During this past week we've had a series of meetings with small business owners from northern Alberta. Basically, they addressed the needs of what small business really needs in our part of the province. Their concerns addressed trained staff to accommo date the needs of service of new developments in the forestry industry.

My question is to the minister of career development. What efforts is your department taking to accommodate and en hance the skilled work force to accommodate the needs of the forestry industry in northern Alberta? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, the efforts that the hon. Member for Smoky River and, indeed, the Member for Grande Prairie have made in meeting with businesses and bringing this matter to my attention have been innumerable.

I would say to the hon. member that I think it's well known that Alberta trained probably at least 25 percent of the journeymen in this country over the last number of years and, indeed, some of them left the province. It is our desire to not only enhance the apprenticeship program but to potentially look to some of those journeymen that are now in other places. MR. PASZKOWSKI: Madam Minister, are we going to have to go out of province to accommodate the needs of the journeymen to accommodate the skills of the industry?

924 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 MRS. OSTERMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, that's a good question. We have a number of journeymen in government that are cer tainly very skilled people, and we are going to make sure -- and I think I made that abundantly clear in the estimates -- that we would be taking on apprentices in government because, indeed, we have those skilled journeymen. However, there will be a shortage of journeymen. We have a red seal exam that jour neymen in other provinces can write.

Again, we are hopeful that some of those people will come back, because the jour neymen are key in order to increase the numbers in our appren ticeship program. MR. PASZKOWSKI: Madam Minister, do we have adequate facilities to properly train for the needs of the small business operators in the northern part of the province so that they can, indeed, adequately continue to service the growing needs that are developing? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, the small businesses that are in this area, particularly dealing with welders, millwrights, car penters, and mechanics, have always played a key role in devel oping skilled workers in this province. I know that when the economy is flourishing to the extent that it is in Alberta, and it's very positive right now, many of those workers end up going to the larger companies. The hon. member, I know, will be think ing about the expansion that is proposed by Procter & Gamble in his area.

While it is key to get additional journeymen here located in the province, I think it's also important for us to rec ognize that we have so many workers in this province who are desirous of getting that training, and I know the hon. Member for Athabasca-Lac La Biche has been keen on this. I might mention that there are programs we are testing. One is in the Whitecourt Learning Centre, where we have people upgrading their education so that they may participate in the program. There are just incredible examples of women who will become heavy-duty mechanics.

There is a native lady with eight children who is taking that upgrading and sees for herself a very bright future. That is because of the incredible oppor tunities now abundant in our economy. MR. SPEAKER: Calgary-Mountain View, followed by Calgary-Buffalo, then Clover Bar. Code Inquiry Report (continued) MR. HAWKESWORTH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Code report finds that prior to 1985, when the present Premier as sumed the leadership of the government, the auditors from Con sumer and Corporate Affairs were accurately describing the problems at FIC and AIC.

The Treasurer, however, when he assumed responsibility insisted on his own department, the de partment of Treasury, redoing the same work, which caused an other delay. Then, apparently not trusting the findings of his own department, he decided to have an outside appraisal of FIC and AIC. Mr.

Speaker, in view of the public document, which is the Premier's sworn statement before the Code inquiry that the Provincial Treasurer did not inform the Premier that some thing would have to be done about those two companies until early in 1987, I'd like to ask the Provincial Treasurer why did he not tell the Premier what he was doing in regard to these two companies? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I guess over the course of the last three or four days we've taken the consistent position, as the Premier has taken again this morning, that we were not going to rehash the Code inquiry.

The inquiry was put in place to hear the evidence, provide testimony, to give reasonable explana tions, and I don't think it's incumbent on this Legislature to rehear Mr. Code. We've indicated already that we'll not be commenting further with respect to the Code comment. MR. HAWKESWORTH: Mr. Speaker, the Provincial Treasur er's making all kinds of comments rejecting the Code report. People want to know: when the Treasurer in July of 1986 knew that a massive injection of capital was needed to keep the Princi pal companies from collapsing, why did he not tell the Premier? MR. JOHNSTON: Well, Mr.

Speaker, again, the member can look at the testimony; he can go through all the documents. Ob viously they've had their researchers over there searching for the documents. In fact, as we've said before, we stand by our former answer. MR. HAWKESWORTH: A shameful abdication of leadership, Mr. Speaker. Will the Provincial Treasurer . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please, hon. member. Do we have a question in that last statement? Thank you. MR.

HAWKESWORTH: Will the Provincial Treasurer stand in his place beside his boss and tell the people of Alberta why he did not pass on vital information to the Premier as soon as it be came known to him? MR. JOHNSTON: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, that is in fact the same question. The reasons, the process, have been spelled out in the Code inquiry, available now for public information. We'll be able to tell everyone. And we were asked those very questions in the Code inquiry and responded to them there, sir. MR. SPEAKER: Calgary-Buffalo. MR. HAWKESWORTH: Mr. Speaker . . . MR.

SPEAKER: Calgary-Buffalo, not Calgary-Mountain View. Thank you. Responsibility for Financial Institutions MR. CHUMIR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In February 1986, at the height of the crisis in our financial industry when a strong, experienced administrator should have been put in charge, the Premier appointed the Member for Peace River to be minister in charge of regulating financial institutions. The Member for Peace River himself advised Mr.

Code that he knew little about the Alberta financial industry or its problems, that he considered himself to be a promoter rather than a regulator, that he was not given a reason for his appointment by the Premier, who told him that he'd only be there for a short time. Indeed, he was there only for three and a half months, while Albertans continued to be fleeced. I'm wondering whether the Premier would tell this House why he made the change and appointed the Member for Peace River to be Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs in February of 1986.

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 925 MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, as I've already told the House to day -- and I'm sure you, sir, will not want us to repeat questions and answers in what is a relatively short question period -- my discussions with my ministers are obviously, and have been traditionally and always will be, a private matter between a Pre mier and his cabinet. MR. CHUMIR: We're not asking for his private discussions. We want to know some of the reasons why he made certain moves.

We also want to know whether the Premier spoke to the former Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs or any other person with respect to the problems that the financial industry was having, whether he informed himself before he made this important change in responsibility at that important time. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member, giving us his best Perry Mason act, will just have to go on with the answer I've given him. He's asking the same question in a different manner, but the same answer applies. MR. CHUMIR: I'd remind the Premier that he didn't testify before Mr. Code, and . . . MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. We're on the final supple mentary. It's a supplementary question; there's no

preamble. It's nothing else. And care is taken with regard to Beauchesne 411. Thank you. Calgary-Buffalo. MR. CHUMIR: Does the Premier recognize how irresponsible it was for him to appoint the Member for Peace River to be in charge of regulating financial institutions at this crucial time, when he obviously had such poor qualifications for the job? MR. GETTY: Again, Mr. Speaker, it's I guess typical of the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo to make those kinds of state ments about another member of the Legislature. It's quite a sad thing to watch him do that about a member who is not here.

He is, in fact, asking the same question again. I would only say this, Mr. Speaker: when he refers to not appearing before the Code inquiry, that was Mr. Code's decision. I was available. MR. SPEAKER: Member for Clover Bar, followed by West Yellowhead. Experimental Liming of Water Bodies MR. GESELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is ad dressed to the Minister of the Environment. The liming of Halfmoon Lake is an ongoing experimental project with the ob jective to improve the water quality in the lake.

There is con cern by the private partners who have financially contributed towards this project, the residents around the lake, that the pro ject may be abandoned. Will the minister assure my con stituents and the Assembly that this experimental project, a criti cal experimental project, will be completed? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, we can guarantee that it will be completed as an experiment, but relative to the commercial use of lime to control nutrients in lakes and other waterways, it's a matter that needs much more study.

The department is recommending that at least three to five years' additional study be undertaken before we enter into commercial application of this particular process. MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary. MR. GESELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister give a preliminary indication at least on the basis of the two reports that have been issued by Dr. Ellie Prapas on this particular lake about the relative effectiveness of this technique? MR. KLEIN: Mr.

Speaker, there has been some evidence that indeed the liming process is effective in reducing nutrient con centrations, but the research at this time is inconclusive and it's for that reason that . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Excuse me, hon. member. Calgary-Mountain View, thank you very much. Perhaps you could adjourn for coffee outside. Thank you. Minister of the Environment. MR. KLEIN: It is for that reason, Mr.

Speaker, that the depart ment is recommending that further research be undertaken and that the individual mentioned by the hon. member be asked to provide a research plan that would involve about another three to five years of good, solid work. Via Rail MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, it'll soon be impossible for Al bertans to travel east by rail or for anyone living east of Alberta to come to our province on a passenger train. The looming cuts in Via Rail will only serve to further divide our country, a coun try originally brought together by railroad. Recent communica tions from the office of my MP, Mr.

Clark, in Ottawa confirm that the final decision on implementing the cuts will be made in cabinet on Monday, July 24, and that will be the end to taking the train across our country. My first question is to the Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

Now that the minister has repeatedly told us just how concerned he is about this situa tion, can he tell us if he plans to express his feelings to his fed eral cousins in Ottawa of the outrage that Albertans feel about a decision of this magnitude being made behind closed cabinet doors with an order in council, not allowing full parliamentary debate or public hearings? Will he officially oppose this conduct? MR. ELZINGA: Mr.

Speaker, I indicated to the hon. member, as I have done to other hon. members on a consistent basis, that we have made strong representations to the federal government indicating our opposition to the cuts in Via Rail service. In ad dition to that, what we have done is that we've put together a task force whereby we're asking for input from the municipal areas that are affected with the cutbacks so that we can continue that strong pressure on our federal counterparts plus examine alternatives in the event that there are cuts.

I stress "in the event that there are," because it is somewhat hypothetical at this time because they are going through that examination process. We recognize that Via has had a substantial deficit The federal government is wrestling with that, but we don't want to see cut backs at the expense of what we consider a very important tourism industry within the province of Alberta. In addition to that, I have had extensive discussions with the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr. Mazankowski, and he has left me with the assur-

926 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 ance that they are going to do their utmost to make sure the in terests of western Canada are protected. MR. DOYLE: To the Minister of Tourism, Mr. Speaker. I suppose there is some small relief in having services to the Rocky Mountains and Vancouver maintained, but I would ask the minister if he can give us his assurance that the department will seriously consider reinstating rail service between Ed monton and Calgary, thus establishing a practical and efficient tourism loop through British Columbia and Alberta. MR. SPARROW: Mr.

Speaker, we've been quite involved, and tourism depends on rail service in western Canada. Just recently, on July 10, the four western ministers of tourism got together to discuss many other things besides Via Rail, and they're waiting with interest and want to have input into the changes that could come about because of the budget strain and changes that the federal government are making. One of the suggestions has been that that loop from Vancouver, Jasper, Ed monton, Calgary, Banff, Vancouver is a very natural tourist loop and should be considered in any changes.

The mountaineer ser vice that we as a government helped promote last year was one of the most successful legs of Via Rail, and it stands out very clearly that that's one that may be and should be expanded. I think the success of that, Mr. Speaker, speaks for itself because we're marketing a specific product. Part of the problem that Via has is that their system is so large across Canada that unless we market those different legs and different parts of it as specific products, that passenger increase won't be there. MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, back to the Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

I'd like to ask the minister if he, the Premier, or anyone in this government has specific plans for helping the more than 1,000 Albertans, in fact 1,000 persons in Edmonton alone, who will very soon be unemployed due to these cuts in transcontinental rail service? MR. ELZINGA: Mr. Speaker, the question is very hypothetical, as you can appreciate. We are naturally very concerned, and it's a consistent concern that this government has had as it relates to employment opportunity for Albertans. We take into account every aspect to ensure that Albertans do have employment op portunities.

This is just one area I've indicated to the hon. mem ber earlier that we are taking action in to ensure rail service, the employment of Albertans, and a number of other variables so that we can make sure that Via Rail does offer a consistent and comprehensive service to the province of Alberta. MR. SPEAKER: Edmonton-Gold Bar. Responsibility for Financial Institutions (continued) MRS. HEWES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know that the Premier changed ministers in Consumer and Corporate Affairs and other portfolios in February and May of '86 and moved the responsibility for the Principal Group to Treasury from Con sumer and Corporate Affairs later in that year, in June. In his affidavit the Premier tells us that this was done without discus sion with anyone and based on knowledge he'd gained from being on the boards of directors of public companies, including The Royal Bank, and further that matters related to financial institutions should if possible be the responsibility of a single government department.

Now, I respect the Premier's comments earlier that discus sions that he has with his ministers are private discussions, but here we have a case where the Premier appears to have made an important, substantive change in isolation, without discussing it or being informed of the problems of the department in advance. I find it very difficult to believe; in fact, bordering on irrespon sible. To the Premier. Will the Premier please tell the House why he made this decision without what appears to be any dis cussion whatsoever with the ministers involved? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, my hon. friend has already led into her question by saying that she believes and respects that discus sions between the Premier and members of his cabinet are not for public discussion and then asks for them. Frankly, the same reply I've given to another member today, the one who sits not far behind her, still applies. MR. SPEAKER: Thank you. Supplementary. MRS. HEWES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the Premier then telling us that the problems being encountered by the Principal Group had nothing whatsoever to do with his decision to make the Treasurer responsible for financial institutions? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, again the answer applies. As a matter of fact, I notice the hon. member used the term "irrespon sible." I've been meeting with some Albertans; I met with them yesterday. They were pointing out to me that both comical and irresponsible were the way the leaders of the opposition parties were as they rushed to get on television in front of each other without even having read the report. That the people of Alberta think was a joke, those two. [interjections] MRS. HEWES: Mr. Speaker, if I could just get back to the sub ject at hand. Mr. Speaker, to the Premier.

There were four different min isters responsible for financial institutions after the Premier took office. Can the Premier explain to the House whether there was any information shared with any of those ministers about the serious problems of Principal Group before, as he has stated, February 1987? MR. GETTY: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, my hon. friend I must say, is continuing to ask the same question. There is no other answer than the one I have given her. MR.

SPEAKER: Perhaps not all hon. members have their Beauchesne with them, but if they would be good enough to look up 411 in Beauchesne: . . . further limitations . . . [are] generally understood, although they may not seem to be understood this morning. A question may not: (1) . . . [talk about] legal questions . . . [and]

interpretation of a statute. (2) seek information about matters which are in their nature secret, such as decisions or proceedings of Cabinet . . . et cetera. Perhaps we now could move on to Calgary-Fish Creek, fol-

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 927 lowed by Vegreville. Insurance Coverage for In Vitro Fertilization MR. PAYNE: Mr. Speaker, the question I ask today is directed to the Minister of Health on behalf of the thousands of couples in our province who have tragically been unable to conceive a child. Could the minister clarify for the Assembly today or pos sibly explain the government health care insurance policy posi tion that denies any insurance assistance to infertile couples making use of in vitro fertilization clinics at a personal cost of many thousands of dollars? MRS. BETKOWSKI: Mr.

Speaker, the matter of in vitro fer tilization and its coverage under the Alberta health care insur ance plan is one that is definitely before us as a policy issue as a government. I commend the hon. member for raising the issue in the Assembly. First of all, I'd like to note that the Alberta Human Rights Commission is currently reviewing the matter, because several of the couples to whom the member refers have asked that the matter be reviewed in that context. The issue of new reproduc tive technologies has enormous consequences for us in a health, in a legal, and in an ethical sense across the nation.

I was very pleased that the federal government took the initiative to estab lish a royal commission on new reproductive technologies, and certainly this will be factored into any of the policy issues. As I indicated, the issue is clearly whether or not a publicly funded insurance plan, as we have in this province, should provide those services. It's certainly something that we will have to re view as a government once the Human Rights Commission reports. MR. PAYNE: Mr.

Speaker, while the minister is quite properly awaiting the results of the Human Rights Commission review, in the interim would she be prepared to consider covering the costs of those basic supplies and diagnostic procedures, such as blood tests, that are covered in virtually every other type of diagnostic work? MRS. BETKOWSKI: Mr. Speaker, I would have to take that question on notice, because in fact there are some of the proce dures with respect to this procedure which are covered under the health care plan within our existing health system.

As to which are and which aren't, I would take the question as notice and respond to the hon. member. MR. PAYNE: The final supplemental, Mr. Speaker. In a day when birth rates are dropping and abortion rates are climbing and the number of babies available for adoption falls far short of the demand, would the minister commit to the House to expedite her policy review and decision regarding insurance coverage for hospital-based procedures related to infertility? MRS. BETKOWSKI: I will make that commitment, Mr. Speaker, but I think it's important to make the distinction . . . MR. DECORE: Point of order. MRS.

BETKOWSKI: . . . of the policy issue which the hon. member has mentioned. The issue, as I've said, with respect to in vitro fertilization is the one of a publicly funded health insur ance plan covering the service. The issue of abortion is a very different issue in a legal sense, because the issue of abortion has been adjudicated by the Supreme Court of Canada, and our pol icy position in this province reflects that decision.

The in vitro fertilization process has not been reviewed by the Supreme Court to deem it a legitimate medical service under the Canada Health Act, and therefore the two are very different in the legal sense. I think that's an important point to put on the record. Nonetheless, with respect to the question of dealing with it as expeditiously as possible, I will certainly commit to that. MR. SPEAKER: Vegreville, and if there's time, Edmonton-Meadowlark. Loans and Loan Guarantees to Peter Pocklington MR. FOX: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's a sad day indeed when Albertans realize that they can't trust the government to tell the truth about their secret deals with the Don Cormies and Peter Pocklingtons of the world. Now, on March 3, 1988, the Conservatives approved the $67 million package of loans and loan guarantees to Mr. Pocklington to, and I quote: develop two significant capital projects -- a hog slaughter plant in southern Alberta and an upgraded and modernized beef and pork processing plant in Edmonton. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the ministers have admitted more than one year later that this money was not to build, upgrade, or create anything, but was intended to cover Mr. Pocklington's high-risk debts at the Continental Bank and give him some general- purpose operating money.

I'd like to ask the Minister of Eco nomic Development: what is he going to say to the hog and beef producers of Alberta, the workers at Gainers, and the good people of Picture Butte, who believed that the taxpayers' money was going to be used to build and upgrade facilities and to cre ate jobs in the province not just to bail out their good buddy, Peter Pocklington? MR. ELZINGA: Mr. Speaker, we've seen on a consistent basis the innuendo that the hon. member deals in.

We saw it consis tently with the Code affair, whereby this government under the direction of our Premier brought forward the most extensive inquiry that could be possible, whereby all the facts were released. We've also seen, again, whereby the hon. member is attempting to twist the facts as it relates to our commitment to the food processing sector within the province and our commit ment to the job creation aspect within this province. He in dicated that there wasn't a commitment on our part to upgrade and build the facility.

There is that commitment, and that is why we involved ourselves, not because of the individual con cerned but because of the processing facilities that are required for the province of Alberta. I can point, Mr. Speaker, and I have pointed to a number of other food processing companies within the province of Alberta that we have offered support to, and we're doing so on the basis of the increase in quality of life to the residents of this province and also so that we will have first-class facilities for our primary producers.

If the hon. member isn't concerned -- and he shows an inconsistent concern for job creation and our farmers -- let him be honest about that and admit it. Our support is for the food processing sector and the individual primary producer. MR. FOX: Mr. Speaker, people unfortunately expect incom-

928 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 petence from government, but they neither expect nor deserve dishonesty. I'd like to ask the minister: with him bragging about his new interest shielding program that reduces operating-loan interest to 14 percent for small business and farmers, how on earth does he justify giving operating loans to Peter Pocklington at 9.6 percent? MR. ELZINGA: Mr. Speaker, again the hon. member con veniently forgets that we have a program in place in excess of $2 billion whereby we guarantee interest rates at 9 percent for the farming population. [interjection] MR.

SPEAKER: Vegreville, you've asked the supplementary. MR. ELZINGA: This loan is in excess of what we are giving to our primary producers, but the hon. member conveniently for gets. It's a program that has been accessed by in excess, I believe, of some 17,000 farmers in the province of Alberta at an interest rate of some 9 percentage points. But the hon. member conveniently forgets that, Mr.

Speaker, and I think it's important that we remind hon. members opposite what we are doing for our primary producers, whereby there is a program in place in excess of $2 billion for our primary producers in the province of Alberta. MR. FOX: Mr. Speaker, Peter Pocklington is quoted as saying, in relation to brighter days ahead for Gainers: I have financially backstopped the company. He should be reminded whose money it is. I'd like to ask the minister: just how long is it going to take this minister to realize that Albertans don't want you using their money to cover Mr.

Pocklington's butt, and demand that that $6 million be returned and used for some real job-creation projects in this province? MR. ELZINGA: Mr. Speaker, it's as I indicated in dealing with the hon. member a few days ago. I recognize it's against the House rules to indicate how he is attempting to distort the facts. But I should indicate to him that we're going to continue to make sure that our primary producers have first-class food proc essing facilities within this province, because without those first-class food processing facilities, it means a net loss to them as it relates to their return.

MS BARRETT: Yeah, yeah, yeah; so what about the loan money? MR. SPEAKER: Order. MR. ELZINGA: Mr. Speaker . . . MR. SPEAKER: Time for question period has expired. Point of Order, Edmonton-Glengarry. MR. DECORE: Mr. Speaker, I rise under Beauchesne 409(12) with respect to the questions that the hon. Member for Calgary- Fish Creek put to the Minister of Health. It's my understanding that the matters that we'll be dealing with today are matters in volving the minister's portfolio. These matters could easily have been put to her during the course of those estimates.

All this did was take up time needed to put urgent questions to the opposite side with respect to the Code matter. In the past, Mr. Speaker, you've jumped up and ruled these questions out of or der, and I wondered why it didn't happen today. MR. PAYNE: Mr. Speaker, in that the hon. leader of the Liber als made reference to me in my participation in question period today, I would like to respond to his point of order and suggest to you that it is not a point of order under Beauchesne for two reasons. First of all, he implied that this is not an urgent matter.

On behalf of thousands of infertile couples in Alberta I can as sure that member that it is an. urgent matter. Secondly, I'd like to respond to his suggestion that we delay the discussion to Committee of Supply. He's been here long enough to know that there's very limited public exposure to the debates that go on in supply. I want the discussion here, where it can be exposed to all our province. MR. SPEAKER: In response to the purported point of order, the Chair would point out that the Chair has been watching to invoke the rule of anticipation, which is a different one than the one stated here by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. The appropriate subsection would have been 410(11) rather than (12). The Chair was watching, and there was some concern with regard to the line of questioning. But in terms of the broad policy concerns, the broad issue, that was fine. In one of the supplementaries there was some concern about getting into the matter of financial aspects, which would indeed have been dealt with in terms of estimates of the Department of Health, to be heard later today, if the member is able to get in in terms of that discussion.

So the Chair takes it as notice but felt that the Chair was in order to allow it to proceed in terms of the broad issue. As to whether or not government members' participation in parliamentary question period is a matter of delaying or not, that's purely a subjective matter in terms of your own opinion or mine. The Chair recognizes another point of order the Associate Minister of Family and Social Services. MR. WEISS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise under Standing Order 23(

i) where it clearly states that it "imputes false or un avowed motives to another member." I rise in deference to the remarks made by the hon. Member for Vegreville. Not having had the opportunity of Hansard or the Blues in front of me to review, he did say, and I believe it impugns all hon. members of the government: making deals with such likes as Cormies and others. I state emphatically that the full report of the Code in quiry by Mr. Code has been made public. It's there. It's an ex pense of some $25 million. I think the government's position is clearly outlined within the report. MR.

MARTIN: This isn't a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. WEISS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like the opportunity to exercise my right in this House by raising the point of order, and that's why I stand here. If other members are not prepared to listen, then I'll sit down until they are. [interjections] MR. SPEAKER: No. Vegreville is not recognized. Mr. Minister, proceed to the point of order, without response to any catcalls which may or may not occur, briefly.

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 929 MR. WEISS: There certainly is no connection whatsoever with the remarks that the hon. member has raised, Mr. Speaker, and I would certainly ask him to withdraw, because I certainly have not sat in the House as a member of government and been in volved in any such deals. I wouldn't want that to be impugned that way. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Vegreville, speaking to the point of order. MR.

FOX: Well, I made my comment about the government, with respect, in the general sense, and I can appreciate the Asso ciate Minister of Family and Social Service's frustration at, you know, not being involved in some of the secret deals that other members of government make with these guys. But it's a matter of public record that deals are made and they won't be dis cussed. The Minister of Agriculture said in the House: I will not share the details of any discussions that I've had with any processors in the province. You can check Hansard.

There have been all kinds of secret deals, I submit, made between this government and Cormie and his buddies over the 10 years that resulted in this mess. But I appreciate your frustration, hon. minister. MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will examine the Blues. head: MOTIONS UNDER STANDING ORDER 40 MR. SPEAKER: Before Orders of the Day we have notice un der Standing Order 40. Mr. McInnis:

Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly appoint a special select committee to consider, hold public hear ings, and make recommendations regarding regulations designating routes for hazardous cargo in rural areas, safety standards relating to the construction of containers for hazardous cargo, training and safety procedures for operators who handle such cargo, and emergency safety procedures for dangerous occurrences involving the transport of hazardous cargo. MR. McINNIS: Mr. Speaker, just speaking briefly to the ur gency of debate.

There were two further spills on Groat Road and another one on 111th Avenue yesterday of Oakite Car- baway, which is the trade name for methylene chloride, a more than somewhat toxic chemical. Three innocent people were sent to hospital, and the Edmonton board of health is currently searching for others who may have suffered harmful effects from exposure to this chemical.

After this matter was raised in the Assembly earlier this session and the government was spe cifically warned that it's only a matter of time before people get hurt, there was a report issued citing a regulatory vacuum deal ing with the fact that there are no standards in Alberta for con tainers that hazardous chemicals can be carried in. Well, Mr. Speaker, the regulatory vacuum has become a leadership vacuum.

Nothing is being done by the government, and the ur gency is that this motion calls for the Assembly to step into the vacuum created by the lack of government action and to set up a process where we're going to get some regulations in place, and therefore I seek unanimous consent to move to Motion 203. [interjection] MR. SPEAKER: Hon. member, please refer to Standing Order 40. Only one person gets to speak to it to make the request to the House. Those in favour of granting unanimous consent, please say aye. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye. MR. SPEAKER: Opposed, please say no. SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. MR.

SPEAKER: The request fails. The Chair would also point out that it is somewhat unusual to have a request on a motion come forward which is already on the Order Paper and already has been discussed to some degree. Perhaps a different degree of creativity could be brought to bear with respect to a request under Standing Order 40 in terms of the wording of the particular motion. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY [Mr. Jonson in the Chair] MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I'd like to call the committee to order. head: Main Estimates 1989-90 Health MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: This morning we are dealing with the estimates of the Department of Health. They com mence on page 215 in the estimates book and page 89 in the ele ments book. Does the hon. minister have any opening remarks? MRS. BETKOWSKI: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make some introductory remarks in an overview sense for the Depart ment of Health and start out by saying that the fundamental pur pose of our health care system is to provide all Albertans with universal access to quality health care and to provide support to initiatives to promote and maintain the health of Albertans.

I believe that Alberta's Health estimates before you reflect this government's principles outlined in our social policy paper Caring & Responsibility. They demonstrate Alberta's continued commitment to provide an excellent health system and balance the necessity to desire to care for and support those with health needs with the need for responsible public management and en suring the most effective use of the resources available to us. Albertans expect and deserve this kind of treatment.

Since being appointed Minister of Health last September, I have gained a tremendous appreciation for the complexities and intricacies of the health system we've created in our province, but also an appreciation of the great challenges that lie ahead for governments, for health providers, for individuals who access that health system. The demands are increasing rapidly, and I'm proud of the work this province is doing in developing a strategy for future care needs for the health of Albertans. In Alberta a very positive step was taken by the Premier with the formation of one single Department of Health.

I'm honoured to be the

930 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 minister responsible for tabling the estimates of this new depart ment, a single administrative body for a range of services both community and institutionally based. Before going on to the trends that are appearing in the health care delivery system, I want to pay tribute to the many people who work in the health care system throughout our province and especially those who work in the Department of Health.

This has been a difficult year in terms of bringing together two departments, and to every single one of those people I say thank you on behalf of Albertans for the job they're doing. I want to pay special tribute to my Deputy Minister, Mr. Rh6al LeBlanc, and his executive assistant, John Sproule; my own executive assistant, Daryl Osbaldeston; and administrative assistant, Chris tine Braun. Although I am the one who receives the public eye, there are a lot of people who work extremely hard on my behalf, and I thank them. This department is seeing a number of trends that are appear ing in health care delivery.

There is clearly a greater emphasis on disease prevention and health promotion, there is a shift in the institutional sector toward the networking of services through geographic sharing and improvements in ambulance service, and there is certainly an increasing need to focus on the growing needs in the area of long-term care. We are meeting the challenges presented by these new trends. In the first case, we are increasing support in the areas of health promotion and community care services and are recogniz ing the growing importance of preventative care . . . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Pardon me, hon. minister.

I hesitate to interrupt, but could we have the agreement of the As sembly to briefly revert to introduction of guests. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS (reversion) MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Edmonton-Kingsway. MR. McEACHERN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for this slight interruption. I did just get the notice at the last min ute and the guests are about to leave, so I apologize to the minister. It's my pleasure today to introduce to the Assembly through the Chairman 16 English as a Second Language students from the Alberta Vocational Centre, the Winnifred Stewart campus in my riding.

They are accompanied by their teacher Ann Marie Labrie. I would ask that they rise and receive the warm wel come of the Assembly. head: COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY Health (continued) MRS. BETKOWSKI: Mr. Chairman, as I was saying, we are dealing with the trends in the system in the following ways. First of all, we are clearly increasing support in this budget in the areas of health promotion and community care services, be cause we're recognizing the growing importance of preventative care in the future health of Albertans.

As part of this increase, we've committed $1 million to the development of a screening program for the early detection of breast cancer, and work on this initiative has begun. Various stakeholder groups have met with the department officials, and an initial meeting of the advi sory committee, bringing together all the players for the devel opment of the program, recently met. The initiative is an ex tremely important one, and we have received positive support from the many health professionals involved.

Alberta Health has provided also an additional $7.8 million to enhance speech pathology programs throughout the province. We've been working with the Department of Education and the health units and school boards involved to expand and enhance speech therapy services, particularly in the initial stages for school-age children. We are clearly continuing our commitment to fight the spread of AIDS through public communication, which is the best way we can prevent the suffering caused by this horrible disease to not only the victims but families and friends.

We're also committing an additional $2 million for patient care serv ices for persons with AIDS, and these funds will go to both the community and the institutional sectors and are in addition to the funding we have provided for the provision of AZT drugs, which is close to $1 million per year, and funding for infection control in hospitals, which was announced in the context of the province's response to the nurses' concerns about safety in the workplace. Under the leadership of our Premier, Alberta is developing the Family Life and Drug Abuse Foundation.

This $200 million endowment will allow us to aggressively explore some innova tive ways to deal with the serious problems of drug abuse and the resultant effect on family life in this province.

This initia tive was commended by other western Premiers at the Western Premiers* Conference hosted by our Premier Getty, and this year's commitment of $250,000 is a very important initiative to allow for consultation with Albertans and professionals to de velop the structure and the terms of reference for the foundation to ensure that the efforts will be effective, worth while, and long-lasting and be a complement to the existing worthy pro grams that occur in this province. We'll be continuing to provide support for AADAC.

I'm pleased to see the executive director for AADAC here in the gallery and welcome him. I am proud that we've been able to enhance the funding to AADAC substantially this year with an overall increase of 18.9 percent and a 35 percent increase in pre vention and education programs.

New initiatives include adolescent prevention which will encourage healthy life-style choices by our young people, treatment programs which will enhance our ability as a province to meet the treatment needs of kids here in Alberta as opposed to them having to leave our province, and finally, planning funds for a northern addiction centre which is included in the budget. Secondly, in terms of the challenges we are facing, clearly they are in the institutional sector as well. As a government we are very proud of the health care infrastructure that has been established over the last decade in Alberta.

We can now begin, however, to concentrate on ensuring the full utilization of exist ing resources through the networking of services. This is start ing to occur in a number of areas with the designated lithotripter units, for example, in northern and southern Alberta at the Misericordia and Holy Cross hospitals. Work is being done on a pilot project in northern Alberta hospitals with respect to labo ratory services. In addition, the first magnetic resonance imag ing unit to be used strictly for clinical purposes will be at the Foothills hospital and will be used in a networking sense across

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 931 the province as well. We also need to ensure accessibility to our fine institutional infrastructure through the development of a new network and framework for emergency services in the province. Members will know of the excellent work that was done by the com mittee. The Member for Drumheller, in chairing the advisory committee, produced the report New Dimensions in Emergency Health Services: An Alberta Solution, and it's an excellent report. As a result, we are are planning implementation of legis lation, and that will be tabled during this session.

A commit ment of $500,000 for initiating the first phases is included within this budget. In order for hospitals to continue their fine work in caring for those Albertans in need of treatment, we have enhanced funding to cover the costs of inflation and allow for enhancement and new programs. To deal with the particular concerns of the nursing profes sion, we have committed $6 million in the Department of Health budget to the first year of a four-year program for this purpose.

The contribution the nursing profession makes to the health in dustry is immense, as well as the resulting impact on manpower costs within our institutions. During the recent labour unrest in British Columbia and Quebec, national attention has focused on nursing concerns, and other provinces have been pointing to Al berta for some of the innovative steps we are taking to address this important area. A nursing job enhancement advisory com mittee has been appointed, chaired by Mrs. Marlene Meyers. I expect to have a new senior nursing consultant in place in early fall.

Thirdly, with respect to the challenges, I'm particularly ex cited about the efforts we are taking and the initiatives we are taking with respect to the area of long-term care. The impact of an aging population is one of the most significant influencing factors on future health care costs not only in Alberta but in other areas as well. Our Premier expressed his commitment to those individuals who did so much to build this province and have chosen to retire here to bring them closer to family and friends. There's been extensive work in the area of long-term care in this province.

The Committee on Long Term Care for Senior Citizens, chaired ably by the Member for Calgary- Glenmore, consulted widely throughout the province. The Mirosh report and its recommendations have been received posi tively by interest groups and service providers throughout the province. The general principles that have emerged as a result of this extensive consultation indicate that Albertans want a system for a continuum of services that's responsible to the individual cli ent's changing needs.

Albertans want a system which empha sizes prevention and health promotion and supports people maintaining their independence as long as possible. Albertans support a multidisciplinary holistic system which acknowledges the contribution of families, informal care givers, and volun teers. Albertans support a system where accessibility is based on equity and allows choice and a system which promotes qual ity and cost-effective care. These are the principles we will be following.

We've already begun to introduce many other recommendations outlined in the Mirosh report and committed $9 million this year for implementing recommendations. It will continue to serve as a policy framework as we meet the chal lenges in this growing area. The following are some of the specific initiatives that are being taken by Alberta this year and are part of the budget that's before you. Major increases in Home Care funding of $5.7 mil lion are in addition to the $6 million that was added to the Com munity Health budget specifically for home care last fall.

This brings the total to $47.2 million being spent in this important area. It will be targeted to heavy care and allow us to maintain clients in-home who otherwise might not have to be institution alized. Other funds are being provided for the following pur poses. We are increasing support in health promotion geared specifically toward seniors. We are providing support for day hospital initiatives. We are developing support and consultative services for long-term care and for Alzheimer and dementia pa tients and the special needs they demand.

We're providing for oxygen and medical surgical supplies to allow nursing homes and auxiliary hospitals to take on heavier care patients. Finally, we will provide for the development of pilot projects such as geriatric rehabilitation teams at the Misericordia and Royal Alexandra hospitals and a quick response service operated by the Edmonton board of health. Many Albertans presently in long-term care institutions entered via the system of the emer gency room in an acute care facility.

I think we need to work to develop methods so that the senior breaking a hip can be dis charged from an acute care to a home and not to another institu tion unless that care is absolutely necessary. A patient classification system was recently introduced in Alberta to ensure that individuals are receiving the appropriate care by appropriately trained personnel. We reviewed the bene fits to promote individuals to stay in their own communities and avoid unnecessary or premature institutionalization.

This clas sification system is being looked at by many other jurisdictions, and I'm pleased to advise that the government of Ontario is sending a delegation to Alberta with the intent of instituting our patient classification model. I'm proud of the commitment the province, and particularly the Premier, has shown toward build ing for the future health needs of Alberta's seniors. I would now like to review quickly the health expenditure estimates and bring to your attention certain highlights within each of the votes.

The estimates for 1989-90 are approximately $3.4 billion, reflecting an increase of 9.4 percent or $295 million over the 1988-89 comparable estimates of approximately $3.1 billion. The estimates presented before the House reflect a budgetary requirement of approximately $3 billion. The differ ence between the expenditures of $3.4 billion and the budgetary requirements of $3 billion represent the revenues and the con tributions by the federal government to the health care insurance fund. The $3 billion estimate is reflected in seven specific votes.

Vote 1 is Departmental Support Services and reflects the costs of administration and support services provided to the various programs within Alberta Health. Central administration budget for Alberta Health has decreased by .7 percent over the previous fiscal year and represents less than 1 percent of the to tal estimates of Alberta Health. Of special interest within the Departmental Support Services is the establishment of a Mental Health Patient Advocate's Office and provision for the planning of funds for the Alberta Family Life and Drug Abuse Founda tion.

The Mental Health Patient Advocate's Office is being set up as part of the new legislation, the Mental Health Act, which was recently passed by this House. The main principles of this important legislation are to recognize and respect the rights of mental health patients, to improve measures for the promotion of the public, and to facilitate more efficient administration of the mental health program. The patient advocate's office is an integral part of the Mental Health Act and an important service

932 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 component toward addressing these principles. As I mentioned previously, the $250,000 in the estimates before you will be util ized to obtain the opinions of Albertans and experts in the area of drug abuse before we establish and set the foundation in place in the budgetary sense. Vote 2 is the Health Care Insurance Fund. This program reflects the costs of administration and this government's contri bution toward the Health Care Insurance Fund.

The Administra tive Support before you provides for the registration of Al bertans for health care insurance, the collection of premiums, and the payments to health care providers under the plan. The '89-90 estimates for Administrative Support reflect an increase of 11.3 percent or $2.8 million. This increase is required for the collection of overdue premiums. That Alberta Health Care In surance Fund provides for this government's insurance plan which covers the costs of medical services and a number of related health services.

Our contribution as a province toward the insurance fund reflects the difference between the revenues collected from premiums and the federal government's contribu tions and the payments made to health care providers. The esti mates reflect an increase of 2.5 percent, or approximately $13 million, in provincial contribution to the fund. Of course, that is an estimate and not a cap. The total expenditure for health care insurance is $981 mil lion. The provincial contribution is approximately $526 million, or 55 percent of the total expenses of the fund.

Premiums ac count for only 28 percent of the expenses incurred through the health care insurance plan. The premiums, as were announced during the budget address, will increase $1.75 for a single con tributor and $3.50 for family contributors. The increase is the maximum increase in health care premiums. I think it's important to note that approximately 250 senior citizens and their dependants are fully exempt from paying health care premiums.

As well, 225,000 registrants are exempt from paying premiums based on income levels, and an addi tional 50,000 registrants only pay partial premiums based on their income levels. We've also revised our method of calculat ing taxable income to ensure that the federal tax reforms of 1988 do not impact on registrants who are currently receiving benefits under the premium subsidy program. The revision will provide 13,000 registrants with higher subsidies than they are currently receiving, and 7,000 additional registrants will receive a subsidy over those who are receiving it now.

Vote 3 is the Financial Assistance for Active Care. The pro gram provides operating funds for active care facilities. The estimate provides for an increase of 11.1 percent, or $170 mil lion, over the '88-89 estimates of $1.53 billion. This 11 percent represents a 5 percent general grant increase announced in December. The remaining 6.1 percent, or $97 million, is being provided to maintain ongoing operations arising out of past commitments, increased activity levels, and new initiatives.

Some of the new initiatives I indicated in my earlier comments for which funds are included are the nursing initiatives, the AIDS patient care services, and the emergency health services. Vote 4 is Financial Assistance for Long-Term Care. The program makes provisions for institutional long-term care serv ices delivered through auxiliary hospitals, multilevel care facilities, and nursing homes. As I outlined to you previously, my department is spending considerable time and effort to de liver long-term care services in a different and an even better way than we've been able to do in the past.

The estimates for the program are being increased by 12.6 percent for $44 million over the '88-89 comparable estimates, and we have not only increased funding for these facilities but have also increased departmental staff to effectively plan for the new initiatives that are under way. Vote 5 is the Community Health Services. The objective of these is, of course, to enhance the quality of independent living in the community through prevention programs, financial assis tance to communities for local health services, for volunteer programs, and, very importantly, to monitor the general health state of Albertans.

The local health services are provided through 27 health units, with offices and suboffices in 212 localities across our province. As well, programs are provided through two provincial laboratories of public health, two provin cial vital statistics offices, two sexually-transmitted disease con trol regional offices, tuberculosis control regional offices, and the administration of family and community support services, which provides funding to 144 local jurisdictions.

The estimates before you reflect this government's emphasis on community health services, for health is as much a family concern as it is an individual one and as much a community is sue as a provincial one. The 1989-90 estimates of $236.3 mil lion reflect an increase of 13.2 percent or $27.5 million from the '88-89 estimates. A major portion of the $27.5 million increase has been identified for home care services of $14.4 million and for speech and audiology services of $7.8 million.

The increase in home care services of $14.4 million reflects an increase of 44 percent or $47.1 million over the estimates of last year. This substantial increase in funding for home care is keeping in line with this government's initiatives in providing Albertans, pri marily seniors, with the ability to live independent lives in their own homes and communities. The $7.8 million increase in speech and audiology service more than triples the '88-89 esti mates of $3.4 million. I also want to highlight the increased funding for the Haemophilus B vaccine and for the early screening of breast can cer.

An additional $800,000 is provided in the budget for the Haemophilus B vaccine for immunizing children at the age of two months rather than 18 months. The commencement of this vaccine is estimated to reduce the disease and incidence by 80 to 90 percent rather than the 20 to 25 percent reduction of the dis ease when it was commenced at the later age of 18 months. Al berta Health will implement the program as soon as the vaccine is licensed. Breast cancer is the leading cause of death among cancers in women.

As I mentioned previously, the government is provid ing $1 million to organize and implement a breast health pro gram offering mammography and a health promotion and educa tion program to women in Alberta. The program will be target ing its services to women in the 50- to 69-year-old category, where a 30 to 40 percent decrease in mortality rate has been documented where such a breast health program is implemented. In the estimates presented to you, you will note that the fund ing for the prevention of sexually-transmitted disease has in creased by 22.4 percent to $5.4 million.

In that budget, an addi tional $800,000 for AIDS patient care services is also provided. Vote 6, then, is Mental Health Services. The objective of mental health services programs is to maintain and improve the mental health of Albertans through inpatient treatment and rehabilitative services, as well as regional community mental health services for individuals and for families. These services are delivered through three extended health centres and clinics

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 933 operated by Alberta Health and through numerous programs provided by community agencies. The estimates before you provide for an increase of 4.8 percent or $2.2 million for these services. I think it's important for me to stress that in my term as min ister, for as long as I'm privileged to serve in this portfolio, the whole issue of mental health is one in which I take a very keen interest. I think that although Albertans are very tolerant people, for which I love them all, we are still of the view that it's okay to be physically ill but not okay to be mentally ill.

I think there are many things the new Mental Health Act gives us as opportunities to co-ordinate the institutional and the commu nity care services in a very important way. Within the general priority, then, of mental health services, I would highlight the issue of children's mental health services as a key priority I will be looking at within my term as minister. Within the next few months the mechanics of the new Mental Health Act legislation will be finalized and implemented, and an integral part will be the mental health review panels. We've included an additional $600,000 for this purpose.

Finally, we have vote 7, which is the Alberta alcohol and drug abuse. As I mentioned briefly in my opening remarks, the funding for AADAC for 1989-90 has been increased by 18.9 percent or $4.8 million over last year. Existing programs have been provided in an additional $1.3 million and new initiatives of $3.5 million. Emphasis for '89-90 has been in the funding for prevention and education programs, which increased by 37 percent, and for field services within the communities, which increased by 32.4 percent.

In implementing these initiatives, then, we as a government will use funding not only for the provision of services but as an incentive to promote the effective management and stewardship of our health system. We must develop a system which is ac countable and based on outcomes, health objectives and health status indicators that programs are targeted toward. We will communicate with those involved in delivering and receiving health services in developing any new strategies. This is my goal as Minister of Health and the goal of this government.

I look forward to the report of the Premier's Commission on Fu ture Health Care for Albertans, which will set the framework for meeting the challenges of the future. I look forward to the remarks by hon. members and will do my best to respond to any questions which are raised. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Edmonton- Centre. REV. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I have a number of comments I would like to make and begin by congratulating the minister on the appoint ment to the position she's held, I guess, about a year now.

I guess I'd also like to get on record the comment I've made in other forums, that it's nice to see how one woman can do the job it used to take two men to do. In fact, it was my idea that the two departments be amalgamated into one. I mentioned that some time ago, and I probably would have agreed with the Pre mier at the time that this minister would probably be able to handle it all. In fact, we're noticing a trend across Canada, Mr.

Chairman, that there are more and more health ministers who are women in a number of different provinces, and I think this is a trend which augurs well for the health of Canadians generally. It is no doubt a huge department in terms of spending. We're talking $3 billion before us here -- $3 billion -- in a very complex, very huge department and its bureaucracy.

The minis ter has alluded already to a number of the complex issues which face the whole health care system, the very profound issues of life and death which are confronted in our health care system and which providers and politicians have to confront more fully. This minister is at the top in terms of this province. I want to tell her that I often say my prayers on her behalf and hope she takes heed to take care of her own health as well as the health of the system and others of us in the province.

I too would like to thank my staff, Nancy Hanneman and Lorna Murray, for all the work they've done to help us in our shop. Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I want members here to be on notice this morning that this whole budget document and budget process is to me completely unsatisfactory. As I've said, it's $3 billion that we have to debate in less than an hour and a half. And in all my time -- I think it's the fourth time now in terms of estimates -- we've had Health estimates only in the two-hour interval of an afternoon or morning.

We've never had an evening session, which provides a bit more time, and never had even more than one allocation of the time in Committee of Supply debate. I think that's just shameful, and I don't know what we need to do about it But I think it does provide for a whole lot of hidden agendas to be going on here which don't meet the light of legislative day, and I think we're going to con tinue to pry away at a number of different issues in the other legislative means we have. But this process, I think, is very un satisfactory.

What I've just referred to this session as is a kind of putting the department through its annual checkup, and what I'm providing is perhaps a second opinion in terms of the health of the system and the spending therein. But I would like to un derscore my comments and frame them with respect to a state ment that was made by a cardiovascular surgeon at a conference in Red Deer recently. He made, I think, quite a profound state ment, and I think it will support a lot of things I've said and things I want to continue to say about the health care system.

He said there have been three revolutions in the health care system in Canada -- three revolutions. The first revolution was how the whole system was revolutionized by the development of services; the whole proliferation of health services that we have has just been revolutionary. The second revolution was the New Democrat initiative of providing those services on a uni versal basis to Canadians at no cost to themselves.

Now, the third revolution, which we're are now into, and again which we as New Democrats want to lead the way on, is the revolution of measuring outcome of those services, looking exactly at what we're getting for what we're putting in. How is it meeting the needs which are actually there and real and being experienced? Are we in fact using the best ways of getting value for dollar in looking at outcome -- what is called outcome management or evaluation, however you want to look at it.

But it needs to revolutionize the system as we have it, because many, many observers are saying that this is just a big black hole in which millions and billions of dollars are being spent and that there is very, very little sense of accountability or evaluation or measurement of really whether we're meeting the goals we want to meet through our health care system. In fact, it's a revolution that's begun to percolate in the Hyndman com mission itself, where I've been impressed by a Mr.

Sturgeon, one of the commissioners, who has made a comment more than once that if he had to run his business the way this government runs the health care system, they'd be in big trouble. Any busi-

934 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 ness person wants to know what the goals are, what the direc tion is, where the money's going, if they're meeting the needs, and having some measure of success in that, but in his time on the Hyndman commission he's seen how there is just a complete paucity of that sense of evaluation or of looking at the out comes, and that a lot needs to be done to improve that. My sense is -- and it's clear from us in the New Democrat caucus -- that what we're seeing time and time again is the way the Tories don't know how to manage the system which we have initiated.

It's our baby, our child. We want to see it ma ture in healthy ways, but it seems like the Tories treat it like a spoiled child. They keep giving it this and giving it that and letting it go on its merry way. We want to see it mature not only in body but in mind and soul as well, and not just to fund its in efficiencies, not just to build it up and up and up and then say, "Oh, by the way, we can't afford it, so we're going to sell it all off," and privatize this and privatize that. That's their approach.

That's obviously the sense we're getting both in this province and other provinces and the threat that our Canadian system is under both from the American and British experience. So we need this second opinion, I think, very much more strongly than ever, Mr. Chairman. We as New Democrats are committed to the basic principles of medicare and hospitaliza tion in this country, and we're going to work for reform from within it to work creatively and help the system to mature through the changes and not betray the birthright we as Canadians and Albertans have in our health care system.

I've been centrally influenced myself by the work of Wilson Parasiuk, who was the Health minister in Manitoba and I think had an incredible agenda for how health care reform could well have continued. He was right on the verge of bringing together all the players and doing some very imaginative and creative things to mature the system as we as New Democrats want to see it matured, and I'm going to live and work to see his reforms come to be.

So with that kind of underscoring and framing of my general remarks, I'd like to get into some specifics in going through the seven votes and the $3 billion in the -- what do we have? -- 25 minutes here. The first one, vote 1, of course, Minister's Office. I guess it's a bit of an unfair question, but I would like to put it to the minister, because I've heard it being raised in more than one case.

It's the difficulty which some departments of health are having in terms of recruiting not only in their own office but throughout the system from a government side, recruiting offi cials for a department at wages which are not competitive with those in the health care industry, that in fact there's a kind of brain drain going on and all the people who have health science administration or have a good understanding and sense of how the system works are actually being picked up by hospitals here or medical associations there at $150,000, $200,000 or more a year, and it's often the fact that public departments of health are not able to compete on a salary basis, and so a lot of the good people are leaving.

I was told once that Elinor Caplan, the Min ister of Health in Ontario, was basically told by the chief execu tive officer of the Toronto General, who makes three or four times as much money as she does, to go and jump in the lake, because he had a lot more power in the system than she did as Minister of Health and he was able to use his influence and sua sion much more than the minister. I think this is becoming more and more of an issue, and I just would like to hear if the minister has any response or is noticing any of that kind of issue arising there.

With respect to the deputy minister, I think it's very clear that we on this side of the House are cognizant of the fact that this deputy minister has had a very bad record in terms of con tracting out services to certain friends during his time in Ottawa. I was very disappointed that as one of the first announcements of this minister she should have reappointed this minister, and I think it was not a wise move. I don't know whether this 27 per cent decrease in his office is a kind of punishment for that or what's going on.

But I have heard from my spies who work over there that there's not the best morale in the department, that there are certain problems here and there, and that this top deputy is really not bringing things along as might be expected. And I'll also put this minister and this government on record that if we see CACI Canada Ltd. or Oskar Anderson at all around the offices of the Department of Health where their com puter systems or communication systems are being improved, and getting any special contracts from this minister or this government, we're going to jump on it right away.

We're monitoring that very closely. The communications budget: I know it's just getting a .6 percent increase, but I would like to hear again from the minis ter. She mentioned about communication on the AIDS issue. I don't know what is the fate of the AIDS ads that were an issue a while ago, but I would like to ask in terms of the whole com munication shop over there: what really is the overall plan? Where is this $1.5 million going in terms of the kinds of mes sages this government is putting out with respect to health care? It's a lot of money.

My goodness, if we had it, we'd put out some very important messages which I think Albertans need to hear. I'm very concerned in the terms of the communications director, what his status is, and where this shop is going. The mental health advocate, as the minister mentioned, is set up for the first time here, and we're certainly monitoring that. I still think, as the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar has stated as well, that there are better models for how a mental health advo cate, that whole system could proceed, but we'll give it some time and evaluate it as we go along. The drug abuse foundation.

Well, I'm glad to hear some of the comments today about it But I would really like this minis ter to table all pertinent information that she has with respect to this drug abuse foundation, because it's been unclear to me re ally what's going on here. I think some of us were speculating whether the Treasurer even knew about this before the Premier, in the grief around his son, announced the whole program. Where is the money from? Is it Heritage Savings Trust Fund? Two hundred million dollars; I mean, that is a lot of money.

Two hundred million dollars is what it's going to cost this gov ernment to pay out the FIC and AIC noteholders. But we're talking $200 million here. Is this $250,000 the interest on that? Where is the funding coming from? How is it being set up financially? Who's doing the planning? What are we to ex pect? I'd like much, much more information with respect to this rather large allocation of public dollars. I don't think, frankly, Mr. Chairman, that we in the New Democratic caucus are going to be supporting this setup of a separate foundation, which is set up I think unwisely insofar as it's separate from AADAC.

I mean, we have AADAC in this province. It served us very well until this government two and three years ago began to whittle it back and cut back on it. I think AADAC is the best starting place and AADAC is where the funding should have gone. It should have been funneled

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 935 through that whole program and supported it much more -- not set up a whole separate big shop of this foundation to do good ness knows what it's going to do, with huge sums of money -- used the established reputation of people of AADAC and sup ported that program to the tune of $50 million or $100 million, if you wish; at least used that system we have in place. Now, with respect to vote 2, the health care insurance divi sion.

Just off the top, and I'm sure this will come as no surprise to the minister, we really are going to have to say again that this health tax, this premium we have -- I think one of the few re maining provinces that still imposes a health tax on its citizens -- is patently unfair as a regressive kind of levy.

And now we're seeing it's going to cost more money to recover premiums that haven't been paid in the past and so on plus, as we pointed out before, you have to increase premiums because the feds are cut ting back on their contribution when you couldn't stand up to Ottawa and get the money that was due to us out of the EPF and so on.

When is this province ever going to come to its senses and say the health care program is part of our duty and respon sibility out of general revenues for the people of this province and do away with this ridiculous health tax which is nothing but an irritation and a blight upon our health care system in this province? Now, I would say with respect to the health care insurance plan that despite the lack of any real information here in the budget books, I was pleased the minister tabled the statistical supplement on the health care insurance plan just this week.

It does provide, I think, a lot of very good information, but mostly in terms of what's happened in the past. Mr. Chairman, we are here talking about this allocation for this fiscal year. So I would like the minister to maybe go through it and put down the col umn for 1989-90 and say what the projection is, where the fund ing's going to go for the various medical specialists, where she wants the services to be increased here or decreased there. I mean, here we're just given a sum of money thrown at the whole health care insurance division.

I think if we're going to look with any degree of discernment, we need to have far more information about what kind of medical services we're going to be providing by whom and to whom, and again how we're go ing to evaluate that. What are the utilization measurements that we're using to put these dollars in place? I know we let the AMA allocate it as per their wants, and I'm not challenging that, but I'd just like to say that as legislators and funders we need to have a much better idea of where it's going in this full health care insurance division.

Now, the docs must be happy, particularly the cardiovascular surgeons, with their three-year agreement. But I notice, Mr. Chairman and members of the Assembly, that we have in the report that the number of practitioners in the province has gone up by 4.16 percent and the number of patients they're delivering services to has actually gone down. It's down to 571 Albertans per practitioner. The number of services per practitioner is down 2.17, and yet the payments have gone up 3.46.

So I mean, here we have a document which tells us that in the past the trend has been that we have less patients, fewer services, but more doctors and more funds. Now, are Albertans sicker or are we not taking care of ourselves as individuals? Why do we need to have more doctors and give them more money to deliver less services on fewer people? AN HON. MEMBER: More diagnostic tests. REV. ROBERTS: More diagnoses. I'm sure they're finding a way.

I would like to ask this minister and get some comment about the very thorny issues of the supply side here with respect to physicians and practitioners, not only in terms of how many we need per thousand Albertans but where they're going to be at practice, what kind of practices we're going to be needing, and if we're going to still have more pediatricians and fewer geriatricians or more internists and fewer psychiatrists. What about the whole issue of fee for service versus salary? Does the minister have some initiatives that we should be taking in terms of salary for some physicians in some places?

I know the docs hate it, but we're going to talk about capping at some point. Is there a problem with saying to this group of specialists: well, you get this sum of money for this year and allocate it among yourselves or we'll put a cap on it. Now I know, as I say, they're happy right now, but these are very lively issues which need to be more thoroughly debated and brought to bear before we can just willy-nilly vote in this supply this morning.

I'd like to also know if all the talk about prevention and health promotion -- doctors have spoken to me and said, "We don't get paid for that; we try to do it when we can in the annual visit," and so on. But is the minister going to take some way to, in fact, allocate some money away from some place and put it into some docs -- family medicine and others -- who are doing preventative health counseling and health promotion counseling with some of their clients and patients? With respect to women's health, Mr.

Chairman, it's very staggering again in this report on the health care insurance divi sion to know that women are by far the greater users of the health care insurance division than are men. I think that's obvi ous during the reproductive years as well as during the senior years. I have a number of issues I'd like to raise with respect to women's health. We certainly appreciate the minister's support of choice.

I think it's very odd, on this side of the House, to hear members, Tories, saying that we as New Democrats are against choice for Albertans when in fact, when it comes to women's health, we are very clear in terms of the fact that women need to have the choices which they deserve in order to direct their own health care and the health of their own bodies. It's nice to know this minister takes that view as well. But still a lot more needs to go on here in terms of really meeting the needs of women and their health and not just again to throw money at the doctors to provide their kinds of services.

I just want to read a story of a doctor. This happened in Toronto. Of course, it wouldn't happen here in Alberta. About 10 male doctors went into the hospital room of a woman -- members of the Assembly, you should listen to this -- who al most died during a late-term miscarriage. Two of the surgeons had saved the young woman's life the night before, but lost her baby. The first thing one of the surgeons said was, "Well, how's the lucky woman this morning?" The woman began to cry.

The attending physician said, "It's clear time and time again that too many doctors overtreat women physically and undertreat them emotionally and socially." I think we very much more clearly need to take a look at what's going on in terms of the medicalization and the hospitalization of women in very, very unnecessary and ques tionable ways. What about the women's health recommendations from the women's advisory committee? It says nothing here about breast screening clinics, which -- I don't know where it's come from; I

936 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 guess out of right field. But the women's health recommenda tions are that there needs to be much more support for women's health and resource centres at Grace hospital in Calgary and oth ers like it. There needs to be a co-ordinated provincial directory which could list every existing clinic, of fice, support group and counselling service for women.

There needs to be "an equitable fee for abortion," and not have a second doctor have to give us his opinion whether or not that abortion should proceed; sterilization proce dures should be reinstated under the plan; contraceptive counsel ing of unwanted pregnancy services should be increased. They don't say it here, but I'd ask about midwifery as an area of women's health.

It doesn't say anything about breast screening clinics, and I'd just like to know from the minister because, in fact, I think a lot of Albertans are looking to this minister from her own experience as a woman in terms of really leading the way here with some very, very important concerns with respect to women's health. There's a whole field here that needs to be really taken up on with some leadership. I know my mother taught me more about health care than my father ever did. I think it's true that women have a way of really nurturing and developing health in people, particularly with respect to their own health.

I think that men in fact would have a much better health care system if more women were to do more in the system, particularly with respect to their own better health. Well, Mr. Chairman, I don't even have time to talk about drugs and generic drugs or dental health or other providers into this system and so on, but I would like to ask again about this outcome study. What is, for instance, Dr. Watanabe and the utilization committee doing? What about the medi-clinics, the private labs, and all the things that are generating utilization?

I'm glad to see this practitioner information retrieval system at work now in the department. We need to retrieve a lot more information, it seems to me, about practitioners in order to make better judgments and discernments. The Auditor General has said we need to improve the Medical Practice Audit Committee, which the college has. It needs to have a lot more funding from the province in order to do audits on medical practice.

As well, the minister needs to look much more clearly at how we gather health stats and demographic data in terms of what real needs have been met through just allocating all this money through the health care insurance division. Vote 3, the hospital division. Well, Mr. Chairman, what can one say in five minutes about $1.7 billion for heaven's sake? One point seven billion dollars. Again, I would say that it's un acceptable and unconscionable that we as members of this Com mittee of Supply should, at page 91, just say, yes . . . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order please. REV.

ROBERTS: . . . we will allocate $1.7 billion based on this information. I mean, it's a sham to think that that's all we have. And then further, we get the annual report of the depart ment this year, and they've gutted, even in the report, schedules and information about where funding's going to hospitals. Now, my goodness; $1.7 billion, and all we have is a few measly pages about where the money's going and how it's being allocated. I think that any legislator worth their salt would de mand far more information or even hold up this vote to get far more information about how this $1.7 billion is proceeding.

I mean, we've had the fiasco with the Principal Group and this government's lousy management and regulators over that, the whole Pocklington thing and so on. How can we possibly trust that this money's just going where we want it to go and being accounted for when we have such little information? It's not just me, Mr. Chairman; it's the Auditor General as well. Again, he's concerning himself with past sins, but still we have no indication from this minister whether or not she's com plied with the Auditor General's recommendations with respect to how this funding's going to hospitals in the province.

He says very clearly that we need to improve information main tained on approved hospital programs, we need to prepare better plans for the development of EDP systems in hospitals, we need to obtain better information regarding hospital operations, and we need to support funding decisions with better documentation. Well, you know, don't take it from me. Listen to our own Auditor General, who serves us so well: we need to support it with far better documentation.

It's not just the fact that we have lousy administration here, lousy information coming, but I need to ask some very serious questions about what funding mechanisms are being used in the department to allocate dollars to the various hospitals. This is a major area of discussion and debate, and we're not going to have any time to look at whether it's based on a volume-driven funding system or case-mix indexes or patient classification sys tems. I hear they're bringing in the management information system, and that's probably good.

What about the diagnostic related grouping mechanism, as they're using in the States, or prospective procedure schedules? There's a whole array of funding mechanisms for hospitals to make sure that they're spending our money wisely. What system are we using? Rather than either a global basis that we're just going to jack up by a certain percentage each year -- which is going to reward some hospitals' inefficiency and penalize other hospitals' efficiencies. So, Mr.

Chairman, we need to do a lot, lot more work in looking at how this $1.7 billion is being allocated and on what basis and with what sense of evaluation. But the biggest concern, of course, as the minister has al ready noted, is not just how the money gets there, it's how the nurses who are in the hospitals are actually able to continue their essential work in the hospital and not, as we're experiencing, have the nurses develop more and more burnout, more and more strike action, more and more dissatisfaction with what their ex perience is in the hospital sector. And it's no wonder, Mr.

Chairman, because nurses have never been asked how to plan a hospital; nurses have never been asked how to design a hospital; nurses have not been brought into the decision-making proc esses in hospitals, particularly bedside nurses. You can have the Hyndman commissions all you want, but unless you sit down with the bedside nurses as represented by the United Nurses of Alberta . . . This brief of theirs to the Hyndman commission is, I think, the basic starting point for any discussion about nursing issues in hospitals in this province.

Until the minister sits down and goes over this -- she might not agree with all of them; we can debate it. But this is the goods right here. It's not just go ing to mean a $6.5 million job enhancement or putting a nurse on a hospital board. It's getting to the heart of the matter, which is right here in the UNA brief to the Hyndman commission. That's what we have to come to terms with if there's not going to be any further problems in the hospital sector. Well, there's no time to discuss emergency service -- I'm glad the Act is soon coming -- or private clinics and all the rest.

Let's move on to vote 4, long-term care. When is the Act com ing? I still think there's a need for an associate minister here,

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 937 the area is of such importance. The over-reliance that the Mirosh committee has on volunteers I think is very dangerous. I would ask for the minister's support for pastoral care. In the long-term care sector -- for accreditation purposes long-term care institutions have to have pastoral care, but there's no fund ing from the department to finance that. So they take it out of parking lot or other revenues. But in terms of the kind of pas toral care which is ably provided in our long-term care system, I think funding is important for that.

The single point of entry and APPI -- I'm glad we have it. We've come a long way since my friend Dr. Skelton said we should have some pilot projects on single point of entry. I have the Price Waterhouse review of it, and I'd just like to know from the minister if the Price Waterhouse review is being complied with and some changes made, or when it's going to become a provincewide system. Patient classification's good. The Medicus system still has flaws in it, but let's get on with it.

I still think Manitoba has a better system, that we have one set of personal care homes and get away from this nursing home auxiliary with two levels -- actually five or six different levels; let's call it what it is. As Sheila Weatherill says, the patient classification is a very progressive step, but there really does need to be more funding, and I think Sheila's got it right on there. Let's get rid of these private, for-profit nursing homes that make gold off the old of this province. We just can't do it anymore. With respect to vote 5, home care, it's about time it's up. We argued it.

Ray Martin said to me: "Listen, William. You know, as soon as the election comes along, they're going to jack it up anyway." And that's what happened. There still are some needs of those under 65 years old which are not being addressed and need to be. Aids to daily living -- what in the world's going on here? Down 25 percent, penalizing those who I think have already been penalized in life.

I think the whole sense of power mobility aids for handicapped people and others -- I know the need to tender out the devices by the department and maybe get a better price for them, but it's no excuse for why this is down so much. FCSS, family community support services. Now, what hypocrisy, Mr. Chairman, that this government can talk about the family all at once, and yet when it comes to a community- based program which gets the biggest bang for the buck, in terms of FCSS, it gets no increase. In fact, it's being put more and more on the municipalities.

I recommend that it in fact be taken out of this department, where it's getting buried, put over into Family and Social Services, and brought back to the 80-20 split with the municipalities that it deserves. Now, I know time is running out here, but smoking -- now, come on. The minister didn't make any comment about smok ing, and we know that smoking causes more damage to our health and more costs on our health care system than anything else. Now, I don't want to be the last province that's wearing seat belts to take this to issue.

But certainly the tobacco industry is making this minister and other health ministers roll over and play dead, and I don't like to see it. I want to see her get much more aggressive with realizing that smoking is an addiction and that we need to get on with making some big inroads there. [interjections] MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order please. REV. ROBERTS: Some comments about AIDS. I'm glad to see the Blair report has finally found its way into this recent document. I just got it yesterday; I haven't had time to go through it. One minute left.

I'll see about the recent allocation, but it seems to me that if we can keep more people with AIDS in the community, that's where the better care is going to proceed, that's where the better dollars are to be saved, rather than putting them in institutions. So more than the $400,000, I think, is very important with respect to AIDS care and treatment of people with AIDS in the community. No time to say anything about mental health. We're going to get some time. I'm damned determined we're going to get some time to talk about mental health, and particularly children's mental health, which is an area of great need.

I'm glad this min ister has called it a priority. We've heard about other priorities in this government. We want to see some action and some ac tion right away in the area of children's mental health. For all of this, Mr. Chairman, I'm arguing we need a third revolution in health care. We need to look at outcomes; we need to look at health status; we need to look at how the dollars are going to provide the services we want to improve the health of Albertans.

This $2.9 billion allocation before us this morning is just typical of a system that has a voracious appetite for public sums, and I'm going to ensure that there is better stewardship, better value for dollar, better health for workers and providers, that this third revolution proceed, and that this minister not be merely, because of French allusion, the Marie Antoinette. Thank you very much. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Edmonton-Gold Bar. MRS. HEWES: Thanks, Mr. Chairman. May I add my con gratulations to the Minister of Health in assuming this portfolio.

I've always found this minister to be thorough, competent, and well-informed. More important, perhaps, I've found the minis ter to be open and sensitive to new ideas and with the courage to change, and I do appreciate those qualities. [Mr. Moore in the Chair] Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased that the portfolios of hospitals and community and occupational health have been combined into health care. I think that division was an unnatural and un fortunate one and added to costs of health care as well as to the confusion in the public's mind about how it was being ad ministered. So I'm glad that's been done. Mr.

Chairman, like most of us, I'm waiting for the Hyndman report with great interest. I've seen their interim reports. I ex pect that part of the budget not including much in the way of innovation is because the minister, likewise, and her department are waiting for that report. Where is the utilization study? We all worry about that one. We desperately want to see it. I'm told the ambulance Bill is coming in. There's no sign of it as yet, but I would hope it will be here during this session. I am pleased, Mr.

Chairman, that the classification system has been completed, but I would draw the minister's attention to the fact that it is not of much use unless it is universally and consistently applied and unless all the choices and supports that are necessary are available. I mean, it's fine to classify and diagnose people, but it's not really much help if the services they need are not available to them and they can't have access to them. Mr. Chairman, I'd hoped to see some indicators of more

938 ALBERTA HANSARD July 21, 1989 rationalization in the system before this. Perhaps the minister will tell me if that's simply awaiting the Hyndman. Like my colleague the Member for Edmonton-Centre, I have to express my frustration with the budget process. I will, of course, repeat this when the estimates for Treasury are before us, but I find it to be so badly flawed that it's embarrassing to me. I don't know how one is expected to make decisions on a budget with the kind of information that is before us. I don't believe that the budget process does service to this particular subject.

It gives us so little information. This is a huge budget in health care, almost $3 billion, and there is really no way to determine from the figures before us whether we're getting value for our money. It doesn't tell me how many units of whatever service are needed. It doesn't tell me how many we used last year, how many we project for this year, why that's gone up or down, what they cost last year, what they're esti mated to cost this year, whether or not the budget accommo dates the needs of people.

There is no move that I see, in total, to functional accounting that would give us some idea of what value we're getting. Mr. Chairman, these comments are not spoken out of criti cism for individual institutions. I believe this is a systemic problem and is the result, in this particular department, of unilateral planning and development, and that we have simply become accustomed to a budget process that really urgently needs an overhaul.

I think it's time to drive a wedge into that procedure, and I would hope that this minister will take these comments into consideration and perhaps give us better infor mation so that we can be of more support or offer better criticism. Mr. Chairman, just one brief comment about Bill 5. I was alarmed at it coming in as it did. I understand the need for housekeeping since those departments have been combined, but I would hope that before we see it again, the minister will have considered some amendments and some excising of

section 11 of that Bill. I believe it is much too open-ended, much too per missive, and has in fact alarmed Albertans at the potential that the Bill gives to any minister for action, activity related to facili ties that belong to the people of Alberta. I know the explanation has been given that it only relates to certain facilities, but I think it's too permissive a piece of legislation. Mr. Chairman, I have many, many questions about this budget, but I'll just go through it vote by vote and try to keep them to a minimum to give the minister a chance to respond.

Relative to the contribution to the Health Care Insurance Fund, the Administrative Support is up 11 percent compared to the provincial contributions. That's indicative, it seems to me, of the growing bureaucratic costs to administer this particular program. Now, our party has talked repeatedly about the need to consider discontinuing health care premiums entirely. Cur rently only B.C. and Alberta collect premiums.

Ontario just recently, of course, has followed the lead of Manitoba and Quebec by dropping this premium, which I consider to be a regressive tax, and has imposed instead a different system of employee-paid payroll tax, with a percentage based on the amount of payroll. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to know if the minister is considering moving to that type of system, if that's a possibility, because I think it really needs to be rethought at this point in time. I think the same argument that was used in Ontario is valid in Alberta.

The program is not only expensive to administer, it is becoming more so, and I think the increases in premium have become par ticularly difficult for low-income families, the working poor, to manage. We don't want to see them left without subsidized care. Currently the income subsidy level for a family is $10,900 and $5,000 of taxable income for singles; that's the subsidy level. Mr. Chairman, only 225,000 low-income Albertans re ceive the full subsidy. I believe the health care premiums have gone up too far.

So I would like to know if the minister is con sidering any major changes, dropping the premiums, a change in the system. There are other health care insurance issues that I'd just like to question for a moment or two. Mr. Chairman, the lack of coverage for refugees is a continuing embarrassment to Al bertans. We're the only Canadian province that denies medical coverage to refugee applicants. I know this has been stated to be under consideration and under review over the past few years, but the review has been going on for close to a year now, and surely we should be at the point of a decision.

I believe the delay is, on humanitarian grounds alone, inexcusable, and I think we should immediately extend coverage to refugees. It seems to me that we have a history in this province of being compassionate and caring, and somehow or other I want to see that put into action. Making people who are already at an im mense disadvantage go through bureaucratic hopes to get any health care, just to save minor costs to the department, I think is inexcusable. Mr. Chairman, perhaps the minister would respond to a few other items that I believe need to be reconsidered relative to health care insurance.

One of them is the continuing difficulty those individuals and families who have members suffering from bulimia express to me. They are unable to get in-patient treatment in Alberta, and when treatment can be found outside of the province, they are not able to get insurance for it. I think this is now a disorder that can be treated, and there is increasing information that it can be treated well. I believe it should be on our list. In vitro fertilization has been discussed in question pe riod this morning.

Another one that needs attention: yesterday I had a call from a very well-known Edmonton artist who unfortunately suffers with muscular dystrophy. She informs me she is able to stay functional and maintain an income as long as she can maintain physiotherapy treatments which she, because of her particular condition, must have in a hospital. The present insurance scheme has disallowed her continuing treatments in hospital. She is only allowed up to 20, I think, per year in a private clinic, and the private clinics do not have the equipment necessary for her kind of care. However, Mr.

Chairman, if that particular in dividual stops making an income and goes on social assistance, she can get the help. Now, this doesn't make any sense to me at all economically nor does it advantage the individual in any way. It's that kind of question about the insurance system that comes to constituencies constantly. The problem with dentists in their compensation for work on social assistance patients and indigents I think has never been totally resolved. The dental assistance legislation has never been resolved.

I believe there is need for a review of how decisions are made about what proce dure is in and what procedure is out and to what extent in our insurance system. Mr. Chairman, in vote 3, Financial Assistance for Active Care, this vote is up 11.1 percent, and System Development is up by 72 percent. Perhaps the minister would tell us what, in fact, that consists of. Again this absence of detailed information makes it very difficult for comments, positive or negative.

July 21, 1989 ALBERTA HANSARD 939 Mr. Chairman, I believe the budget still doesn't reflect the problems that we experience in Alberta between utilization in urban and rural centres. I think this simply has not been ad dressed. We haven't been able to make any rationalization, that I can see, about the circumstances where urban centres are over- utilized, are having to put people on extensive waiting lists, while rural centres are underutilized and experiencing difficul ties getting the kind of professional assistance they need.

The budget simply doesn't, in its statements here, address those par ticular problems. Mr. Chairman, we are, all of us, beset with the kind of hu man tragedies that occur when people cannot get care in urban hospitals. I believe they think they have a right to it, if we have a universal health care system. We are still experiencing bed closures that are particularly disquieting during the summer months. We find that some of these closures are due to lack of funding, some are due to lack of the capacity to hire or find trained and experienced hea

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19890721
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L22 S1 19890721 1000 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	909be6971dd40d7cbf9df829efa01024a1ccb3db

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (json).