Province of Alberta The 28th Legislature First Session Alberta Hansard Monday, April 15, 2013 Issue 45 The Honourable Gene Zwozdesky, Speaker

Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 28th Legislature First Session Zwozdesky, Hon. Gene, Edmonton-Mill Creek (PC), Speaker Rogers, George, Leduc-Beaumont (PC), Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees Jablonski, Mary Anne, Red Deer-North (PC), Deputy Chair of Committees Allen, Mike, Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo (PC) Amery, Moe, Calgary-East (PC) Anderson, Rob, Airdrie (W), Official Opposition House Leader Anglin, Joe, Rimbey-Rocky Mountain House-Sundre (W), Official Opposition Whip Barnes, Drew, Cypress-Medicine Hat (

W) Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC) Bhullar, Hon. Manmeet Singh, Calgary-Greenway (PC) Bikman, Gary, Cardston-Taber-Warner (

W) Bilous, Deron, Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview (ND) Blakeman, Laurie, Edmonton-Centre (AL), Liberal Opposition House Leader Brown, Dr. Neil, QC, Calgary-Mackay-Nose Hill (PC) Calahasen, Pearl, Lesser Slave Lake (PC) Campbell, Hon. Robin, West Yellowhead (PC), Deputy Government House Leader Cao, Wayne C.N., Calgary-Fort (PC) Casey, Ron, Banff-Cochrane (PC) Cusanelli, Christine, Calgary-Currie (PC) Dallas, Hon. Cal, Red Deer-South (PC) DeLong, Alana, Calgary-Bow (PC) Denis, Hon. Jonathan, QC, Calgary-Acadia (PC), Deputy Government House Leader Donovan, Ian, Little Bow (

W) Dorward, David C., Edmonton-Gold Bar (PC) Drysdale, Hon. Wayne, Grande Prairie-Wapiti (PC) Eggen, David, Edmonton-Calder (ND), New Democrat Opposition Whip Fawcett, Hon. Kyle, Calgary-Klein (PC) Fenske, Jacquie, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville (PC) Forsyth, Heather, Calgary-Fish Creek (

W) Fox, Rodney M., Lacombe-Ponoka (

W) Fraser, Rick, Calgary-South East (PC) Fritz, Yvonne, Calgary-Cross (PC) Goudreau, Hector G., Dunvegan-Central Peace-Notley (PC) Griffiths, Hon. Doug, Battle River-Wainwright (PC) Hale, Jason W., Strathmore-Brooks (

W) Hancock, Hon. Dave, QC, Edmonton-Whitemud (PC), Government House Leader Hehr, Kent, Calgary-Buffalo (AL) Horne, Hon. Fred, Edmonton-Rutherford (PC) Horner, Hon. Doug, Spruce Grove-St. Albert (PC) Hughes, Hon. Ken, Calgary-West (PC) Jansen, Sandra, Calgary-North West (PC) Jeneroux, Matt, Edmonton-South West (PC) Johnson, Hon. Jeff, Athabasca-Sturgeon-Redwater (PC) Johnson, Linda, Calgary-Glenmore (PC) Kang, Darshan S., Calgary-McCall (AL), Liberal Opposition Whip Kennedy-Glans, Donna, Calgary-Varsity (PC) Khan, Stephen, St. Albert (PC) Klimchuk, Hon.

Heather, Edmonton-Glenora (PC) Kubinec, Maureen, Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock (PC) Lemke, Ken, Stony Plain (PC) Leskiw, Genia, Bonnyville-Cold Lake (PC) Luan, Jason, Calgary-Hawkwood (PC) Lukaszuk, Hon. Thomas A., Edmonton-Castle Downs (PC) Mason, Brian, Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood (ND), Leader of the New Democrat Opposition McAllister, Bruce, Chestermere-Rocky View (

W) McDonald, Everett, Grande Prairie-Smoky (PC) McIver, Hon. Ric, Calgary-Hays (PC), Deputy Government House Leader McQueen, Hon. Diana, Drayton Valley-Devon (PC) Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (ND), New Democrat Opposition House Leader Oberle, Hon. Frank, Peace River (PC) Olesen, Cathy, Sherwood Park (PC) Olson, Hon. Verlyn, QC, Wetaskiwin-Camrose (PC) Pastoor, Bridget Brennan, Lethbridge-East (PC) Pedersen, Blake, Medicine Hat (

W) Quadri, Sohail, Edmonton-Mill Woods (PC) Quest, Dave, Strathcona-Sherwood Park (PC) Redford, Hon. Alison M., QC, Calgary-Elbow (PC), Premier Rodney, Hon. Dave, Calgary-Lougheed (PC) Rowe, Bruce, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills (

W) Sandhu, Peter, Edmonton-Manning (PC) Sarich, Janice, Edmonton-Decore (PC) Saskiw, Shayne, Lac La Biche-St. Paul-Two Hills (W), Official Opposition Deputy House Leader Scott, Hon. Donald, QC, Fort McMurray-Conklin (PC) Sherman, Dr. Raj, Edmonton-Meadowlark (AL), Leader of the Liberal Opposition Smith, Danielle, Highwood (W), Leader of the Official Opposition Starke, Hon. Dr. Richard, Vermilion-Lloydminster (PC) Stier, Pat, Livingstone-Macleod (

W) Strankman, Rick, Drumheller-Stettler (

W) Swann, Dr. David, Calgary-Mountain View (AL) Towle, Kerry, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake (W), Official Opposition Deputy Whip VanderBurg, Hon. George, Whitecourt-Ste. Anne (PC) Weadick, Hon. Greg, Lethbridge-West (PC) Webber, Len, Calgary-Foothills (PC) Wilson, Jeff, Calgary-Shaw (

W) Woo-Paw, Hon. Teresa, Calgary-Northern Hills (PC) Xiao, David H., Edmonton-McClung (PC) Young, Steve, Edmonton-Riverview (PC), Government Whip Party standings: Progressive Conservative: 61 Wildrose: 17 Alberta Liberal: 5 New Democrat: 4 Officers and Officials of the Legislative Assembly W.J. David McNeil, Clerk Robert H.

Reynolds, QC, Law Clerk/ Director of Interparliamentary Relations Shannon Dean, Senior Parliamentary Counsel/Director of House Services Stephanie LeBlanc, Parliamentary Counsel and Legal Research Officer Fiona Vance, Sessional Parliamentary Counsel Nancy Robert, Research Officer Philip Massolin, Manager of Research Services Brian G. Hodgson, Sergeant-at-Arms Chris Caughell, Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms Gordon H. Munk, Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms Liz Sim, Managing Editor of Alberta Hansard

Executive Council Alison Redford Premier, Pres ident of Executive Council Thomas Lukaszuk Deputy Premier, Minister of Enterprise and Advanced Education, Ministerial Liaison to the Canadian Forces Manmeet Singh Bhullar Minist er of Service Alberta Robin Campbell Minister of Aboriginal Relations Cal Dallas Minister of Internationa l and Intergovernmental Relations Jonathan Denis Minister of Justice and Solicitor General Wayne Drysdale Minister of Infrastructure Kyle Fawcett Associate Minister of Finance Doug Griffiths Minister of Municipal Affairs Dave Hancock Minister of Human Services Fred Horne Minister of Health Doug Horner President of Treasury Board and Minister of Finance Ken Hughes Minister of Energy Jeff Johnson Minister of Education Heather Klimchuk Minister of Culture Ric McIver Minister of Transportation Diana McQueen Minister of Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Frank Oberle Associate Minister of Services for Persons with Disabilities Verlyn Olson Minister of Agri culture and Rural Development Dave Rodney Associate Minister of Wellness Donald Scott Associate Minister of Account ability, Transparency and Transformation Richard Starke Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation George VanderBurg Associate Minister of Seniors Greg Weadick Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs Teresa Woo-Paw Associate Minister of Inte rnational and Intergovernmental Relations

STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Standing Committee on Alberta’s Economic Future Chair: Mr. Amery Deputy Chair: Mr. Fox Bhardwaj Cao Donovan Dorward Eggen Hehr Luan McDonald Olesen Pastoor Quadri Rogers Rowe Sarich Strankman Xiao Standing Committee on the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Chair: Mr. Khan Deputy Chair: Mrs. Jablonski Anderson Casey Dorward Eggen Kubinec Sandhu Sherman Select Special Conflicts of Interest Act Review Committee Chair: Mr. Allen Deputy Chair: Mr. Luan Blakeman Dorward Fenske Johnson, L.

McDonald Notley Saskiw Wilson Young Standing Committee on Families and Communities Chair: Mr. Quest Deputy Chair: Mrs. Forsyth Brown Cusanelli DeLong Fraser Fritz Goudreau Jablonski Jansen Jeneroux Leskiw Notley Pedersen Swann Towle Wilson Young Standing Committee on Legislative Offices Chair: Mr. Cao Deputy Chair: Mr. McDonald Bikman Blakeman Brown DeLong Eggen Leskiw Quadri Rogers Wilson Special Standing Committee on Members’ Services Chair: Mr. Zwozdesky Deputy Chair: Mr. Rogers Casey Forsyth Fraser Kennedy- Glans Mason McDonald Quest Sherman Smith Standing Committee on Private Bills Chair: Mr.

Xiao Deputy Chair: Ms L. Johnson Barnes Bhardwaj Brown Cusanelli DeLong Fox Fritz Goudreau Jablonski Leskiw Notley Olesen Rowe Strankman Swann Webber Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, Standing Orders and Printing Chair: Ms Olesen Deputy Chair: Mr. Lemke Calahasen Cao Casey Hehr Jansen Kennedy-Glans Kubinec Luan McAllister Notley Pedersen Rogers Sandhu Saskiw Towle Young Standing Committee on Public Accounts Chair: Mr. Anderson Deputy Chair: Mr.

Dorward Allen Amery Anglin Bilous Donovan Fenske Goudreau Hale Hehr Jeneroux Khan Pastoor Quadri Quest Sarich Stier Standing Committee on Resource Stewardship Chair: Ms Kennedy-Glans Deputy Chair: Mr. Anglin Allen Barnes Bikman Bilous Blakeman Calahasen Casey Fenske Hale Johnson, L. Khan Kubinec Lemke Sandhu Stier Webber

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1791 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Monday, April 15, 2013 1:30 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Monday, April 15, 2013 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon, hon. members and guests. Let us pray. Dear Lord, let us be thankful for the opportunity we have been given to help improve the lives of others, and let us count among our blessings the freedoms and the responsibilities that accompany that opportunity. Amen. Please remain standing, hon. members, for the singing of our national anthem led by Mr.

Paul Lor ieau, and I invite you to participate in the language of your choice. Hon. Members: O Canada, our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command. With glowing hearts we see thee rise, The True North strong and free! From far and wide, O Canada, We stand on guard for thee. God keep our land glorious and free! O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. The Speaker: Thank you, members. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recrea - tion. Dr. Starke: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my great pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a group of 12 students who geographically represent Alberta from Calgary right up to Grimshaw. While that would seem a little bit unusual, what is not unusual is that they have enrolled themselves in the School of Hope home -schooling program, which my two sons graduated from. I’m very pleased to have them here today al ong with seven parent leaders and their teacher, Mrs. Johnston MacMillan. I had the opportunity to meet with these students. They’re anywhere from grade 4 to grade 7.

They informed me that they’ve enjoyed their visit to the Legislature very much and that i t beats a day at home. They’re seated in the public gallery, and I’d ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly 23 members of l’école St. Angela elementary school. They are a grade 6 class that will be here for the whole week as part of the School at the Legislature, and they are here with their teacher, Luke Wasik.

If I could have them all stand, please, and receive the warm traditional welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Energy. Mr. Hughes: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to introduce to you and through you to all members of this As sembly a group of students with three teachers from Webber Academy. Webber Academy houses students from kindergarten through to grade 12 and is located in the scenic and historic constituency of Calgary-West. They are seated in both the members’ and the public galleries. I’d ask that they rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr.

Anderson: Mr. Speaker, I’d like to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly one of the most courageous individuals I’ve ever met al ong with her loyal family and friends. I’d ask them to rise and remain standing as I introduce them. First, Dani Polsom. She has been in the news a lot lately. She tragically was abused for eight years and then had her case dropped because of Crown and sys tem delays. It is her courage that has resulted in the government’s recommendations, just released on Friday, which should help ensure that what our system did to her doesn’t happen again.

Also with Dani is her mother and biggest cheerleader, Alison Jones. Then we have several family members: Kevin Hughes, Alison’s boyfriend; Lance Edwards -Hampton, Dani’s boyfriend; Andy Jones, Alison’s brother; Beverley Jones, Alison’s sister; Kristopher Polsom, Dani’s twin brother; David Jones, Alison’s nephew; and friends Lois Jones; Karen MacDonald, another wonderful victims’ advocate; and Angie Milley-Lowe. They are here today with a document that I will table after question period urging the government to make some important changes to justice legislation.

I’d ask th em to rise if they haven’t already and receive the very warm welcome of this Assembly. [Standing ovation] The Speaker: Thank you. The hon. Member for Edmonton- Meadowlark and leader of the Liberal opposition. Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly Jon and his wife, Evelyn, who have travelled to Edmonton from Shellbrook, Saskatchewan, to advocate for Jon’s brother Paul Siebert, who is a 55-ye ar resident of Michener Centre.

Accompa- nying them is Jon’s brother James Siebert and his wife, Ann, as well as their daughters Melody and Joy. Paul, who is now 60 years old, was 17 months old when he was diagnosed with encephalitis. He suffered brain dam age and began having up to 24 seizures a day, and it affected his sensory abilities. Paul’s parents, Abe and Cornelia Siebert, lived 30 miles away from town with their family, and without the care of nurses they cared for Paul around the clock and even too k turns sleeping with him in his bed.

Paul was five when Michener Centre opened their doors to him, and he has lived there happily and safely for the last 55 years. Mr. Speaker, Paul’s mother, Cornelia, was so touched by her son’s life that she felt compelled to write the story of Paul. She wrote a book titled Over the Wall with Paul, that I will table later today. Please join me in giving Jon and Evelyn Siebert and James, Ann, Melody, and Joy the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly as they ask us to keep the Michener Centre open for Paul. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m very honoured to rise today and introduce to you and through you a very special guest who personifies the very meaning of community service and dedication to others. Bettylyn Baker, a teacher and certified Irlen screener, has travelled to be here today to show her support for my private member’s bill, Bill 204, the Irlen Syndrome Testing Act. Bettylyn is a teacher who very frequently encounters and

1792 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 thoroughly understands the many hurdles that come with Irlen syndrome. She was the first teacher to bring Irlen’s to my attention, and for that I’m grateful. She’s had the opportunity to change the lives of many people, and I’m grateful for the work she has done with all of the children in whose lives she has made a difference. Bettylyn, you have risen, and I’d ask the Assembly to give you the warm traditional welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Hehr: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour and privilege to introduce to you and through you to all members of this august Assembly doctors Ross and Eleanor Wein. These two are long-time Albertans who have been involved as postsecondary educators in Alberta. They have a new passion now, and it’s trying to establish the international wellness and nature lodge out at Coyote Lake. This lodge is similar to a lodge that we see down in Kananaskis Country called William Watson Lodge, which was established by Premier Lougheed, and many people with disabilities have enjoyed that for the past 25 years.

What they see is a need for one in the Edmonton area. I’m very impressed by these two individuals in their passion for this, and I know they’re working with th e Minister of Infrastructure to try and get some things handled in this regard. I have every confidence that they will be successful, and I look forward myself to going there at some point in time in the future. If they could rise, and let’s give them the warm welcome of this Assembly. 1:40 head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore. Ultimate Ascent Robotics Competition Ms L. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Saturday, April 6, I took off my MLA hat for the day and was a proud mom and spectator at the Ultimate Ascent robotics competition. This competition included 30 teams from North, Central, and South America. For the first time th e high school regional competition was held in Calgary. Both of my sons have been part of Team 1482, representing Bishop Grandin high school, one of the pioneer teams from western Canada. Joining them on the field was the rookie team from Henry Wise Wood high school, also in Calgary -Glenmore.

What was really exciting was that the robots we were watching were built by the high school students themselves. In early January robotics teams all around the world received the same kit consisting of basic drive mechanisms and programming boards. Then for the next six weeks team members designed and built their robot. During the competition robots begin by operating independently to shoot Frisbees into goal boxes that are eight and 10 feet off the ground. Then the s tudents step up and operate the robots.

For the next two minutes robots are loading and shooting Frisbees across a field that is 27 by 54 feet in size. By the way, Mr. Speaker, did I also mention that there are six robots on the field at a time? The robots are placed into teams of three, where they work together to get as many Frisbees into the goals as possible. Interference, blocking, and checking of robots by robots is also allowed. This is a full-contact sport. As the clock is counting down, robots begi n climbing a tripod to earn more points. The tripod is eight feet tall, and more points are awarded depending on how high the robot reaches.

FIRST Robotics would not have been a success without the participation of industry, mentors, parents, volunteers, school staff, and the use of school facilities. Their support and a grant from the Department of Culture had teenagers and adults working together, creating risk takers and students with initiative. It was a great day, Mr. Speaker. Dani Polsom Mr. Anderson: To look at Dani Polsom for the first time, one would likely just see a smart young women with a magnetic personality and a contagious smile, but there is so much more to her than that.

You see, Dani was sexually abused hundreds of times over eight years by someone in a position of trust. When Dani was able to report what had occurred, she was revictimized, this time by Alberta’s justice system, which allowed her case to be dropped because of three years of Crown and court delays. Now, Dani could have done what most would have justifiably done in her case. She could have kept her identity secret and hoped that time would slowly make the pain fade away. But she didn’t.

Although she understood that her abuser would never be punished for what he had done, she decided that no other person who had suffered at the hands of a child molester should have to be revictimized in the justice system. Not only would she speak out about this; she would fight and win a court application to have her identity become public. She wanted victims to have a face, not some shadowy figure with a distorted voice on a television news story because, as she rightly states, she and every victim like her have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of.

On Friday Alberta Justice released a rep ort on Dani’s case, including recommendations to ensure that what the justice system did to Dani will never happen to another. These are good first steps. Like so many heroes, Dani will never meet the victims she has saved. It’s impossible to know who woul d have had their abuser go unpunished had Dani’s reforms not been implemented, but that’s just another reason why Dani is a true hero. She has given up her privacy, anonymity, and freedom to not talk about her abuse for the welfare of those she will never meet.

Dani, thank you not only for being the driving force behind these needed reforms but for showing us all what courage, sacrifice, and love truly are. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Irlen Syndrome Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Irlen syndrome is a real disorder that requires our attention in this Legislature if we are to help children and adults who suffer from this disability. Irlen syndrome is a neurological impairment which adversely affects one’s ability to read by causi ng word distortions to appear on paper.

Because of Irlen’s reading becomes a struggle and causes children to have difficulties in school. They complain of tiredness or headaches after reading. They complain that the print is blurry and the words dance or jiggle on the paper. They rub their eyes after reading for a while. They often lose their patience when reading aloud, and they often misread short words. Some are suspected of having ADHD, and parents are told that Ritalin might help. If a teacher or a p arent suspects that a child may have scotopic sensitivity syndrome, or Irlen’s, then they should take the steps to help a child.

The impact of this condition is devastating.

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1793 Today’s theme is literacy, and no one needs to say how important literacy is to the success and happiness of every Albertan. Teachers work very hard to ensure that students are reading to their very best levels at grade 3. Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have a duty to all children in Alberta. If we can address the problem of Irlen syndrome a nd help children with this disability to become all that they can be, then we had better not miss the opportunity today, right now, right here in this Legisla- ture.

I will be asking all members of the Legislature to review Bill 204, the Irlen Syndrome Testing Act, and to support the passing of this bill. Addressing Irlen syndrome in our schools will go a long way in helping all Albertans to achieve their dreams. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lesser Slave Lake. Northland School Divisi on Literacy Initiative Ms Calahasen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. “Literacy is not a luxury, it is a right and a responsibility.

If our world is to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century, we must harness the energy and creativity of all our citizens.” That’s quoting President Clinton, and that is what Northland school division is doing as a result of their division-wide literacy initiative, which was implemented at the beginning of the 2012-2013 school year. According to Literacy Alberta 40 per cent of adult Albertans and 35 per cent of working-age Albertans do not have basic literacy skills.

That’s why I’m so proud of Northland school division for tackling literacy in their schools so that we minimize the high percentage of illiteracy in our present-day world. They will do this by implem enting a sustained emphasis on reading, writing, language devel opment, and comprehension. All of the schools in the division

schedule two hours of daily literacy programming during which educators help students become stronger readers. Because the Northland school division has up to a 98 per cent aboriginal population, there is a strong emphasis on using First Nation, Métis, and Inu it material in these activities, including works of both fiction a nd nonfiction, as well as a major focus on oral language and reading in various forms across the curriculum. It also places a focus on community and family engagement with a number of advanced activities such as the celebration of Family Literacy Day.

Although it is in its first year, early results indicate student progress and community engage- ment. I have high hopes for Northland school division and its students and its community that all schools will continue to celebrate student growth and highlight the importance of literacy so that Northland school division students can also be successful. Exactly like Dr. Seuss says: “The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you’ll go.

Congratulations to the trustees , to the superintendent, to the principals, and to all the teachers and the communities that have been involved. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Scotiabank Calgary Marathon Ms Cusanelli: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today to speak about the 49th annual Scotiabank Calgary Marathon happening on May 26 from the Calgary Stampede grounds. Celebrating its 50th anniversary in June 2014, the Scotiabank Calgary Marathon has the distinc tion of being Canada’s longest running marathon. When the race first took place on August 10, 1963, there were 19 runners.

This year approximately 30,000 competitors, volun- teers, and onlookers are expected to take part. Events like this attract people to experience Al berta, boosting our global profile and our economy. The Calgary marathon offers a full marathon, a half marathon, a five- or 10-kilometre family walk or run as well as a children’s marathon and offers an opportunity for participants of all ages to achieve goals, enjoy the outdoors, and be active. The event also gives competitors the opportunity to raise money for local and national charities by racing on behalf of a worthy cause of their choice.

Known as the Charity Challenge, partici- pants represent over 70 charities, and last year the Charity Challenge raised $738,000. This year the goal is $750,000. 1:50 I’m delighted to share with you that I’ll be partaking in the 10- kilometre run in order to raise funds for the Sonshine community service, a nonprofit residential shelter in my constituency that is committed to helping young women and their families escape situations of domestic violence and rebuild their lives.

In addition, I would like to thank the hon. members for Calgary-Lougheed, Calgary-South East, and Calgary-North West for agreeing to also participate. Also, I’m extremely proud and honour ed to have been chosen as the first honorary chair for the event as I fundamentally believe that events like the Scotiabank Calgary Marathon help bring communities together in the spirit of service and charity. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: The hon. Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposi- tion for the first main set of questions. Alberta Health Services Executive Expenses Ms Smith: Mr.

Speaker, we have evidence which points to a scandal that combines two of the most troubling aspects of the mess in health care, exorbitant expenses and queue-jumping. Documents we will table today show that a former Capital health region executive spent more than $7,000 for a visit to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, submitted the bill, and was reim- bursed by Capital health. To the associate minister for Health: is this another example of the lax approach to managing expenses, or was this actually a workaround to avoid lengthy wait times here at home? Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr.

Speaker, another drive-by smear campaign. The member of the opposition is making innuendos that are suggesting that some thing unbecoming has happened. Frankly, she had withdrawn thos e innuendos just a few minutes after she made them initially, so she isn’t even sure whether what she’s saying is factual or not. But let me tell you one thing. This government is committed to working hard to making sure that we have one of the best health care systems possible, and if you don’t believe me, tune into your best news network today at 2:30, and you will see how. Ms Smith: I haven’t withdrawn anything, Mr. Speaker.

I’m asking questions for clarification. That’s what the Official Opposition does.

1794 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 I’d like to get some answers because we need proof, not just lame talking points. Will the associate minister for Health assure Albertans that this practice has been stopped and that the govern- ment will take every effort to ensure that this money is paid back? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, Alberta Health Services officials and Alberta Health officials travel extensively to other, allied clinics to make sure that we acquire the best practices possible, so travel for executives of both Alberta Health and Alberta Health Services is not unusual.

What is unusual is to see somebody’s travel expenses, which very well probably are legitimate, and to make innuendos without any factual basis for it. Ms Smith: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Premier could clear things up by answering the questions here today. He’s chosen not to. We have made freedom of information requests for the expenses of 93 health executives, and we’re still waiting for 42 of them to be released. Several of these executives are fighting our requests. If the minister was sincer e about wanting to clean things up, then he would simply agree to the request, that we’ve made multiple times.

Will he release all of the expenses for all of the executives for all of the health regions going back to 2005? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, in this provi nce we have very clear legislation relative to the Freed om of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, and any and all pa rties can request information. If that information can be released relative to the legislation, they will receive it. As she indicated, they have already received a large portion of what they requested, and if the rest can be released, it will be released.

There’s nothing to hide, but to draw conclusions on documents that you haven’t yet received is simply irresponsible and wrong. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition for the second main set of questions. Ms Smith: If there’s nothing to hide, we have no reason to know why it is they’re not releasing them because, Mr. Speaker, expense account abuse does exist in the health regions. That much is clear. Health Services Preferential Access Ms Smith: The changes to the rules don’t erase years of lavish overspending, but this case points out a situation that’s even more serious than just wasting money.

It appears that this Capital health executive jumped the queue by going outside of the country for treatment and having taxpayers pa y for it. This apparent queue- jumping must be investigated. Will the Premier extend and expand the Vertes inquiry to look at th is case and any others that may come to light? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, once the documents are released on this FOIP request and if indeed there is any behaviour that’s unbecoming, it will be dealt with. We just had a queue-jumping inquiry, a very extensive queue -jumping inquiry, and what did they come up with by way of evidence? Nothing.

So why would we now draw conclusions on documents that have not yet been released, that they haven’t had a chance to see? They’ve already prejudged the outcome having not even received the documents. Ms Smith: Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Premier isn’t listening. The documents have been released. We released them to the media today, and we will be tabling them today, and we’d sure like some answers on this.

Albertans must be forgiven for wondering about the state of our health care system because when executives who run the public system go to private clinics to get treatment that they can’t get from the public system that they run, doesn’t the minister see that that is an accountability problem? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, if that was the case, it would be a problem, and if there was a probl em, we would deal with that problem. The problem with the opposition is that they don’t know whether there is a problem. They imagine a problem, they allege there to be a problem, and they want us to deal with it.

We have the managing of health care at stake, and we have making sure that Albertans get the best health care possible at stake, not dealing with their imaginary problems. Ms Smith: Mr. Speaker, it appears the Deputy Premier wasn’t properly briefed today. Maybe he’ll answer the questions tomorrow because this is an issue of fairness.

Many other Albertans somet imes need out-of-province treat- ment, too, but they have trouble getting reimbursed by AHS – and we’ll hear about one of those cas es a little bit later in question period – yet health executives jump to the front of the line, they buy expensive private care, and then they submit the bills to the taxpayer for immediate payment. Now, that’s not fair, Minister, is it? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, any Albertan that needs to travel outside of the province or outside of the country for treatment that isn’t otherwise available in this province or within Canada can, and there is a medical committee that makes the decision of whether it is a bona fide treatment that would be justified. These will not be political decisions like the opposition would do right now. These are medical decisions made by medical professionals, so if an individual needs to travel outside of the province, that decision is made on a medical basis. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Airdrie. Access to Justice Mr. Anderson: Mr.

Speaker, by now we all know about the case of Dani Polsom, who was sexually abused repeatedly for over eight years only to have Albert a’s justice system drop her case because of three years of Crown and court delays. The Ministry of Justice has now announced severa l reforms that it says will guarantee that victims of sexual vio lence in our province will never have their cases dropped ag ain due to Crown and system delays. Some of these changes will take time and money. To the Justice minister: have you set a hard deadline by which these recommendations must all be implemented? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. First and foremost, I think we all should go and thank the victim in this particular case for her courage and determination in bringing this matter forward. I also want to thank Greg Lepp, our associate deputy minister, for authoring this report. I’ve committed that within 90 days we’ll be making a further statement as to what progress we can make as well as what part of the recommenda- tions we want to act upon immediat ely. I recognize that some also deal with other levels of govern ment like the federal government, and we will handle that as well.

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1795 Mr. Anderson: These recommendations if implemented – and we will follow up to make sure they are implemented – are a good start, but, Justice Minister, they do not go far enough. Given that your own government’s safe communities task force recom - mended back in 2007 that the government should annually publish the num ber of cases that were stayed or dropped due to system delays and given that such a reform would improve accountability and give the Justice minister a gauge to measure progress by, will the Justice minister implement this long -overdue reform immediately? Mr.

Denis: Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, we will go forward, and within 90 days we will make a further correspondence to everyone in this House, including this particular member, about where we want to go on the report itself. Just so everybody knows, the report talks about enhancing the use of precharge consultation with the police, enhanced education of Crowns in prosecuting sexual assaults, expanding the court case management program, and, as well, continuing to advocate for the elimination of preliminary inquiries, which on average delay each trial by 26 weeks. Mr. Anderson: You didn’t answer the question.

That wasn’t part of one of the recommendations made in that report. You need to implement that. Mr.

Speaker, given that the Crown initially did not support Dani’s request that she be allowed to speak publicly about her victimization and identify herself, not the accused but herself, and given that victims of sexual abuse should never be forced to refrain from talking about their abuse or system fa ilures such as this, will the Justice minister undertake to alter the policies or laws necessary to grant victims over 18 the right to waive media bans pertaining to their ability to identify themselves and to speak publicly about their victimization? 2:00 Mr. Denis: Mr.

Speaker, in this particular instance our prosecu - tions branch did not oppose the victim’s request to lift the publication ban. At that point in time we also have to consult with the police as well as the prosecution to see if this is possible. One of my concerns is that by following this member’s request, we may inadvertently identify other people if we actually go that far. Again, within 90 days we’re going to be back with this particular item to discuss this further, and I thank this memb er for his comments.

The Speaker: The hon. leader of the Alberta Liberal opposition, followed by Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Alberta Health Services Executive Expenses (continued) Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In order for regular Albertans to get out-of-country health care coverage for medically necessary care not available in Alberta, the standard procedure is to apply to Alberta Health, where a special medical panel ap - proves coverage of the care, travel, accommodation, et cetera. However, in this one instance the region approved these expenses and covered the costs without following standard procedure.

To the Premier: was this standard practice in the health region, or was this just an isolated incident? Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, thank you to the leader of the Liberal Party for clarifying for the members of the Wildrose Party how the system actually works because he said exactly what I said. There’s a medical decision made if an Albertan needs to travel outside of the province or outside of the country for medical treatment. However, if there was an irregularity, which I am not insinuating there was – the opposition is insinuating that there was – that matter will be reviewed and dealt with.

But at this point in time we have no informatio n on which to base such a conclusion that there was an impropriety of any kind. Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker. I don’t think he heard the question. The Helios quickie-colonoscopy issue is one thing in the public inquiry, but this one takes the cake: top -notch care at the world - renowned Mayo Clinic and an all -expenses-paid stay at the Marriott, including an in -house movie and even two bottles of Aquafina. It’s like a special medical system they have set up for themselves and their senior executives.

To the Premi er: is this an isolated case, or is this one of the perks that goes with being one of the senior execs in AHS or one of these highly connected Albertans? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, if what the member is insinuating in any way resembles what happened, that person and others will be dealt with. What I’m saying is that at this point in time there is no evidence to suggest that. It is very possible that this individual went to that clinic for a meeting and actually was at a seminar for two or three days, hence the hotel and other charges. We don’t know that.

But if there is inconsistency with policy, it will be dealt with. Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, this transitions perfectly into my next question. Dr. Chris Eagle originally ordered a forensic audit of all Capital health region executives, but the Premier had the board chair shut him down and just focus on Mr. Merali. But there are hundreds of executives. To the Premier: will you finally order the forensic audit of all senior execs, which Dr. Eagle called for in t he first place, or do we just have to keep waiting for all these FOIPs? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, I explained already very clearly how information is released. It is released in accordance with the law, and that’s how it will continue to be released and made available to those who request it. At this point we will be focusing on deliverin g the best possible care to Albertans. We will be moving forward, and we will be making sure that Albertans receive the care that they deserve. If they want to do smear campaigns, they’re more than welcome to do so. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview, followed by Calgary -Shaw. Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview? The hon.

Leader of the New Democrat opposition instead. Okay. Mr. Mason: I didn’t think I was heckling so much that I would be missed, Mr. Speaker. Provincial Budget Mr. Mason: This government has been on the retreat in the past week, proving that Albertans can stand up to this government and make them keep their promises. They’ve retreated on pharmacist compensation, they’ve retreated on the veterans’ parking pass, and they’ve retr eated on their high-handed attempt to destroy academic independence in this province.

But this government also made an absolutely disastrous $147 million cut to our postsecondary institutions, Mr. Speaker. Will the Deputy Premier reverse it and keep his promise to Alberta students?

1796 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, before this member pounds his chest too much, Mr. Speaker, no retreat in this particular file has happened. As a matter of fact, I am pleased to report to you and to the Legislature that I had a meeting with all 26 presidents. The presidents agreed that there has to be a mandate letter. The presidents agreed that they have the capacity and the wherewithal to deal with the budget. Although it will be difficult, they will deal with the budget. They have simply asked of me what I used to ask of them when I was a university student, an extension.

They need an extension to deal with the mandate letter a little longer. They have received it. They will respond by September 1. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Premier has ordered a charge to the rear. Today Albertans affected by cuts to persons with disabilities gathered to express concern about a $42 million cut to programs that allow persons with disabilities to live full lives. The past few weeks are proof that Albertans who stand up can force this callous PC government to back down and keep its promises. My question is to the associate minister.

Will he do his job, stop breaking promises, and restore the funding that allows vulnerable Albertans to live with dignity? Mr. Oberle: Mr. Speaker, the hon. membe r obviously didn’t read the whole budget. We got, actually, an increase in the disability services budget. We’re quite confident that we have the budget in place to do the job that we need to do. There have been within that budget some reallocations. We’re working with service providers on that now. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, it’s the same old practice of just moving money around within the department, but those cuts exist.

This PC government’s broken- promises budget contains $180 million of cuts to the senio rs’ drug benefit plan, meaning that thousands of seniors will be cut off their drug coverage. The province’s seniors didn’t know that they’d be paying out of pocket for this government’s broken promises. Will the Deputy Premier back down, as he does on so many other things, and keep the PC promise to Alberta’s vulnerable seniors? Mr. Lukaszuk: Speaking of charges to the rear, the leader of the fourth party, Mr. Speaker, is wrong again.

As a matter of fact, you can’t win with these guys either way because if you don’t listen, you’re arrogant, and if you listen, you retreat. You can’t get it right. Mr. Speaker, I’ll tell you one thing. We will continue listening to Albertans. We listened to Albertans during the last campaign, and that is why you have in this House what you have. Look at the numbers. We will continue listening to Albertans because that’s how we arrive at the right decisions. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary -Shaw, followed by Edmonton-South West. Servants Anonymous Society of Calgary Mr. Wilson: Mr.

Speaker, the safe house operated by Servants Anonymous in Calgary, which supports women and their children escaping prostitution, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation, is closing because of this government’s misplaced priorities. It is a terrible decision to eliminate support for a service that has directly assisted 176 women to exit the sex trade over the last four years. There’s nothing else like it in Alberta, yet the Deputy Premier, apparently an expert on everything, says that there are other services available that perform this exact same function. Really? Where are they, and what are their names? Mr.

Hancock: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member would like to know what actually is happening. What actually is happening is that under the safe communities task force there were pilot projects that were funded with one -time grants and short -term grants. That’s the grant that’s running out. Under Human Services we’re working with all sorts of groups across the province to help vulnerable women with respect to shelters, to help women who have been victimized by sexual crimes and in a number of other areas. We will continue to do that, and we will continue to embed those good programs that work. Mr.

Wilson: Given that this is another case of the government telling us that they’ve had to make tough decisions when, really, all they’ve done is made cuts to the front lines and given that a year’s worth of funding to operate the Servants Anonymous safe house is about the same as the annual salary of just one of the communications people in the Premier’s office, when can Albertans expect this Premier to get her priorities straight? Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, I’m glad that this member brought this up, Mr. Speaker. I don’t expect you to listen or to read the Hansard from the estimates.

This opposition went through my entire budget. Even though, on one hand, they’re asking us to balance and cut deeper and most severely, on the other hand they don’t want anything cut. The only thing they found wrong in my budget, the budget for our ministry, was to lay off one person in my office from communications. This is how constructive this opposition is. 2:10 Mr. Wilson: It’s good to see they continue to answer the questions, Mr. Speaker.

Given that the Justice minister just last year presented Servants Anonymous with an award recognizing the important work the organization does and given that the Justice department’s analysis showed that for every dollar invested in SAFE House, $8 are saved in policing, justice, health, and social supports, to my hon. friend the Associate Minister of Finance: how is it possible that a 700 per cent return on investment was deemed a waste of taxpayer dollars? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Denis: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Servants Anonymous over the last four year received $866,000.

This was designed to be a temporary grant with some bridge funding. I know they’ve done a lot of good work. In fact, I was just talking to one of them on my Facebook today. That being said, this was just temporary funding, and if you look forward, we do expect these individuals and these groups to look towards private funding as well. I’m sure that’s something that this member could support. Collective Bargaining with Teachers Mr. Jeneroux: Mr.

Speaker, it’s been an entire month since the Premier, the ATA president, and our Minister of Education announced that a tentative deal had been reached with 40,000 of Alberta’s teachers. This agreement is great. Many of my constituents were relieved, knowing that all we have to worry about now are just new schools coming to our constituency and not a teachers’ strike, but we haven’t heard much since. To the minister: can you please give these parents an update since the

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1797 fanfare an nouncement last month on when this great education deal might be finalized? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr. Speaker, since the fanfare announcement last month there has been a great deal of progress made, but there is still work to be done. Since the announcement of t he tentative deal I can tell you that we’ve been going around the province meeting with several communities and with all the school boards as well as the ATA locals, making sure that they’re well informed on it and that they make good decisions as they try to ratify this.

As a matter of fact, yesterday Edmonton public ATA local voted yes. I can tell you that we’ve got close to 40 of our 62 boards now onboard, and we’ll be working with the rest in the coming weeks. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Jeneroux: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that we’ve only had a fraction of the boards support this deal and a number are still debating whether it works for them and some have even taken the step of voting against this deal, when will we know that this great education deal is final and the school boards’ voices are heard? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr.

Speaker, the school boards’ voices are being heard on an ongoing basis, but there are still several weeks of work to be done in terms of working with the boards, meeting with the boards, making sure their concerns are heard and that all the trustees understand the deal here. As a matter of fact, this week alone there are dozens of meetings scheduled with the ATA locals and the school boards across this province. Within the coming weeks, by the middle of May, we’ll know how every one of them feels, but I’m very optimistic. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Jeneroux: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My final question: given that you just said that this agreement ensures the stability and sustainability of our system, can you please speak to my constituents, clear the air on how the specifics of this deal will truly impact our kids, my kids, in the classroom and not just comfort in the boardrooms? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr. Speaker, as the Premier sai d when we announced this deal – it was over two years in the making – it does recognize the vital role of teachers and gives them some of the supports they need to continue doing the great job that they do.

It’s great news for school boards because it give s them cost certainty over the three years. We’ve frozen salary and pay for three years in terms of the raises for teachers. More importantly, it gives stability to the entire system and to the students so that we can continue to focus on making the system better for students as opposed to worrying about labour agreements. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Innisfail-Sylvan Lake, followed by Calgary-Glenmore. Out-of-country Health Services Mrs. Towle: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While health executives are busy expensing private health care at the Mayo Clinic to the taxpayer, five-year-old Brooke Aubuchon from Innisfail is dying of a rare disease of the nervous system, the same disease which took the life of her brother Alex in 2011. But there’s hope. Brooke qualified for a revolutionary clinical trial in New York that may save her life. Her surgery was on February 26 of this year. Unfortunately, Brooke is not a senior health executive, and the Minister of Health told Brooke’s family that the PC government won’t cover her expenses.

How can the associate minister for Health possibly defend this absolutely disgusting hypocrisy? Mr. Lukaszuk: You know, as a parent I have to tell you that nothing can be more difficult to anyone than having a sick child and not being able to help. But at the same time, I have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that to hear this, the word “despicable” would be an understatement.

We have been very clear that the decisions on out-of-province and out -of-country services are made by medical doctors in the best interests of the patient, not by a PC government, not by a Wildrose opposition but by medical doctors, who know what is best and what is really possible. Mrs. Towle: So disappointing.

Given that this PC government clearly has set up the worst kind of two -tier health care possible and given that one tier has Albertans waiting the longest in the country for many medical procedures if they’re even available and given that the second tier allows Alberta Health Services executives and members of the government family immediate access to private health care on the public dime, when will this government afford this same opportunity to everyday Albertans? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, if we had the choice and the ability, every member on this side of the g overnment would give any child and any parent any ability to send their child anywhere possible, but we all know that that is not realistic, especially when you have an opposition screaming to cut deeper and deeper and deeper. We will always make sure that decisions are made on the best medical information available to the benefit of the child or the patient and that they will not be politicized by government members, by bureaucrats, or by the opposition, who have a tendency to do so. Mrs.

Towle: Given that five-year-old Brooke Aubuchon’s family has taken on severe financial hardship to pay for what this government gives away to senior health executives, will someone in this government finally do what’s right, realize how wrong they are, and pay for Brooke Aubuchon’s expenses? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, let me restate the obvious. Decisions on sending children or any Albertans to clinics outside of Alberta or outside of Canada are made based on medical information from medical doctors and other allied profess ionals. These are not political decisions.

These are not decisions made by government officials, nor should they ever be. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary -Glenmore, followed by Calgary-Mountain View. Employment Supports Ms L. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Human Services. Mr. Minister, Budget 2013 includes adjustments to program supports for underemployed and unemployed Albertans. Can the minister advise the Legislature: what are the expected effects to literacy programs as a result of these decisions? The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Human Services. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What we anticipate with the strength of the economy and the job market in Alberta is that a number of people will not require the services of Alberta Works or will require the services of Alberta Works for a shorter period of time. What it will allow us to do is to focus on target

1798 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 populations who actually need more supports to get into the workforce. Literacy is one of those target populations. Obviously, literacy is a very important part of being in the workplace today, and we’re working closely with Enterprise and Advanced Education to ensure that those programs are available. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms L. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister comment on the impact of the skills improvement plan, where I hear from community members there is some concern? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I would just add on to my previous answer to say that by reducing the number of people who require the services of Alberta Works and the associated programs, we’ll actually be able to focus more strongly on those people who really need our assistance. That skills program is one of those areas where we’ll continue to connect actively to Albertans with job opportunities and continue to assist in programs which will help them get the skills they need not just to get a job but to get a job with a livable wage. Ms L. Johnson: Finally, Mr.

Speaker, I continue to hear from nonprofit agencies about the cancellation of the STEP program. Can the minister indicate his progress with nonprofit organizations for the upcoming summer employment programs? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The STEP program was cancelled as it was started up to be a summer temporary employment program. As I referenced in the previous two answers, the job market is actually quite good, and there are jobs out there.

What we do wan t to do is to work with not -for-profit organizations and service providers who want to get students to come into their area to learn about a career in that area. We’re working with Enterprise and Advanced Education, with Volunteer Alberta, and with other organizations to find ways to assist those organizations to achieve success in drawing students in to learn about careers in that area, and we’ll continue to work in that area. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary -Mountain View , followed by Edmonton-Strathcona. Support for Vulnerable Albertans Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, this government continues with damage control communications couched in the new guise of results -based budgeting. Most Albertans see it for what it is, a desperat e attempt of government to make their financial mismanagement look responsible. Cuts to the Servants Anonymous emergency shelter we’ve heard about; $48 million in cuts to persons with disabilities community supports; inadequate funding to the charitable gr oup Inn from the Cold, housing families from the street, mostly First Nations; cuts to child care; and no poverty strategy. To the Minister of Human Services.

Albertans contacting my office don’t believe that these changes, most without consultation, refle ct anything but this government’s PR problem. How is that any . . . 2:20 Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, the problem they’ve got is that they went to his office. In fact, there’s a lot of good work happening. We’ve had strong consultations across the provi nce with respect to a social policy framework that’s leading into some excellent work with partner agencies and communities on a poverty reduction strategy. These people talk about cutting grants with respect to organizations.

The organization that he referenced was on a short -term, three-year grant program. So they’ve got to get their facts right. They’ve got to know that we are working closely with Albertans to ensure that every Albertan has the opportunity to achieve their potential. Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Minister, tell vulnerable Albertans how these cuts to services are going to improve their quality of life. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What we’re doing is making sure that every taxpayer dollar is effectively used to achieve results.

Focusing on outcomes, focusing on targeting where people need assistance to overcome a barrier to success, whether it’s periodic or chronic, working with individual Albertans to understand what the barriers to success are and how they need to move past those barriers to success: it’s very focused, it’s very broad in terms of looking at all of the things that get in the way of success, and it’s going to be achieved with the success of communities and Albertans. Dr. Swann: Well, this gover nment has a lot to account for, with bonuses to executives when they’re cutting the services to the most vulnerable.

When are you going to allow the vulnerable to define their results? Mr. Hancock: Every day, Mr. Speaker. Every day, every time we embark on this type of a process, we talk with the most vulnerable to find out what their issues, what their barriers have been and what will help lead to success. This hon. member would have people believe that it all stops and starts with the money. It doesn’t s top and start with the money. It starts and stops with understanding what success looks like, understanding how you can help people overcome the barriers that they have to success, and understanding where they want to get to.

Applying and priorizing our re sources is part of that, but it’s not the be all and the end all. Environmental Protection Policy Ms Notley: Mr. Speaker, in Washington the Premier told the story, and I quote: the truth is that Alberta is home to some of the most environmentally friendly , progressive legislation in the world. Clearly, the Premier is confused about how to use the word “truth” in a sentence. As renowned scientist David Schindler said last week: just because you shut your eyes and say the oil sands are clean four times doesn’t mean they are.

So to the Premier: why don’t you understand that intentionally and knowingly making public statements that are not correct jeopardizes our industry in the long run? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier was quite accurate in her statements. I’d like to actually mention a few statements that Dr. Schindler has made in the past as well about when we look at the work that we’re doing with regard to land-use planning, with regard to the monitoring in the oil sands, and

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1799 doubling that monitoring. Dr. Schindler has actually made very positive comments about from where we were to where we moved to. The Premier was very accurate in her statements in Washing - ton. Ms Notley: Well, interestingly, given that Dr.

Schindler said that even the village idiot couldn’t deny the significant impact the oil sands have on the environment and given Alberta’s inaction and denial on almost every facet of environmental protection means that this government has not yet risen to village idiot status, why is this minister standing by while the Premier intentionally and knowingly makes public statements . . . [interjections] Speaker’s Ruling Inflammatory Language The Speaker: Hon. member, we had an episode last week when someone was quoting something, and it was somewhat derogatory for some.

Some could construe what you just said as a quote also in that same light of casting an aspersion that may not rightfully be so. So pleas e review your questions before you bring them in here. It just raises disorder and disruption, and I’m trying my best to not allow that to happen. Meanwhile let’s have an answer from the minister. Environmental Protection Policy (continued) Mrs. McQueen: Mr. Speaker, let’s talk about the facts about Alberta, the first jurisdiction in North America to put a price on carbon, to have a technology fund to reduce emissions.

As we grow the oils sands region to supply access to markets, world- wide markets, we co ntinue to make sure that on integrated resource management, land -use planning, monitoring, and the climate change policy – show me anywhere else that has the kind of environmental policies that this Premier and this government have taken. Ms Notley: Well, Mr.

Speaker, given that this PC government just handed over most environmental protection in this province to the founding member of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and given that Alberta will miss its reduction targets by miles and has abs olutely no plans to fix that, why won’t the minister admit that the failed PC environmental record seriously damages Alberta’s international credibility and simultaneously hurts industry and the environment? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. McQueen: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You can do solid environmental policies while being efficient and effective in the regulatory process, and that is exactly what this minister is doing along with the Energy minister. As well, we’re making sure that our environmental policies are being reviewed as they pertain to climate change policy to make sure that our emissions will be reduced. That is the commitment we have made. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury -Three Hills , followed by Calgary-Varsity. Capital Region Municipal Planning Mr. Rowe: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today Albertans living in and around our major cities awoke to some rather troubling comments made by the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The minister stated that he is seriously considering forc ing the amalgamation of capital region municipalities. It appears this government wants to throw the little guy under the bus on the way to the creation of megamunicipalities and end local autonomy just like Ontario did with the regions surrounding Toronto . Will the minister commit to preserving local autonomy rather than forcing Toronto-style megacities? Mr. Griffiths: Mr.

Speaker, the member’s comments actually are inaccurate. I never suggested that we were going to amalgamate in any way, shape, or form municipalities. We haven’t talked about that at all. The Capital Region Board is critical to the success of the entire region. They have to adhere to the same principles that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs does. There is no us versus them. One of them will not be successful while the rest fail, and politicizing this process drives business away and does not appropria tely serve the people that live within the Capital Region Board. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Rowe: Thank you. Given that this government thinks that Toronto is a good example from which to copy regionalization plans and given that Albertans in and ar ound our major cities want their local autonomy preserved, why won’t the minister commit to working with municipalities to keep local decision-making in their hands instead of threatening to forcibly amalgamate the entire region? Mr. Griffiths: Mr. Speaker, again the premise is inaccurate. I’ve never even mentioned the city of Toronto once in any comment I’ve ever made. It’s completely inaccurate.

The Capital Region Board is a group of municipalities that comes together to try and find creative solutions t o ensure the success of every single municipality. We in Municipal Affairs and this government respect municipalities, and the Capital Region Board also has to respect municipalities and each other because we’re all dependent on each other for success. Mr. Rowe: I understand the minister’s comments, but this process has been going on for eight to 10 years now, and it’s clearly not working.

Given the numerous failures of forced centralization here in Alberta, chief among them Alberta Health Services, and giv en that forced regionalization will rob municipalities of their autonomy and their democratic authority, why is the minister even considering imposing a Toronto- style program of regionalization on our municipalities and threatening their independence? Mr. Griffiths: Mr. Speaker, this is about smart planning for the next generation as well. This has been eight years of success.

They have reached a small impasse, but ultimately I don’t think I’m going to take any recommendations from an opposition that needs a mediator to meet with the town of Sylvan Lake, that demands the city of Calgary have a red -light district, that tells the city of Edmonton what they’re going to do with their municipal airport, and writes chastising letters in local newspapers when a mun icipality decides to build a library. I won’t be taking their advice. Mr. Saskiw: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: A point of order from Lac La Biche-St.

Paul -Two Hills has been noted at 2:29 p.m. in response to the last answer that was just given. Let’s go on to Calgary-Varsity, followed by Strathmore-Brooks.

1800 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 Results-based Budgeting Ms Kennedy-Glans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Results -based budgeting was implemented last November to review individual government programs for their relevance, their e ffectiveness, and their efficiency. Supported by five external experts and two other MLAs, I’m chairing the results-based budgeting panel challenging 60 of 180 economic development programs across eight ministries. We’re reaching the end of our cycle, and panel members want to ensure that this work does not lead to another report that’s simply filed away.

My first question is to the Minister of Enterprise and Advanced Education. How will your ministry ensure that the learnings from this RBB process are inco rporated into decision -making not just this one time but on an on- going basis? The Speaker: The hon. minister and Deputy Premier. 2:30 Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, results -based budgeting is an exercise where we practically have a chance to step back, look at what we do, and make a determination on whether we deliver the best services possible to Albertans at the best price possible.

So it’s in a sense deconstructing the delivery and then reconstructing it again. One of the benefits that will occur from this is that we’re hoping that the culture of delivering benefits will change so that we will continue to deliver great programs at good cost. Ms Kennedy-Glans: My next question is to the Associate Minister of Finance. Given your role in overseeing the results - based budgeting process, what have you learned from this process thus far, and what improvements will you be recommending to ensure that this proces s achieves even better results going forward?

The Speaker: The hon. associate minister. [interjections] Mr. Fawcett: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m glad the opposition is so interested to learn more about this. What we have learned is that there’s a high level of professionalism and commitment in the public service, and they’ve embraced this initiative in changing the culture of how we deliver and how we look at making decisions in allocating finite resources.

They’ve really embraced the fact that w e need to balance the fact that we have finite resources with the ability to achieve an outcome of excellence for Albertans, and that’s the responsible thing to do. The Speaker: The hon. member? The hon. Member for Strathmore-Brooks , followed by St. Albert. ERCB Production Outage Mr. Hale: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On Friday we learned of some troubling developments at the ERCB.

First of all, we found out that several of its core technological systems had been down for days, jeopardizing applications, notif ications, licences, and fee recovery, but it appears the system outage is only the surface of the problem. A former ERCB executive has blown the whistle, saying that the outage is part of a much deeper backroom issue where egos are trumping sound decision-making. He called it a panicked environment. To the Energy minister: just what exactly is happening at the ERCB? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hughes: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m delighted to answer that question because it’s quite clear that w hat’s going on is that the most important function of the ERCB is carrying on, and that is ERCB’s incident reporting and emergency response capability. Field staff are continuing regular inspections, monitoring, and responding to landowner concerns. They a re also dealing with a temporary outage of some of their IT systems. They’re managing through that, and as we have seen, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers has indicated that this is not causing a concern at this stage. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Hale: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. Again to the Energy minister: given that it took five days for the ERCB to even report the systems outage and given that the former ERCB executive has alerted us to the internal problems that are apparently paralyzi ng the board and its functions, how can Albertans have confidence that the ERCB is doing its job to ensure the safe and secure development of our natural resources? Mr. Hughes: Well, I think, Mr.

Speaker, that Albertans can be quite confident that the ERCB is continuing to carry on its functions on behalf of all Albertans to protect the environmental concerns of Albertans under the new regulator when the Alberta energy regulator steps up in the next few months and to ensure the right balance between effecti ve and efficient responsible development, that Alberta is well known for. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Hale: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again to the Energy minister: given that your department is already scrambling to have the new single regulator under Bill 2 up and running by June and given the apparent dysfunction at the ERCB right now, how can we believe that the new regulator won’t be paralyzed by the same internal carnage that has seized the ERCB? Mr. Hughes: Mr. Speaker, Alberta remains one of the strongest regimes in North America in terms of managing the regulatory regimes in this province and ensuring that the energy sector is appropriately regulated and ensuring that Albertans’ interests are protected throughout the piece.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert, followed by Cypress-Medicine Hat. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support Mr. Khan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A number of concerned parents in St. Albert have approached me with a common concern and have identified what I believe are discrepancies that exist in our education and social support systems. Students who suffer and struggle w ith severe attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, ADHD, and other severe learning disabilities do not always receive standardized support services throughout all of their schooling years.

My constituents have shared with me that from kindergarten to gra de 6 youth with these severe learning difficulties get very good assistance, that helps them be successful. However, once these youth reach junior high, the extra support seems to wane. My first question is to the Minister of Education. Where is the support in our schools for youth aged 12 to 17 . . . The Speaker: Hon. Minister of Education, you’ll have to jump in here, please.

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1801 Mr. J. Johnson: I think I’ll just guess what the rest of the ques - tion was about, Mr. Speaker. Students with unique learning needs are something we heard a lot about with Inspiring Education over the last few years, so that’s why we’ve taken action. Parents have told us that every child is unique, including those with ADHD, and we need to ensure that there’s adequate funding and flex ibility in funding for local educators to make decisions on how to support those kids.

That’s why we increased the inclusive education funding this last year by $68 million to a total of $375 million. We are increasing it even yet again in this tough budget. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Khan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second question is to the same minister. Mr. Minister, my constituents have a simple question. Why is it that an ADHD student who qualifies for additional supports in elementary school n o longer meets the requirements for these same supports in middle and high school? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr.

Speaker, there actually is no change in funding between elementary to junior high to high school. School boards have the funding coming from us in the form of $375 million in inclusive education funding, and they can apply that funding to whatever they deem is appropriate at the local level because all kids learn in different ways, and they need that flexibility. So that funding should not drop off just be cause the student moves up in grades throughout their educational life. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Khan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Mr. Minister.

My next question is to the Minister of Human Services. What supports currently exist outsid e of the school system so that youth aged 12 to 17 with severe ADHD who do not have access to school supports can still receive the community and family assistance they need to be successful? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, in certain circumstances that would fall within the purview of the family supports for children with disabilities, a program that we have to help families if their children have unique needs and barriers to promoting their development. Each individual circumstance would be determined on its own merits.

FSCD would assess the impact of ADHD on the child and family and may provide services and supports to meet the child’s and family’s unique needs. Families whose children are severely affected by any diagnosed disability may receive specialized services and, of course, other information with respect to where they might find other supports. Northern Lights Regional Health Centre Mr. Barnes: Mr. Speaker, the Northern Lights regional health centre is in dire need of a new building exterior, and this government doesn’t seem to get that.

The health centre is the only primary health facility in the Fort McMurray service area, and the ongoing delay in getting this done is a huge concern for local and area residents. To the associate minister for Health: doesn’t the minister think it’s time to publish a public infrastructure priority list so northern Albertans can have some assurance that their hospital will be able to continue servicing their area? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, because of the fact that this government did not take the advice of the Wildrose opposition and did not cut our infrastructure spending by $1.6 billion, the residents in this ri ding have hope. They have hope that the facilities will be renovated and built as we’re building right now. Not only are we building health facilities, but we’re building schools and seniors’ homes and highways and overpasses, and we’re fixing bridges. Those are projects that would not have been built if we’d adopted their capital plan with a $1.6 billion cut. Mr. Barnes: Yeah. Not the MLA office building.

Given that the Northern Lights regional health centre received a D in the CBC’s Rate My Hospital inve stigation and most patients would not recommend the hospital and given that the government claims health and safety are the most important criteria to base infrastructure spending on, when will this government get serious about respecting northern Albertans and publish a public infrastructure priority list so residents of northern Alberta know their community priorities are important to this government? Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, how rich coming from an opposition that is chastising this government every da y for what they call not balancing the budget and not cutting deeper and harsher, from an opposition that wanted to cut capital spending by $1.6 billion, from an opposition that doesn’t allow us to amortize the cost of building infrastructure to the future, from an opposition that says that if we borrow to build those hospitals for which they’re asking right now, we’re passing on debt to the next generation. You can’t have it both ways. 2:40 Mr. Barnes: Our debt-free capital plan accomplishes a lot of this.

Given that last month a report indicated that patients at the Northern Lights regional health centre are picking up infections at a rate twice the national average despite the best efforts of front - line health workers, isn’t the associate minister for Health worried that this leaky building is causing patients to get sicker? Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is why we will not listen to this opposition and will continue building Alberta.

We will continue making sure that kids have schools today, not i n 30 years; that patients have hospitals today, not in 10 years; and that our seniors have adequate facilities for homes now, not in 10 years. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock, followed by Little Bow. Alberta Distance Learning Centre Ms Kubinec: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Over the constituency week I met with the Pembina Hills regional school division to discuss recent funding cuts to the Alberta Distance Learning Centre.

The ADLC serves in excess of 60,000 students, including those in FNMI communities, rural and remote schools, and outreach centres, in collaboration with over 130 school authorities in Alberta. My first question is to the Minister of Education. The number of students enrolled in distance education has been steadily increasing, so why was it so hard hit with the cuts? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr. Speaker, I’d like to thank the member for the question. She’s been a great advocate for her constituency and for the ADLC.

To answer her question, when we were looking at this budget, we had to examine every line to make sure we were getting the best bang for the buck. When we looked at the way we were funding distance education, distance learning, we realized that we were funding kids taking distance education courses more

1802 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 than we were the traditional courses when they actually cost less to deliver. So what we did was that we adjusted that funding, but it’s important to point out that we did not, as part of that, change or decrease the funding that the ADLC gets for each student that it delivers those services to. Ms Kubinec: To the same minister. Pembina Hills felt that they were left out of the conversation that led to this new funding model. Why weren’t they included? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr.

Speaker, as I mentioned, the Alberta Distance Learning Centre, which is operated by the Pembina Hills school division: their funding for delivering the distance learning to the kids didn’t change. They used to receive 56 per cent of the value for the credits that any child taking the distance learning courses got, and they still do. What we did change is the funding of the resident board, the board that registers the student. They used to get the same level of funding that they would get for a student that they were delivering traditional learning to. Of course, it doesn’t cost as much.

It doesn’t take as many resources. That didn’t make sense, and we addressed it. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Kubinec: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Minister of Education: how can we ensure that these cuts don’t affect students’ distance learning capabilities when the subscribing boards indicate that they will not be able to afford the services of ADLC to the same extent? Mr. J. Johnson: Mr. Speaker, students take distance learning for a variety of reasons, and we expect that demand to keep increasing for a number of reasons. Really, it’s about access, and it’s about programs.

We know that the school divisions will do a great job. ADLC continues to do a great job. As those programs are available, we’ll have more and more students signing up because that’s the way it’s got to be delivered in the future for many students for a number of different reasons. The Speaker: Hon. members, that concludes question period. Before we carry on with the rest of the Routine, could we have unanimous consent to revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-South West. Mr. Jeneroux: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. I’m pleased to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly some very important ears and advocates for my bill, Bill 203, being read for a second time today: Ms Angeline Webb, Ms Anna Mann, and Ms Chelsey Ans eeuw. All three of these ladies and others have provided countless hours of advice and support during the consultation process of my bill. This bill wouldn’t have the legs it does today without their unwavering support. I’m proud to ask that these guests h ere today please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Red Deer-North. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly Dr. Sharon Vaselenak. I am very privileged to have Dr. Vaselenak here today. She’s joining us in the Assembly to show her support for my private member’s bill, Bill 204, the Irlen Syndrome Testing Act. She is one of many professionals who view this as a condition which must be addressed. I will be meeting with Dr. Vaselenak later this afternoon to discuss Irlen syndrome and the negative effects it has on literacy for all those affected. Dr.

Vaselenak is from Edmonton, and she wears many hats. She’s a family physician, a parent, and a person who suffers from Irlen’s. She is seated in the public gallery, and I would ask her to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: Seeing no others, in 20 seconds we will continue with Members’ Statements, beginning with Calgary -Mountain View. head: Members’ Statements (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Support for Vulnerable Citizens Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

After 42 years in power this government is clearly the best in Canada at one area, public relations spin. Given another serious budget deficit this govern- ment announced it has suddenly realized new ways to improve care for our most vulnerable and save money at the same time. The Public A ffairs Bureau is clearly in damage control for a government that has failed a thoughtful, evidence -based, inclusive plan for people, especially our most vulnerable.

Having mismanaged our finances and still dependent on oil prices for 25 per cent of Alberta’s budget, it’s no surprise that the cuts to some of our most vulnerable citizens are being explained as improving care for people, and all this without consultations with key stakeholders and clients in these programs.

Under the excuse of results -based b udgeting Human Services has cut Servants Anonymous emergency shelter in Calgary; $48 million from persons with developmental disabilities community supports; allowed cuts to Inn from the Cold, housing families which are mostly First Nations, including children, from the street; announced it will wait to address its commitment to end child poverty until it has a definition of poverty. Yet another example is the lack of indexing of AISH, assured income for the severely handicapped, which would protect them fr om cost -of-living increases year to year.

This, of course, contrasts sharply with the MLA salaries, which benefit from a policy of indexing and annual cost-of-living increases. It’s a small wonder that Albertans are saying that enough is enough. When the most vulnerable and their exhausted families must fight each year for their essential supports and depend on the charity of churches and donors for their security, there is no security. With the fear of the Wildrose dominating all decisions of this old gov ernment, they will not bring in a fair tax system to provide stability and dignity to our most vulnerable, just more spin.

Well, Albertans are doing their own results-based analysis on this government, and the trust is gone. Many long -standing Tories that I know will no longer be supporting this sham of responsible government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1803 head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I am very pleased to present a petition that has been reviewed and approved in format by Parliamentary Counsel.

The pheasant release program petition to be presented has 486 signatures, and it’s petitioning the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government to take the necessary measures, including the introduction of proposed amendments to existing legislation, to ensure the preservation and enhancement of the Pheasant Release Program, which has been an important part of Alberta’s hunting tradition, heritage and culture for over 65 years. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Aboriginal Relations. Bill 19 Metis Settlements Amendment Act, 2013 Mr. Campbell: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 19, the Metis Settlements Amendment Act, 2013. The proposed legislation will amend Alberta’s Metis Settle - ments Act. The amendments in Bill 19 flow from my ministry’s close work with the Métis settlements leadership over the last year. Bill 19 is vital to the success of the Métis settlements’ long - term arrangements, one of my ministry’s key initiatives.

The Premier and I officially signed an agreement with the Métis settlements on March 12, 2013, a nd this represents an investment of $85 million over 10 years. 2:50 The long-term arrangements have four objectives: strengthening settlement governance, accountability, and sustainability; enabling the Métis settlements to provide essential services, inc luding infrastructure, on par with neighbouring communities; developing long-term economic and financial stability and settlement capacity; and enhancing the productivity relationship between this government and the settlements.

The Metis Settlements Amend - ment Act focuses on accountability and governance, which will contribute to the sustainability and future economic prosperity of the settlements for the benefit of all Albertans. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 19 read a first time] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice, followed by Edmonton- Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling five copies today of a report entitled Injecting a Sense of Urgency: A New Approach to De livering Justice in Serious and Violent Criminal Cases.

This report was presented to me on April 11, 2013, and it was authored at my request by Greg Lepp, who’s the assistant deputy minister in my department. I’ll pass five copies to the Clerk. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview, followed by Edmonton-Centre. Mr. Bilous: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If you’ll indulge me, I have two tablings today. I have the appropriate number of copies of an open letter sent to Premier Redford by Joyce T ona of Rimbey. In this letter Joyce speaks very passionately about why it’s so important for this PC government to reconsider the closure of the Michener Centre.

Joyce’s daughter has now lived in the Michener Centre for 45 years and is one of a very vulner able group of people who would be severely affected by this closure. The second tabling, Mr. Speaker, is the appropriate number of copies of one of many e -mails we received about the PC government’s cancellation of the STEP program. Marianne Wilkat, president of Ogden House senior citizens’ club, writes about how STEP helped them set up a program to assist seniors who were incapable of clearing snow and doing yardwork.

Marianne describes the cancellation of the STEP program as a “real kick in the teet h” for seniors in Alberta. Here’s another example of the effects of the cancellation of this program. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Thank you. The hon. Member for Edmonton -Centre or someone on behalf of, followed by Calgary-Buffalo. Dr. Swann: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Earlier the parents of Paul Siebert, who has been a resident of the Michener Centre for 50 years, were here, and his mother penned the booklet Over the Wall with Paul, which I’m tabling five copies of. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Airdrie, please. Mr. Anderson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have five copies of a document that has been signed by over 1,000 folks, constituents mostly, asking the government of Alberta to immediately pass legislation that will: • Expedite all cases of crimes against children; • Automatically trigger an outside investigation, independent of Alberta Justice, where cases are stayed due to institutional or Crown delays, in order to determine the causes of such delays as well as so lutions to ensure such delays do not happen again; • Grant victims over 18 the right to waive media bans on their name if they choose to speak publicly about their victimization; • Publish the number of Crown Stay of Proceedings and Withdrawals annually wi th an updated action plan from the Attorney General detailing how this problem is being addressed; and • Ensure the government allocates adequate resources to ensure the Crown Prosecutor’s office is able to effectively manage all prosecutions against viole nt offenders, especially those charged with sexual and other violent crimes against children.

I have five copies of that with well over a thousand signatures. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Member for Cardston - Taber-Warner, please. Mr. Bikman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have the requisite number of copies of two e-mails that I received. One is from Ryan Holt of King Drug Accounting regarding pharmacy as well as one from pharmacist Wayne Smith in Raymond. I’ve handed them to the page. Thank you.

1804 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 The Speaker: Hon. members, I believe we’re now going to deal with points of order. I have one on the

schedule today, and that was Lac La Biche-St. Paul -Two Hills . Please proceed with your citation and the point. Point of Order Allegations against Members Mr. Saskiw: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today according to Standing Order 23(h), (i), (j), and it’s with respect to a comment that was made by the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Our hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills was asking a question about municipalities, and for some reason the minister decided to respond with an allegation that was not true, that our party in some way supported red-light districts. That is in no case the circumstance.

Our party does not advocate or support that in any way whatsoever. Perhaps the member found that idea in his book that he wrote, 13 Ways To Kill Your Community , because it certainly would be. One thing that we see is, you know, this government’s policy in respect of cutting the safer communities funds, which had a ctually provided a safe house for individuals in prostitution to provide them with a sort of safe haven. With respect to those cuts our party actually vigorously advocated against front-line cuts to those services that provide support to the most vulnerable in our society. Mr.

Speaker, we’ve discussed this matter multiple, multiple times. Our party has clarified this issue multiple, multiple times. I think that in these circumstances, where you have a situation where an allegation is continually made, our side continually clarifies our position, and after that robust and exhaustive clarification there is a continuation of making an incorrect and false allegation, that is obviously going to cause disorder in this Assembly.

Again, this was a circumstance where the question that was asked was on a topic within the minister’s jurisdiction and prerogative, but instead he went out of his way. He went out of his way to make a false allegation, an incorrect allegation, that has been clarified multiple times. In these circumstances, where it’s an intentional, flagrant use of an allegation towards our side and where this matter has been clarified again and again, I ask that under the standing orders you request that that comment be withdrawn from the record. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s actually kind of humorous to be standing up here and to listen to some of the comments that have been made that it’s completely inaccurate and that it’s a false accusation. Every single statement that comes out of the opposition’s mouths in a

preamble to every question is a false accusation against the government. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Olds-Didsbury -Three Hills, who is the Municipal Affairs critic, I have some respect for, but he’s obviously buying into some of the mantra that comes from his opposition colleagues because in his

preamble in the second question he said: given the fact that I think Toronto’s system of a large municipality is great. I’ve never ever, ever made any such comment, and in every question the opposition does that. They come out with false information. I simply was pointing out, in the question about how this department and how this minister approaches municipalities, that we treat them with respect, that we honour their integrity, but we know that they need to work together because conflict does not help build a better Alberta. It does not build stronger communities.

Especially in something like the Capital Region Board, Mr. Speaker, it’s essential that they work together for the common good so that the people that they represent live in a competitive environment where the industry, the business, and their communities continue to grow and be prosperous. I was simply pointing out on the last question some facts that the opposition has said that indicate that they are not a good group to take advice from when it comes to working with municipalities. The Member for Rimbey -Rocky Mountain House -Sundre, Mr.

Speaker, wrote a couple of v ery public letters in the local newspaper chastising the local municipality for making a decision to build a library. Something that you’re supposed to have is respect for municipalities, and they were insinuating I didn’t. I was simply pointing out that t hey’re the ones that seem to have challenges with municipalities. The Member for Innisfail-Sylvan Lake , Mr. Speaker: the town had to get a mediator to come in to have a meeting with their local MLA.

Obviously, there’s a challenge there for respect, and ag ain this helps me to indicate that the opposition is not a great group of people to take advice from on how to approach a deal with municipalities. The constant berating of the city of Edmonton and its council on its decision to close the city airport, Mr . Speaker: their assertions that they would overturn that decision and impose their decision on the city council and the citizens of Edmonton, who made a decision to close that airport, show, again, that they are not the best group of people to take information from. 3:00 Finally, Mr.

Speaker, I was simply pointing out that the Leader of the Official Opposition very, very publicly – and never has a member recanted their comments about that – recommended that the city of Calgary have a red -light district. I t’s fact. When you write a column in a local newspaper in the city of Calgary telling the city council what they need to do even though many aldermen said that they didn’t think that was a very good idea, it simply indicates the way the opposition approaches their discussions with municipal councils.

Those are four good examples, in my mind, of why I would not take advice from the opposition on how to deal with municipalities. Every single thing I talked about, every single one of the four examples I used, Mr. Speaker, is a fact. It is a fact. There is no point of order. Simply because the opposition doesn’t like the truth does not make it a point of order. Mr. Hancock: Although my friend has been very eloquent, perhaps just a brief supplement to suggest that it’s very dangerous, Mr. Speaker, to have points of order with respect to questions of policy.

Those can be clarified by people getting up and making clarifications. But if one was to call a point of order every time there was a deviation from the facts , there would not be any questions coming from the opposition side of the House. There are clearly differences of viewpoint. This is clearly a difference of viewpoint. But to call a point of order every time they believe that they’ve been misquoted or misa pprehended is ridiculous. I mean, if we were to do that, there wouldn’t be any other business carried on. The Speaker: I see the hon.

Minister of Justice wanting to rise briefly, but we’ve had several speakers, and I’m prepared to rule on this. In fact, I’ ve been sent a bunch of notes here, and I was distracted momentarily by them. But they’re all valid. Hon.

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1805 Minister of Justice, I apologize for interrupting you prematurely there. In any event, let me make a couple of very brief comments here before I give you the decision. The hon. Member for Olds- Didsbury-Three Hills rose and asked a question at 2:27 p.m. The hon.

Minister of Municipal Affairs answered the question and said this: They have reached a small impasse, but ultimately I don’t think I’m going to take any recommendations from an opposition that needs a mediator to meet with the town of Sylvan Lake, that demands the city of Calgary have a red -light district, that tells the city of Edmonton what they’re going to do with their municipal airport, and writes chastising letters in local newspapers when a municipality decides to build a library. I won’t be taking their advice.

Now, there’s nothing unparliamentary about anything that went on in the question or, frankly, in the answer, so there’s really no point of order. Let me just remind you of this. You know, it’s fair and fine for opposition or private members to stand up and ask all kinds of questions they want, and the chair typically allows a maximum amount of latitude in that regard. Also, there’s a thorough appreciation for what we call freedom of speech in this Assembly, which is what it was set up many, many hundreds of years ago to in fact reflect.

On the one hand, we get questions, in the two examples I’m going to give you, from the opposition . One opposition member today stood up and said something about the idiot status of the government or something along that line. Well, the context within which it was said and because it was a quote and so on doesn’t make it very parliamentary. Then we had somebody last week and perhaps the week before as well accusing government of muzzling people and words to that effect. Typically these things go without any point of order being raised.

However, on the other side, when a government member says something in return, you have to remember that you get as good as you give, and that is what this Assembly has been noted for. Now, that does not mean that you should become unparliamentary in the giving and the sharing and the getting and the receiving. That doesn’t mean that that justifies it. I’m simply telling you that there’s a wide amount of latitude that goes on here.

I think the Government House Leader is very correct in the statement he made when he said that we would probably stall the entire proceeding o f this Assembly, or words to that effect, if someone stood up every single time that there was a disagreement on a policy matter, on a procedural matter, or on something along that line. We wouldn’t be making any progress here at all. So how do we cure this going forward? Well, fix up your language. Most of these points of order happen during question period, and question period is also a time when you have ample time to prepare your question.

In fact, you can time it to the second. You know word for word what you’re going to be asking. Look in the mirror and, again, ask yourself: “Is this the kind of question that I’m going to get away with, so to speak? Is this question in order? Am I going to raise a point of order, or am I going to be accused of creatin g disorder, disruption, and all the rest of it?” At the end of the day let’s be a lot more careful if we can, both on the questions and in the answers, to avoid any accusations, to avoid the allegations, to avoid the assertions, and to avoid attributions t hat may be unfounded.

There you have the four As of the Assembly coined today: accusations, allegations, assertions, and attributions. That being said, you might want to also – and I’ll close on this point – review Beauchesne’s 494 just as a reminder, whe re it is noted very clearly that the acceptance of one member’s word on an issue ought to be enough and that statements within their particular level of expertise are to be taken and treated as true regardless of how you may feel or if you feel differently.

Secondly, on page 510 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice it says that there is frequently disagreement over the facts and what I just alluded to. If there’s a disagreement as to the facts or as to the question of debate or a particular policy position, that is not a point of order. It is simply a disagreement.

Please keep that in mind, and we’ll save the House a lot of time, save you a lot of time, and we’ll move on with a much more effective mannerism in this House. head: Orders of the Day head: Written Questions [The Clerk read the following written questions, which had been accepted] Federal Building and Centennial Plaza Costs Q28. Mr. Barnes: As of November 1, 2012, what costs have been incurred on the Edmonton federal building and Centennia l Plaza project? Health Capital Plan Infrastructure Costs Q29. Mr.

Barnes: As of November 1, 2012, what is the status of all infrastructure projects in phase 1 and phase 2 of the health capital plan, 2010-2013? Traffic Safety Act Vehicle Impoundments Q31. Mr. Barnes: How many drivers have had their vehicles impounded since September 1, 2012, pursuant to the 2011 amendments to the Traffic Safety Act, and what was the average length of time of the impoundment? New School Construction and Maintenance Costs Q33. Mr.

Barnes: What was the cost to build each school under the Alberta schools alternative procurement 1 and Alberta schools alternative procurement 2 initiatives and the ABC Schools Partnership, and what is the ongoing annual cost of the maintenance agreements for each school? The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Transportation Construction Costs Q30. Mr. Barnes asked that the following question be accepted. As of November 1, 2012, what is the projected spending for each project l isted in Alberta Transportation’s three -year construction program, 2012-2015? Mr. Barnes: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to ask that my Written Question 30 be accepted as written. It makes me wonder why the Transportation ministry and the government want to change the question. I want to start with what we have now. We have a three- year tentative major construction project list by highway number without any cost, and obviously being listed by

1806 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 highway number means without any real priority. Throw the w ord “tentative” in there, and that, of course, strongly suggests without any commitment either. One of our researchers did a great job and took the 2012- 13 list and compared it to the 2014 list, and it’s amazing how many different projects I have that hav e been dropped from the list that appear not to have been done. It makes me wonder whatever got them on the list in the first place or maybe, better yet, what got them taken off the list.

The Wildrose and myself especially believe that Albertans and Alberta taxpayers are open to a full -blown conversation about where their taxpayer money is spent, what our highest priority needs are, and where our money is best put forward to help our economy. Too many times – too many times – I’ve seen where Albertans thought they were on a priority list, thought they were getting a much -needed infrastructure project, and it doesn’t happen and the hardship this causes. It pits one area of Alberta against another, and that’s not what we want.

We want all Albertans working together to build a strong Alberta and a strong economy. 3:10 I think that fact, coupled with the fact that this government ran on the idea of being more open, more transparent, more fair, suggests that we should have the numbers as to what these projected costs are going to be there. In part (

a) the government has suggested they change my question by adding “the contract associated with” before where I had put in “each project listed.” For some reason we want to add “the contract associated with.” Well, then my thoughts are: what the heck are they doing on the list if they’re not that far? I think there are some other important reasons, though, for us to have the estimated or the cost that the government is projecting for these Transportation projects transparent. Number one, it will help us prioritize.

I’m very much in agreement with the government that there are only limited dollars, and they have to be spent where they’re most effective. When Alberta citizens and taxpayers can get a full look at what ever ything is going to cost, this will help tremendously. People realize that they may have to wait a year or two or that they may not be the highest priority in terms of safety, in terms of health, and there may be other things.

I would hope that for all of our government spending, especially in Infrastructure and Transportation, there is a huge degree of cost-benefit analysis put into the bigger, more expensive projects before they’re committed to. I would hope they’re not just political. I would hope there’s proper planning and the proper use of taxpayers’ money for all reasons.

If we’re going to the extent of trained professionals, whether it’s in our Transportation department or some consultants we may have, doing a full -blown cost-benefit analysis on the importance of having these projects, it’s only a smaller step, then, to having the estimated cost of these projects on the list as well.

I’ve been talking to a lot of stakeholders since I’ve been Transportation critic, and a lot of stakeholders have told me that the government’s inability to plan properly, the government’s inability to spend on a sustainable, consistent level, the govern- ment’s inability to let projects know what order they’re going to be done in on a certain priority costs Alberta taxpaye rs extra money, costs us more services, costs us all quality of life. Why do they tell me this is so?

They tell me this is so because what happens when they see the government not prioritize these things, when they see the government break promises, is that they go to other jurisdictions. They do some private work.

Or, worse yet, when they do get some government work, they put in many, many costs of capital equipment and costs of being in business that they would probably prefer to amortize over a longer period of time if they could, but because they don’t know what the government’s priorities are, because they don’t know what the total costs are of these projects, because they don’t know the full estimates, they end up increasing their bids. If they become a successful bidder, it ends up costing us all more.

Again, stakeholders are telling me that with a fully public prioritized infrastructure list with costs and a government that had the commitment to stick to the list or release the good reasons when things change, that openness and transparency would lead to better value for all Albertans and future generations. I also believe that it might help avoid some cases of what might be missing costs and what might be missing estimates. We all may remember that in the supplementary estimates we had a hundred-million -dollar extra request from the government for some of the ring road around Anthony Henday.

Whether it was missed or whether it was just part of the overall process and was a later part of what was bei ng done is not clear to me, but I do believe that if this was on the priority list and our number was there, this would help taxpayers hold the government and Transportation accountable for how the money is spent, and this would help our Transportation employees work towards the number we need to work towards. Also, I think that this can be done. If we know the number and if we release the number, I think this could become an important way, Mr. Speaker, to hold contractors accountable.

If we’re not releasing the number and if one of the reasons that we’re not releasing the number is that we’re not sure what we want, then we haven’t done our planning. If we’re only putting it out to two or three bidders and we don’t know what the costs are going to come in at, then, my goodness, we’re in a tough spot if the safety or the economic importance of that project rises and our costs are only the higher costs.

Again, I think that releasing a project cost that shows more clearly what the experts in the Transportation department are expecting this to cost can help hold some companies in check and can help us negotiate some better deals for taxpayers and some better quality infrastructure for all Albertans. I also think that if we’re more open and transparent with all of our stakeholders, all of our transportation and road-building companies, this will lead to some efficiencies.

They will see what certain projects are, what certain costs are estimated for certain areas, and again they can plan their capital, their men, and their equipment better. This will allow them, you know, to give the taxpayer and the citizen a better deal, better quality, and possibly more roads. I also think that if we put this projected cost of the projects out, it would ensure some more fairness for taxpayers and certainly for contractors. Taxpayers can see what’s on the list. We’re very fortunate. We have a great, educated population.

They know that Rome or Alberta cannot be built in a day, but they do know that working together on what is most important and has the highest safety needs will lead to better infrastructure for all of us. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would speak against changing my question, where the phrase “the contract associated with” before “each project listed” is put in there. Once a contract is signed, we have certainly missed out on huge parts of the planning. We have certainly missed out on what may be the most important part of all, and that is the cost -benefit analysis.

A good cost -benefit analysis, of course, will have to hav e some number with some degree of hardness. When we add to the end of the question “with the exception of pretendered estimates,” that basically suggests, again, that many,

April 15, 2013 Alberta Hansard 1807 many parts of the priority list are just thrown on there with the desire to come o ff in a short time without being seriously thought of. I think it’s a disservice to Albertans not to provide as much information to them as we can. Thank you. The Speaker: Hon. member, thank you for your comments. Actually, it sounded like you were antici pating some changes to your motion. The House has not seen any amendments yet, but that’s okay. It will save us time later when we get to the amendment if there is one. That being said, the hon.

Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat has now moved Written Questi on 30, and it’s on the floor for discussion. The hon. Minister of Transportation. Mr. McIver: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is like Kreskin because as it turns out, there is an amendment. It’s like he read my mind. That’s actually because we furnished the hon. member with the amendment ahead of time.

The Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat asked this question: “As of November 1, 2012, what is the projected spending for each project listed in Alberta Transportation’s three -year construction prog ram, 2012- 2015?” After reviewing the question, I would propose an amendment so that it would read as follows: As of November 1, 2012, what is the projected spending for the contract associated with each project listed in Alberta Transportation’s three-year construction program, 2012 -2015, with the exception of pretendered estimates? Mr.

Speaker, I’m asking for this amendment really just to protect the integrity of our tendering process. Alberta Transportation does not publicize the pretender estimates of construction projects. If we did, it would influence the prices bid on these projects. As an analogy that would be like getting an estimate to build a house and telling your contractors in advance how big your bank account is and then saying: now bid on it .

This is essentially what the hon. member is advocating, and the reason that we don’t want to do that is that we don’t want to put Alberta taxpayers in that position. 3:20 Of course, we set a budget for projects, but again by contract if you tell the con tractor what your bank account is for that project, they’re obviously going to bid the full amount or more. Without doing that, there is a chance, of course, that they could bid under that, which is in the better interest of Albertans, which is essentially the reason we’re asking for that amendment. We need to be accountable within our budget.

Project bids should reflect what the work will cost, not what contractors think we can afford on behalf of the taxpayers. In addition, costs are not presented at a p roject level because it could put a contractor at a competitive disadvantage on a future project. Of course, that also might dissuade them from giving the people of Alberta through this government the best price that they can. Each project on the three-year program could be a subcomponent of a larger construction tender.

For example, they could be different types of work or work on different highways, so when the time comes to tender, they may be bundled together to achieve efficiencies in their delivery. Making this type of detailed “project” information publicly available to their competitors could put them at a disadvantage. Of course, Mr. Speaker, if we put our contractors at a disadvantage, they may not want to do work for the government anymore, and with fewer people bidding on our contracts, the taxpayers could actually get a worse deal, and we don’t want that to happen to them.

So we don’t want anything that may impact the integrity of our construction project tenders or the competitive process. If there are questions offline later on that I could explain to the member, I would be happy to do so. Mr. Speaker, another couple of points were raised in the opening speech. One that the member raised was about a hundred million dollars in estimates for Anthony Henday. The biggest part of that, as was explained to the member, was that the work got done actually ahead of schedule. Of course, it shouldn’t really surprise anybody that when work gets done, you have to pay for it.

Sometimes when work gets done sooner, you have to pay for it a little sooner. Further, the speaker also talked about pitting one area against another, Mr. Speaker, and that’s why we put all of our approved projects on the website. We think that that actually prevents pitting one area ag ainst another because there are only two rankings that matter, funded and unfunded. Well, pitting one area against another because one project was theoretically under the speaker’s idea approved at number 1 and another at number 17 would cause a fight that has no point simply because they’re either funded or they’re not.

That’s what the municipalities tell me. They want their projects funded. Funded or not funded: that’s what they need to know. That’s what we tell them. Mr. Speaker, that’s why I’m proposin g the amendment, and I hope all members of the Assembly, having heard the explanation that I have just given, will support the amendment that has just been proposed. The Speaker: Having heard the amendment as moved by the Minister of Transportation and hav ing heard some comments already about the anticipated amendment by the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat , are there other speakers to the amend - ment? The hon. member.

Mr. Barnes: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sorry for my misunder - standing at first, and than k you to the hon. minister for providing me the amendment earlier. I appreciate it. I think it is a step forward that we’re going to get some information on what the costs are going to be. Again, openness and transparency is something that’s important to many Albertans. An Hon. Member: All Albertans. Mr. Barnes: All Albertans. I appreciate that. What is the projected spending for the contract associated?

That phrase to me suggests that the numbers that are provided are going to be limited, and I don’t see any reason to limit them. “With the exception of pretendered estimates” is also going to limit it. I’m going to suggest to you that possibly a range of prices where your cost-benefit analysis has looked at things would go a long way to help Albertans know when things are going to be done. In closing, thank you for considering my question this far, and thank you for providing it to me earlier. The Speaker: Thank you. Are there any other speakers to the amendment? The hon. Member for Lac La Biche-St.

Paul-Two Hills. Mr. Saskiw: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to support the original, unamended question, and that question reads: “As of November 1, 2012, what is the projected spending for each project listed in Alberta Transportation’s three -year construction program,” and that’s from 2012 to 2015 inclusive.

1808 Alberta Hansard April 15, 2013 Mr. Speaker, the reason I support this written question is that we often see that when the government comes out with various announcements, promises on different projects, there’s often an overspending or escalation of costs o