Alberta Hansard — 23 March 2004, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 25, Session 4)

20040323

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 631 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 1:30 p.m. Date: 2004/03/23 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Give to each member of this Legislature a strong and abiding sense of the great responsibility laid upon us. Give us a deep and thorough unders tanding of t he needs of the people we serve. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of G uests Mr. Jonson: Mr. Speaker, on your behalf I would like to introduce 15 visitors from the Barrhead-Wes tlock constituency and Tokoro, Japan.

The town and county of Barrhead formally twinned with the town of Tokoro in 1991, and each year Tokoro sends a group of high school students to s pend a we ek in Bar rhead. Wi th us today are eight students from the Tokoro high sc hool. Accom panying the students are Mr . Shu ji Abe, Ms Miwa ko Nakad ai, Mr. Hir oshi Minagawa, Ms Debbie Bender, Mr. Kim Kalmbach, Ms Louise Rau, and Mr. Michae l Ward. T hey ar e seate d in your gal lery t his afternoon, Mr. Speaker, and I would ask them to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly Dr. Angèle Leong-Sit, a constituent of Edmonton-Whitemud. She’s the parent of three children, two of the children attending Earl Buxton elementary school in th e Edmonton-Whitemud constituency. Dr. Leong-Sit is here as part of the Education Watch initiative. She’s here this af ternoon beca use of he r concern a bout the quality of education her childre n are re ceiving and the funding f or public education within A lberta schools. Dr.

L eong-Sit is s eated in the members’ gallery. I ’d ask that she plea se stand a nd receiv e the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Indeed, it’s my pleasure today. When I first arrived in Al berta 26 year s ago, I met some friends that are with us today. In fact, one of these gentlemen sat on the city council of Fort McMurray for many, many years. He’s here today in the public g allery with his w ife and f riends. It ’s my pleasure to introduce Bill and Carol Gendreau, Sandy Williams, and Helen Gallant.

I want to say that they are truly good friends, and it’s a pleasure to see them here today. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Yankowsky: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I ris e to introduce to you and through you to this Assem bly a constituent and someone whose name is quite well known to Albertans and to us politicians, and that is Mr. John Carpay, the Alberta director of the Canadian Taxpayers Fe deration. John is he re to observ e this af ternoon’s House proceedings. John and his wife, Barb, also have a brand new baby boy who is exactly six weeks old today.

John is seated in the public gallery. I’d like him to st and and rec eive the ve ry warm welcome of this House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Rathgeber: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is indeed a pleasure for me to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly two guests who are seated in the public gallery. First, Mr. Laurie Hawn. Mr. Laurie Hawn is the recently nominated candidate who will carry the colours of the new Conser- vative Party of Canada in the new riding of Edmonton-Centre. Mr. Hawn is in the publi c gallery.

I’d ask him to ris e and receive the warm response of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Mr. Lukasz uk: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. Indeed a pleasure to introduce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly 52 constituents of mine, 50 being students from St. Lucy Catholic school accompanied by two teachers, Mrs. Lynn McLagan and Mr. Paul McNeely. I would ask them to rise and recei ve t he warm traditional welcome of this Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Vandermeer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to rise today to introduce t o you and thr ough you to t he members of this Assembly 55 constituents of mine from St. Dominic Catholic school. They are seated in both the members’ gallery and the public gallery. They’re accompanied by their teachers, Ms Sherri Anwender, Mrs. Karen Letwin, and their parent helpers are Mrs. Monique Malo, Mr. and Mrs. Shokoples, and Mrs. Deanne Riley. I’d ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly several guests from my constituency who are seated in the members’ gallery. I’ll ask them to rise as I read their names: Peter Duncan, who has one child attending McKernan elementary junior high, the school from which I graduated; Jane de Caen, who has three ch ildren, one attending Harry Ainlay, one at Avalon, and one at McKernan ; Liz Miller, who has four sons, one at Scona, two at McKernan, and one at Windsor Park; and Karen Ferrari and Preet Sara, who both have children at Windsor Park and McKernan.

These people a re here today as me mbers of the Ed ucation Wa tch initiati ve. The y’re observing our procedure s and are very concerned about bot h the quality of education and the level of funding. Please give them all a warm welcome. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Rathgeber: Thank you very much again, Mr. Speaker. It is also my pleasure to rise and introduce to you and throug h you to al l members of the Asse mbly Mr. St ephen Kushner. Mr. Kushner is well known to many members of the Assembly as the president of Merit Contractors .

They represe nt ope n s hop mem bers of t he construction industry, and he’s here to view the proceedings of the Legislature. Mr. Kushner, could you rise and rec eive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Member for Edmonton- Riverview.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004632 Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr . Speake r. I have one other gues t to introduce who is here also as part of the Education Watch initiative, and her name i s Dan ica Wolkow. She is seated in the mem bers’ gallery. Please give her a warm welcome as well. Thank you. head: Oral Quest ion Peri od The Speaker: First Official Oppo sition main question. T he hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Government Expense Claims Ms B lakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

This government still won’t come clean on i ts big spending habits, which should worry Albertans given that a budget is c oming do wn tomor row. T he Liberal opposition has asked questions about government expenses in the House only to be told to put the questions in writing. We put the questions in writing only to be told we s hould do motions for returns, but yesterday our very first motion for a return on ministerial expenses was v oted down. My questions ar e to t he Minister of Finance. What is this government hiding? Mrs. Nelson: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice on my behalf filed a document.

It’s called the report of selected payments to ministers and former members of the Legislature and lists off all of the payments that were made to every member in this Assembly, even opposition me mbers: their salaries, their expenses, and any payments that were paid to associates of members. I also said in this Legislature earlier, as this carping keeps going on, that we have a full disclosure and we are audited on an annual basis by our own Auditor General, who has made reference in the audit report, Mr.

S peaker, that he has audited the expen ses and reimbursements of memb ers of the Legislature, which includes everybody on both sides of the House, and has f ound nothing untoward. 1:40 We also have another process, Mr. Speaker, that I think is very, very important, and that’s our Ethics Commissioner. He is obligated – I’m going to be saying something that you already reminded us of – that if there, in fact, are things that have come to his attention that need to be looked at, he would let us know.

From the last conversa- tion I had with him, there were no outstanding issues that needed to come before this Assembly, so members on both sides of this House have bee n following the rule s and reg ulations that have bee n put forward. Again I will say that our government is open and accountable to Albertans. We have been the only government in all of Canada that releases these documents on a quarterly basis and updates Albertans on the actions of their government. Quite frankly, from the results I think they’re quite happy with us. Ms Blakeman: Then answer the questions.

Why did government members vote down a motion to provide the expenses for the Minister of Energy, who with 23 trips under his belt is this government’s most frequent flyer? Speaker’s Ruling Decisions of the Assembly The Speaker: The decisions of the Assembly are not to be the purview of the question period. Votes in the House that were taken yesterday are recorded in the documents of the Assembly. This is not a question to be answered by a minister of the Crown. It was the members of the Assembly that made the decision, not one person.

Government Expense Claims (continued) The Speaker: Second supplemental, hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Again to the same minister: does this government expect Albertans to believe that its spending habits are reasonable when it refuses to provide the spending figures to prove it? Mrs. Nelson: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, I believe that by filing this document that, quite frankly, lists off all y our expenses as well so that p eople can ask questions as to why y ou have huge travel expenses when you live in the city of Edmonton – it’s something you may want to answer to your own constituents.

Quite frankly, this was filed in this Assembly yesterday, and we are open and accountable. I can go through each page, Mr. Speaker, if the Assembly would like, but it is clearly here. It’s available, and if people want to read this document, please pick it up or go into the library and get it. Out-of-province Government Travel Mr. MacDon ald: Mr. Speake r, w hen the gov ernment doesn’t outright refuse to provide inf ormation about its lavi sh spending habits, it prices the information out of reach instead.

This govern- ment wants over $3,000 from the Alberta Liberal opposition just to tell Albertans how it spent their money on three recent government out-of-province trips. My first que stion is to t he Minister of Government Services. Why should it cost almost $1,800 just to access information about the expenses incurred during the Premier’s mission to the United Kingdom when in the year 2002 over $2,000 was spent on lunch alone in London on a previous trade mission? Mr. C outts: Mr.

Speake r, under fr eedom of inform ation and protection of privacy there is a process by which fees are charged for the service of ge tting that i nformation, becaus e there is a cost to assembling the information, photostating it, and making sure that it is presentable and ready for the people that have requested specific information. If a request for inf ormation comes in that is ve ry broad based, asking for a lot of infor mation tha t i sn’t specific, well, then, of course, the cost is appropriately higher than if you should a sk for specific infor mation.

T he costs f or free dom of i nformation and protection of priva cy re quests in A lberta are the lowest across Canada, and it’s directly attributable to the amount of information that is being requested. Mr. MacDonald: Again to the same minister: why should it cost another $1,200 to access information about expenses incurred during the Premier’s recent missions to Washington and New York and to India and Hong Kong when over $8,000 was spent on a car service alone in New York City in 2002 on a similar trip? Mr. Coutts: Mr.

Speaker, I certa inly wasn’t on the trip, and that question has been a nswered in thi s Assembly on two other occa- sions, if I recall. Mr. Speaker, our Department of Government Services is responsi- ble for the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. We are responsible for training privacy commissioners in each and every department. Those are the people that provide the information

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 633 upon request, and that is the e xtent of Government Services’ responsibility for the Fr eedom of Inform ation and Protec tion of Privacy Act. So I am not responsible for e very single s olitary department that giv es out the inf ormation t hrough their pr ivacy commissioners. Mr.

MacDonald: Given that it’s apparent that this government is more concerned about protecting the information from the taxpayers than they are about spending less on their trips, why is this minister admitting that charg ing such out rageous fees is a disincentiv e to democracy, to accountability, and to transparency in government? Mr. Coutts: Mr. Speaker, there is a $25 fee for the application to come int o any minister’s office . That is the lowest fee a cross Canada. The low est fee across Canada.

I f a member or someone from the public is not satisfied with the information, they can also go to the Privacy Commissioner and ask for an appeal. That is part of the process, and that is also part of what the select standing commit- tee of this House put into the report when the freedom of information and protection of privacy legislation is reviewed every three to five years in this Assembly. In terms of actual costs that were on that trip, the hon. Minister of Economic Development was on the trip, and may be he can shed some light on what the member is offering. Mr. Norris : Well, Mr.

Speaker, it would be a delight to rise. [interjections] Do you want an answer, or are you just going to . . . The Speaker: Hon. minister, please. Through the chair. Mr. Norris: Mr. Speaker, I did indee d have the honour of being with the Premier on both those trips. The limousine service they’re talking about was organized by our department. It was actually two Ford Econoline vans. Our departmen t di d a cost compar ative analysis to put four cabs on hold in New York City for the 12 hours a day th at we w ere there or get the service, and we saved a bout $2,500 by doing the service.

Aside from the security risks not addressed by having the Premier of the province in another country wandering around in New York City trying to get cabs, the reality is that to have an efficient business trip, you have to have your time organized, and your time and your meetings are very important. I don’t know if you understand that, not having ow ned or run a bus iness, but it ’s very important to be punctual when you’re visiting other people. The reality is all of those costs can be documented.

Our depart- ment and others ha ve ma de an ef fort to get t he lowes t cost for Albertans because the trips are vitally important for our exports. Calgary Health Region Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, the Calgary health region has again been caught in its own web of political spin. After claiming last week that an error in June 2000 with potassium chloride led to, quo te, immediate and corrective action, end quote, we now learn that a similar incident occurred only two months later.

In response the reg ion has put forw ard one of its spin doctor s, the Minister of Health and Wellness’s former executive assistant, now acting VP for the Calgary health region, to ba ckpedal by claiming that chang es we ren’t immediate and that things take tim e. My questions are to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Given that this minister was so quick to disband WestView regional health authority for failing to balance its books, why is the minister not taking similar action with the Calgary health region for needless deaths resulting from years of mismanagement? Mr. Mar: Because the impor tant thing , Mr.

Speaker, is that we move forward on he lping ensure that sy stem errors in f act don’t occur in the future. To that e xtent, what we’ve done as a govern- ment is we’ve asked the Health Quality Council of Alberta to work with the Canadian Patient Safety Institute to work with other experts to report to Albertans on the best practices that can be employed for the handling of materials that contain potassium. I expect that the experience and the recommendations of other jurisdictions w ill be reviewed.

I want the Health Quality Council to work with other reviews, such as int ernal reviews being conducted by the Calg ary health regio n and any external review s that are being done by professional associations, like the pharmacists. I woul d expect that the outcome of these reviews will resu lt i n health authorities throughout the entire province adopting the very best practices to ensure that errors in pota ssium handling will not occur in the future. I also expect, Mr. Speaker, that the process will be undertaken and completed on an urgent and timely basis over the next several weeks. 1:50 Dr.

Taft: Given that we’ve heard too many reassurances and have seen too many deaths, Mr. Speaker, what will it take for this minister to finally act and remove the Calgary health region’s senior manage- ment and appoint an independent administrator? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, I know that the hon. member has received similar correspondence as I’ve received from the Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists because I was copied with a letter that was sent to him, and I will table this at the appropriate time. I want to quote out of this letter.

System failures contribute to the majority of errors in health care – not the ne gligence of individual provid ers. Although we do not have all of the fa cts, it would appear that the incident in Calgary may have occurred as a re sult of system failures. Much has also been made of the fact that pharmacists did not check the dialysate product. Studies have however p roven that a tech-check-tech system is a safe and effective standard of care. Hospital pharmacy technicians receive proper academic instru ction and their training is supplemented by additional certification within hospitals.

Finally, this paragraph concludes by saying: Studies have a lso s hown t hat the o ptimal p lace for pha rmacists within the health system is advising and recommending therapies at the point of prescribing, not in the checking o f drug products. That, Mr. Speak er, is a l etter dat ed 22 March 2004 f rom the Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists. The Speaker: It will be tabled at the appropriate time. Mr. Mar: Yes, sir. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the same minister: why is the Calgary health region continuing its policy of hiring well-connected Tories for senior positions within the Calgary health region? Mr. Mar: Mr. S peaker, the issue is no t wh ether one’s political credentials are right. The question is one of one’s qualifications. I think it’s important to know that association with the Conservative Party is not a bar rier to ge tting a job, nor is it a r equirement to getting a job. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for West-Yellowhead.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004634 Learning Commission Recommendations Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last September for no good reason this government laid off 1,000 teachers, leading to a spike in class sizes a nd deteriora ting clas sroom condi tions for A lberta students. Tomorrow’s budget is the government’s last opportunity to correct these errors by fully funding the Learning Commission recommendations in accordance with the t imetable laid out in the report. My questions a re t o the Ministe r of Le arning.

Ha s the government decided to fully fund the implementation of the phase 1 recommendations o f the L earning C ommission, in partic ular the reduction of class sizes, t o make sure that parents, te achers, and school boards once again don’t feel let down by this government? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just in my opening comments I would say that the budget would be tabled tomorrow, so I will not be talking about anything specific when it comes to the educational funding.

In the Learning Commission phase 1 is recommending approxi- mately a little over $300 million over the first three years of the plan. It recommends over five years that there be put in right around $600 million. Also included in that was a recommendation for the funding formula to be put in and to be added to the funding. I will say to the hon. member in regard to his specif ic question about class size, about teachers, about parents that included in the funding formula is a g reat amount of fle xibility which allows the school boards to spend the money as they see fit. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr.

Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: given that over one-quarter of kindergarten to grade 3 students in Edmon- ton public schools are packed into classrooms of 25 or more, within what time f rame will the government imple ment the Learning Commission’s class size guideline of 17 students in kindergarten to grade 3? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, included in the Learning Commission is that that recom mendation be over f ive years. We are working on that, and I hope it to be considerably less than five years. Dr. Pannu : My fi nal supplem entary, Mr.

Speak er: giv en the Learning Comm ission’s focus on im proving ea rly chi ldhood education, what is the government’s time frame and action plan for implementing the recom mendations for ful l-day kindergarten and half-day junior kindergarten for children at risk? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you, Mr. Spe aker. I’m certainly glad the hon. member added in the last statement, which was “at risk.” One of the current issues that we are dealing with is: how exactly do you define an at-risk child?

Many of the factors that are out the re are indeed only proxies, and we’re attempting to get the most accurate proxy. I will say to the hon. member that one of the things we’re looking at at the moment is actually language and speech delay. That seems to be the most accurate proxy that is out there for high-risk needs, and we’re currently looking at how we could implement that. It does have a lot of ramifications to not just the K to 12 system but also to the postsecondary system as speech pathologists and the like are very few and far between right at this moment. We are working at it hard.

I would anticipate that it will be done probably within the next two or three months. But, Mr. Speaker, the key thing to this is that when we do it, it’s going to be done well. It is going t o be done accurate; it is not necessarily going to be done quick. The Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Softwood Lumber Trade Dispute Mr. Strang: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Yester day the World Trade Organization panel ruled that the process the United States used to determine whether softwood lumber poses a threat of economic harm to the United States producers does not comply with international trade law. The panel also said that the United States must take steps to comply with the WTO ruling. My main question is the Ministe r of Inter national and I ntergovernmental Relation s. How will this WTO decision impact the future NAFTA ruling in the dispute against Canadian softwood lumber for our Alberta indus- tries? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Jonson: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

Ther e are tw o resolution panels involved he re that ar e looking a t this over all ma tter, one under the NAFTA, the North American free trade agreement, an d one under the World Trade Organization. The issue is whether the U.S. International Trade Commission currently determined that our softwood threatens injury to the Unite d States producers. Duties cannot be imposed unless it is established that imports are causing or threatening harm to producers in the importing country. Mr.

Speaker, back in September a NAFTA panel also found flaws in the International Trade Commission’s analysis and have told the ITC to fix those flaws. The ITC issued revisions to its original ruling in December, and the NAFTA panel will make a decision on those revisions in April. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Strang: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My first supple- mentary question is to the same minister. Will the WTO ruling result in a reduction in duties or mon ies being returned to the Canadian softwood lumber producers? Mr. Jonson: Well, Mr. Speaker, the simple answer is: not right now.

Legal processes are not yet over, unfortunately. So far the U.S. has failed to make its case that our softwood lumber is threatening cause or harm to producers. Howev er, the U.S. sti ll has the opt ion to appeal the WTO ruling. If it loses the appeal, it has to take steps to comply with WTO rules. It may have to redo its injury analysis to meet those rules. If they cannot do this, they will have to drop the duties completely. However, regretfully, we are not at that stage yet, and these legal processes are complex and lengthy and are running their course. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. My second supplementary question is to the Minister of Sustainable Resource D evelopment. In light of the softwood lumber dispute how have Alberta mills been able to keep their rate of production up?

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 635 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. That’s a very good question becau se the re are s ome articles in the local pa pers today in relation to the forest of gold, tal king about the forest industry, in fact, in Alb erta and h ow well the ind ustry is doi ng. They’ve increased production in the last number of years by 30 per cent. We used to ship 1.1 billion board feet of lumber to the U.S. on export markets. Now, we’re shipping 1.5 billion.

So the industry is doing very well, and the reas on for that is we probably have the most eff icient mill s in North A merica, Mr. Speaker. Our fores try pra ctices a re probably the best in North America, and we k now how to keep a ba lance between economic development, envir onmental man agement, and fish an d wi ldlife management. But as a government we do not cre ate the jobs. We don’t do a very good job creating the jobs, but we do, I think, a good job of creating the environment for private industry to create jobs and the wealth. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon.

Member for Calgary-Currie. 2:00 Automobile Insurance Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A recent study shows that the use of credit scores for a person’s credit history in the rating process as an insurance underwriting tool has a negative impact on low-income and minori ty groups. In 2003 at least 40 U.S. states were drafting legislation ranging from full bans to limits on credit information use, whi le in Canada only Onta rio has banne d credit scoring as far as auto insurance premiums are concerned. My first question is to the Minister of Finance.

To what extent are Alberta automobile insurance companies using credit scoring as a means to accept or reject drivers for automobile insurance in this province? Mrs. Nelson: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don’t have an answer to the hon. member on that question. It’s not something that I’ve gone into on their financial records and asked them. I do know that they probably should refer that question to the individual company and have them answer it themselves. Mr. MacDonald: I’m astonished, Mr. Speaker.

To the same minister: given that Ontario has banned this practice, will this gove rnment ban the use of credit sc oring as a fac tor in calculating insurance rates and coverage in A lberta f or Albert a drivers? Mrs. Nelson: Well, Mr. Speaker, under our new framework that we’re putting forward, that would not be a cr iterion for qualifying for i nsurance. We would have in pla ce under the new str ucture what’s called the all-comers rule, so people would have an opportu- nity to access insurance within this province. So that would not be relevant at that point. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr.

Speaker, to the same minister: can the minister guarantee Alberta consumers and drivers that no Albertan will be denied automobile insurance under the government’s insurance reforms based on their credit scores or their personal credit history? Mrs. Nelson: What I can say, Mr. Speaker, is that under this new structure Albertans will not be denied insurance within this province. Now, how it will be determined wi ll be from their own driving record and their accident record. If they’ve had at-fault accidents or they have a b ad driving record, the n they a re going t o pay f or insurance.

Access to insurance is critically important, and one impetus for this whole structural change is to make sure that the law we have in place that says that you have to ha ve automobile insurance can be adhered to. That’s one of the reasons we made the structural change that we did. So I’m glad to see that the Liberal Party or the member opposite at least is onside for the new restructuring of automobile insurance. Environmental Initiatives Mr. Lord: Mr. Speaker, my constituents are consistently expressing a v ery strong conce rn and intere st in envir onmental issues.

M y questions are to the Minister of Environment. Given that Canadian cities such as H alifax are now recycling about 60 per cent of their solid waste stream and other countries are moving towards 100 per cent recycling and reportedly even making money doing it, are there any new or recent initiatives being introduced by your department that would greatly encourage and facilitate recycling in Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes. Let me start by saying that Alberta has one of the best recycling programs in the country.

We recycle beverage containers, we recycle tires, we recycle used oil, we recycle milk jugs and, recently, fluorescent light bulbs. As we move forward, we still need to do more. About 80 per cent of our waste still ends up in landfills, an d we need to reverse that so that 20 per cent ends up in landfil ls and 80 per c ent ends up in recycling. As the mem ber corre ctly po inted out, many other jurisdictions do. So we’ve set a goal for Albertans to reduce the amount of waste they produce. Each Albertan, everybody in this House, everybody in the gallery, produces about 750 kilograms of waste a year.

To us older folks that’s about 1,600 to 1,700 pounds a year. We want to reduce that to 500 kilograms a year. To do that, we have to move into more recycling. We want to move into recycling of electronic waste, we want to move into more recycling of hazardous materials, and we want to move into more recycling of organics. So those are the areas that we’re looking at moving into. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lord: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the same minister: given that widespread pesticide use is of concern to many Albertans, what policies or practices is your department involved in to ensure that pesticides are being used and disposed of appropriately? Dr. Ta ylor: Mr. Speaker, we have worke d with the agricultural industry as well as the pesticide industry, and I can tell you that over 1 milli on pesticide containers have been recycled. This is an operation that is a co-operation between the private sector, industry, Operation Clean Farm, and the Department of Environment.

T his program is an easy sell in rural Alberta because farmers are educated users of pest icides. The y use th em yearly. Th ey know how t o handle them, and they know how to dispose of the containers. When you have an educated population, recycling works very well, and this has been a very successful program. Mr. Lord: My fi nal supplem ent agai n to the sam e minis ter: is Alberta Environm ent consider ing incorpora ting prove n to be

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004636 effective environmental managem ent systems such as ISO 14000 into provincial programs? Dr. Taylor: Well, Mr. Speaker, as has been correctly identified, ISO 14000 is an inter national environmental management technique, I guess one could call it. There is only one jurisdiction in Canada that has mandated or imple mented I SO 14000, and that’ s the city of Calgary. Perhaps the hon. member who asked the question was on council there when it was mandated; I don’t know.

We are looking at ISO 14000 in the Department of Environment, but we have to set standards that are appropriate to Alberta condi- tions, Alberta industry, Alberta environment. As we conti nue to look at them, we will set the standards that are appropriate to Alberta and Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. Interim Leader of the Official Opposition, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-East. Student Loan Program Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. S peaker. A millennium scholarship study confirms what Alberta students have been telling this govern- ment about stude nt fina nce for years.

The government’s assump- tions are plain wrong. Living cost allowan ces, expect ations of parental contributio ns, a nd the overa ll plan base d on increas ing student debt just isn’t working. My questions are to the Minister of Learning. When will the government’s assumptions about parental contributions be adjusted to reflect reality? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, first of all, the m illennium scholarship fund put out a study about one to two years ago that said essentially the same type of thing.

A t that time it was criticized because the sample size w as extremely small, and the m illennium scholarship group said that they were going to go back, expand the scope of the study, and expand t he numbers of people that were involved. It’s our information that this did not occur and that, indeed, they were actually utilizing the same size sample group as they did before. Interestingly enough, Mr.

Speaker, Stats Canada put out a study about two weeks ago that stated that university today, when it takes into account the expenses, the fe es, the book s, and eve rything, is actually cheaper than it was in 1965, whi ch I think is a very good deal for the citizens of Alberta. Dr. Massey: He’s been away too long. To the same mi nister: when will t he government take action to help Alberta students living away from home to reduce the $3,000 gap between their living costs and student loan allowances? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, it would be very nice if the hon. member would read the study.

What the study actually says is that Alberta has probably done the most of any province in Canada to address this. Rural students, for example, who are required to move to the cities to go to school now receive approximately $2,250 in order to enable them to do this. I think that when you ask any of the student associations, they w ill tell y ou that the st udent loan p rogram i n Alberta is one of the best if not the best in Canada. The other comment that occurred in the

article basically stated that loan limits had not been inc reased for approximately three to four years. Obviously, Mr. Speaker, this is false because the loan limits in Alberta have consistently been increased over the past four to five years. Indeed, more than a 50 per cent increase has been put into the student loan program since I’ve been minister. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you. Again to the same minister: when will the government simply overhaul t he entire s tudent fina nce pla n an d bring it into the 21st century? Dr. Oberg: Mr.

Speaker, what the hon. member seems to tend to forget is that a considera ble portion of the student loan program is actually overseen by the federal Liberal government. Our student loan prog ram pro vides auto matic re mission; the federal Liberal student loan program gives no remission. We allow the interest to be phased in over a six-month period. There are differences with the federal student loan program. We have been working very hard to harmonize the Alberta student loan program with the federal student loan program, and finally we are at a point where it’s very close to being harmonized. 2:10 Mr.

Speaker, in today’s budget – and it’s probably just being read as we speak or will be a little later – there will be some significant changes to the federal student loan program, and I commend them for doing this. Th ey have actually raised limits for the first tim e. Today in the budget they ha ve kept apace w ith what A lberta ha s been doing. It’s very good. I would say that the st udent loan pr ogram currently in place i n Alberta is the best of its kind in Canada and will continue to be the best of its kind. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-East, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie.

Calgary Police Service Investigation Mr. Amery: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Calgary Police Service has concluded its investigation into a police officer’s fatal shooting last fall of Mr. Deng Kuol, a member of the Sudanese community. The investigation and the review by a Crown prosecutor have found no criminal wro ngdoing on the part of the offic er involv ed. Members of the Sudanese community are unhappy with the process followed in investigating this incident, which happened to take place in my constituency. T hey have also ques tioned whether the investigation was truly fair and impartial.

To the Solicitor General: is the minister satisfied with how this incident was investigated? The Speak er: We’re asking for an opinion here a bout a legal instrument. The hon. minister. Mrs. Forsyth : Thank you , Mr. Speaker. As the hon. member indicated, the Calgary Police Service did release the results of the investigation. The past few months since this incident have been a very difficult time for many people: the man’s family and his friends, the Sudanese c ommunity, the pol ice off icer i nvolved, and the Calgary Police Service itself.

The polic e service understands the stress on the com munity affected and h as said tha t it will try to rebuild a better relationship. I’m assured that all proper investigation procedures were followed and that everything that could have been done to review the incident was done. The report of the investigation was reviewed by a Crown prosecutor as it is required by police service policies in incidents of this nature. The prosecutor has concluded that the officer involved acted reasonably and justifiably in self-defence. Mr.

Speak er, the prosecutor has concurred that the investigation was impartial , objective, and exhaustive.

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 637 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Amery: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since many residents of my constituency called for a public inquiry at the time this incident took place and they’re still calling for one in light of the findings, will the government hold a public inquiry? Mrs. Forsyth: Mr. Speaker, there will be a fatality inquiry into this incident. That is required by law and is automatic in events of this nature. A fatality inquiry is held before a provincial court judge. It is a public hea ring open to the media and open t o community members who wish to attend.

Witnesses w ill be call ed, and all evidence will be presented in an open, public, and objective manner. The inquiry will look at all the factors surrounding what happened, and the pre siding jud ge may make re commendations on how to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future. Kananaskis Valley Development Ms Carlson: Mr. Spea ker, the Eva n-Thomas alluvial fan, w here Evan-Thomas Creek meets the Kananaskis River, is one of the most important regions for wildlife in Kan anaskis Country.

It’s a home to wolves, grizzly bears, moose, and bighorn sheep as well as the site of most of the existing commercial development in the Kananaskis. To the Minister of Community Development: given that the levels of development proposed for the Kananaskis Valley will negatively affect wildlif e in the re gion, why is this m inistry considering allowing further commercial development in the area? Mr. Zwozde sky: Mr.

Speake r, the Evan -Thomas revi ew d raft management plan was put together after a great amount of public consultation with loca l groups in the env ironmental sect or, with local businesses, with the KID Council, and I myself have b een down and met with them on numerous occasions over th e past couple of yea rs.

I th ink we ha ve made some very good prog ress toward some compromises that can be looked at so that we recognize the importance of the Evan-Thomas area not only to wildlife and the ecological systems that support it but also to tourists and to resident Albertans who like to visit that place and don’t want to see it totally shut off from some of the amenities, that are in desperate need there. So we are looking at arriving at something very soon that would help move that partic ular projec t along in a very environm entally sensitive yet palatable way for all Albertans. Ms Carlson: But, Mr.

Spea ker, why is thi s minister ignoring the protests of Albertans who do not want to see further development in Kananaskis? Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr. Speaker, back when Evan-Thomas was established as a provincial recreation area – I think it goes back to the 1980s – there was always an understanding that on this issue of what would or would not be permitt ed in the f uture by w ay of development or other proposals that might be considered, there would always be an opportunity to review it at an important time in the history and development of tha t area.

That time did come a couple of years ago, and that’s what’s being done. But I want to as sure the m ember that the polic y that w e are adhering to, the Kananaskis recreation policy, will be followed. It specifically says that there will not be any large-scale new develop- ments allowed in that are a, but there will be some consideration given to some small expansions to existing facilities so that we can accommodate the tremendous growth needs of the area and of people who want to visit that absolutel y gorgeous jewel in the Canadian Rockies area. Ms Carlson: Mr.

Speaker, will t he ministry expand surrounding provincial parks and wild-lands to protect this sensitive area from further commercial development? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, that’s one of the best questions I’ve had in this regard, and it’s a very good one. As part of the compro- mises and in sort of coming together on this issue with many groups, we have looked at how we m ight alleviate so me of t he concerns.

One of them would be if we allow some type of an expansion, on the one hand, to exi sting fa cilities, w hich wo uld help not only the tourism industry but also the important staff members who service the Evan-Thomas facilities that currently exist, but also to take a look at what we might do by way of including some other areas that would be desira ble for e xpansion suc h as the hon. m ember i s referring to. So we ’ll be getting bac k to the A ssembly very soon with some further indications of what we’re planning to do there, but I do thank the hon. member for a very good question. Thank you.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Health Care Premiums Mr. Mason: Thank y ou very much, Mr. Speaker. Health c are premiums are a regressive tax that hurts seniors, middle-class families, and working Albertans. Scrapping premiums will put over $900 million directly into Albertans’ pockets, saving $1,056 per year for a typical fam ily, yet the priority of this gove rnment is to keep implementing a multiyear $1 billion tax cut for large and profitable corporations. My question is to the Minister of Finance.

Why is the government’s priority to keep cutting corporate taxes at the expense of scrapping health care premiums, which would provide far greater benefit for average Albertan families? Mrs. Nelson : Mr. Speake r, I read t he mem ber oppos ite’s press release again today, and I have to be honest with you. An Hon. Member: Which one? Mrs. Nelson: Which one? They put them out by the dozen, and they all say absolutely nothing.

Insofar as taxes are concerned, this current year, that we’re under right now, saw Albertans receive the benefit of us protecting them from the inde xation of the person al income tax to make sure that Albertans have t he lowest personal tax in t he country, and we’ve done that ver y successfully. We are the onl y province, I can s ay again for individuals, th at doesn’t have a sales tax. That’s a huge advantage for Albertans. Mr. Mason: Mr.

Speak er, w hy doesn’t the Minister of Finance admit that a $1,056 health care premium bill for a typical family is a huge tax that is paid primarily by people who can’t afford it? Mrs. Nels on: Well, Mr. Speaker, our job here is to provide a package for Al bertans tha t is one that provides the m wit h core programs and a qualit y of l ife that we beli eve is t he best in the country, and that’s a balance. It’s a balance of making sure that we profile certain areas, such as health and education, but also making sure that our fees and charges and taxes are the lowest overall in the country.

Quite frankly, we’ve been successful in doing just that. 2:20 Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, why has the government let down

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004638 *See page 678, right column, paragraph 11 Alberta’s senior cit izens ag ain by f ailing to s crap heal th care premiums for all seniors at a modest cost of only $90 million in lost revenue, preferring instead to keep cutting corporations’ taxes? Mrs. Nelson: Mr. Speaker, I’m not going to get into the particulars because we are bringing a budget down tomorrow, and this little game that comes from the opposite side on a regular basis before we bring down financial statements is just t hat: it’s a little game.

So we’re not going to fall into the game that’s being played, but I can tell you that I believe that wha t we w ill be pres enting tomorrow meets the needs of Albertans, quite frankly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. Contaminated Groundwater from Ogden Rail Site Mr. C ao: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. Part of my constituency is greatly concerned about an underg round p lume that has been migrating away from the contaminated site of the Ogden rail site into the community.

I understand that Alberta Environment has been aware of this contamination since 1999, and it conti nues to spread into the community and toward the river. My question today is to the Minister of Environment. Why after five years are residents in my community still exposed to the toxic vapours that are associated with the contaminated groundwater? Dr. Tayl or: Well, Mr. Speaker , this is a serious is sue, and th e member is correct: we have some probl ems in that area.

We have been working with the Calgary regional health authority to ensure that CP Rail is living up to its responsi bilities and f ulfills it s responsibilities to the residents. Currently concerns, as th e me mber has identified, have been raised, Mr. Speaker, about possible health issues related to off-site contamination. That off-site contamination would take the form of vapours actually happening in people’s basements. What we have insisted on and where these vapours are detected, CP Rail is putting in something called subslab depressurization units.

These subslab depressurization units vent the vapours out o f the af fected base- ments, and this actually works. When these units are installed, the basements are ve nted and there are no m ore vapours i n the base- ments. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Thank you. My second question is to the same minister. Given that many residents have used the devices in their basements to remove the vapours, my question is: what is your department doing to ensure that all affected homes a re identified and outfitted with the devices? Dr. Taylor: Well, we need to put the number of homes in context.

I mean, if it’s your home, it’s important and significant, but overall, Mr. Speaker, the total number of homes affected is about 35 homes. As I said, for those 35 families this is a significant issue. So I can t ell you that the te sting for vap ours in th ese homes is continuous, and CP Rail is actively testing the groundwater around the community. We’ve insisted on that to determine the extent of the contamination, w here it is , how m uch there is of it, and that is actually happening right now. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question is to the same minister.

What is your department doing to ensure that there is no further contamination leaving the CP Rail site? Dr. Taylor: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member has touched on an important point. Alberta Environment has required – this is not an option – CP Rail to pla ce a bar rier on the s ite to stop any further migration of the toxic materials off the site. So we’ve stopped it. To make sure that is happening, we require CP Rail to test any ground- water that does leave the site. So we know exactly what’s happening around that site. Resu lts to d ate have indicated t hat the barr ier is working.

The contamination is contained. It is not leaving the site. What we have to do is work on cleaning up the existing contamina- tion. There is a 1-800 number that the residents can call if they wish to find out more information, and that 1-800 number is available at their MLA’s office. Transportation Department Survey Mr. Bonner: Mr. Speaker, in 2003 Banister Research & Consulting Inc. conducted a client satisfaction survey for Alberta Transporta- tion. To the Mini ster of Transportation: what was the mandate of this survey?* Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’m not aware of the Banister survey.

Maybe he can give me more details. Mr. Bonner: Since the minister is not familiar with this survey that was conducted by Alberta Transportation, perhaps he could give me answers to my following two questions once he’s had an opportunity to look at the information. Those ques tions would be : could the minister forward to us the cost of this survey to the Alberta taxpayer, and when will the results of this survey be publicly released? Thank you. Mr. Stelm ach: Mr. Speaker , I sh all endeavour to bring that information forward.

We do a fair amount of work in the department through various consulting agencies, including engineers, looking at various plans for Alberta Transportation well into the future. I’ll get that information to the House. The Speaker: Well, that worked well. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Identity Theft Mr. McClelland: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first question is to the Solicitor General. Identity theft occurs when someone steals the identity of an unsuspecting victim. The thief then empties the bank accounts, runs up credi t cards, a nd general ly ruins the cre dit reputation of the victim.

Last month someone stole credit files and personal inform ation o f 1,4 00 Canadians , many of whom were Albertans, as the result of a security breach at Equifax Canada. My question: what is being done by the Solicitor General to ensure that law enforcement considers identity theft to be a serious crime? The Speaker: The hon. Solicitor General. Mrs. Forsyth: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The member brings up a good question. Obviously, the department and the police in this province are very, very concerned ab out identity theft. A lbertans take their privac y very seriously.

Identity thef t and, in this case, cybercrime are fraud, and all police services treat these incidents of crime very, very seriously.

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 639 We must keep in mind, Mr. Speaker, that crime is becoming more high tech and sophisticated. We wi ll be announcing a significant increase in police funding in the provincial budget tomorrow to help provide police with more tools to keep up with this type of crime. The Al berta Solicitor General is currently working w ith other government departments and the fed eral g overnment on a cross- government strategy to combat cybercrime. Lastly, we’ll continue to push the federal government for a national strategy because these are crimes that have no borders.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. McCl elland: Thank y ou. My f irst supplem ental is t o the Attorney Genera l. Are maxi mum penalties for id entity theft sufficient to deter criminals? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the hon. member has referred to, there a re provisi ons under th e Cr iminal Code which would come into play with respect to areas of identity theft. The first which comes to mind w ould be the cha rge of personation which would carry, if I ’m not mistaken, a penalty of up to 10 y ears in prison.

Other charges might be available in the areas of fraud, false pretenses, false statements, uttering forged documents. All of those carry rather significant maximum penalties. The tric k, of course, is to get the appropriate penalty in plac e. Crown prosecutors, in taking these cases to court, consider them very, very serious beca use we’re seeing more of an impa ct from identity theft situations, particularly with the onset of the use of the Internet.

Our special prosecutions branch handles these cases, tends to aggressively prosecute them and try and get actual jail sentences attached to convictions in this area. So, yes, the maximum penalty is there. T he trick is getting it put in place with respect to these crimes. Of course, as the hon. Solicitor General mentioned and as I just mentioned, we have the special prosecutions branch, and we have a cybercrimes prosecutor specifically dedicated to looking at areas of Internet crime and crime using computer technology and information technology.

That’s very closely intertwined with this whole area of identify theft. So we’re taking it very seriously, we prosecute it aggressively, and we attempt to get very solid penalties in order to deter other citizens from engaging in this area. 2:30 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. McClelland: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final supplemental is to the Minister of Government Services. Is our government being proactive in educating Albertans about the threat posed by identity theft? Mr. Coutts: Mr. Speaker, the quick answer to that is yes.

We tend to kind of c omplete the picture here i n terms of Albertans w hose identities or assets have been stolen. What w e do in Albe rta Government Services is we offer a tipsheet for them as to how to get themselves out of the predicament that someone else has put them in. Alberta Government Services has gotten together with all of the consumer protection ministers from across Canada and put together a national identity theft kit. What this national identity theft kit does is it provides a standard form that’s used all across Canada by people who have had t heir identity taken a way from them.

It provides a standard form for them to reach out to credit c ard companies, to banks, financial institutions and to take this form and process it to clear their name. In addition to that , Alberta Government Services has just em- barked on a new highly secure driver’s licence card as well as th e process and the delivery of that c ard that hel ps preserve people’s identity. The last thing that we are involved in, Mr. Speaker, is that when you go to get your driver’s licence, there is a stricter enforce- ment into proving who you are before you can apply for that driver’s licence.

So those are the things that we are doing in Government Services to protect people’s identity. The Speaker: Hon. members, 30 seconds from now I’ll call upon the first of four members to participate in Members’ Statements, but let me sa y, first of a ll, thank y ou to all m embers today. Shorter questions have led to shorter answers, and we were able to deal with 14 different sets of questions, and that’s appreciated. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Bonnyville-Cold Lake. Bernie and Sheila Inman Mr. Ducha rme: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er.

On Mar ch 8, 2004, Bernie and Sheila Inman launched a very important safety video. In 1994 while working in the petroleum industry, Bernie Inman was critically injured and, as a result, i s now confined to a wheelchair. His video The Other Si de dramatically re-creates the incident and traces the impa ct of the accident on his w ife, Shei la, and his coworker Al. Since his accident Bernie and Sheila h ave become ambassadors for workplace safety. They have travelled throughout Alberta and Saskatchewan sharing their st ory and r aising awareness about the importance of workplace safety.

Their courage and commitment to this cause and each other are truly amazing. Bernie and Sheila have been working closely with the Job Skills Safety Society to promote workplace safety. This society works tirelessly to address the unacceptable number of workplace injuries and fatalities and to ensure that young workers are properly trained for safety before they enter the workforce. To accom plish their m ission, they have designed JobSafe, an award-winning workplace safety training program.

JobSafe educates youth about work place hea lth and safet y issues, pr omotes t he development of a posit ive atti tude to wards safety, and gives our youth a solid foundation for future workplace training. I also thank EnCana, Talisman, and Toromont Process Systems for sponsoring and hosting this event. They are truly industry leaders in workplace safety awareness. Alberta has set a record low for lost-time claim rates in 2002, and we are looking at setting another record for 2003. It is very exciting to see the work of Bernie, Sheila, and the Job Skills Safety Society pay off.

Workplace safety is everyone’s responsibility. Government has to set standards and enforce them. Employers need to integrate safety into all their operations. Workers need to take personal responsibil- ity for themselves and their coworkers. It is time for everyone to choose safe, not sorry, and as Bernie puts it: Safety Starts with Awareness; Awareness Starts with You. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Spruce Grove -Sturgeon-St. Albert.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004640 Alberta Athletes Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to recognize some of Alberta’s outstanding a thletes a nd teams for their national and international achievements. Spruce Grove’s Jennifer Heil was crowned as the women’s overall moguls champion on the World Cup freestyle ski circuit this year after competing in 14 different events and reaching the podium nine times. She is a lso the fi rst Canadia n woma n to ever win this prestigious championship.

Vermilion’s Beckie Scott continued her success at the Canadian cross-country ski championships in New Brunswick, where she won three national titles in the 30- k race, the sprint r ace, and in a 10-k two-day pursuit event. One week previously Beckie finished second in the pursuit event at the world championships in Italy, missing the gold by a fraction of a second. Red Deer’s Jeremy Wotherspoon maintained his d ominance in speed skating by winning the 500-metre event at the long track speed skating championships in Korea.

He also won the overall title for this distance, proving yet again that he is the fastest man on ice in the world. Edmonton’s Chris Benoi t recently won t he world heav yweight wrestling championship in New York’s Madison Square Garden. He is one of the most respected wrestlers anywhere, having begun his career in 1986 in Calgary Stampede Wrestling. Alberta’s college teams also achieve d great success this season.

The Lethbridge Community College Kodiaks w on the Canadian Colleges Athletic Association’s national championships in women’s basketball, and the Red Deer College Kings won the men’s volley- ball national college championship for the fifth year in a row. The U of A Bears basketball team captain, Kevin Petterson from Spruce Grove , won the 2004 K en Shields TSN a ward f or his outstanding commitment to ath letics, academics, and community involvement. He was chosen over all other male university basket- ball players in the country. Mr.

Speaker, we are all very proud of our Alberta athletes, and our sport programs do indeed develop great athletes and great citizens. I would like everyone to join me and the M inister of Community Development in congratulating these talented Alberta athletes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Weldwood of Canada Limited Mr. Strang: Thank you very m uch, Mr. Speaker. I rise t oday to clarify an is sue that was raised in the H ouse last w eek regarding Weldwood of Canada and IKEA.

In a question raised in the House by an hon. member, it was suggested that Weldwood was dropped as a supplier of wood to IKEA because its f orestry practices did not meet IKEA’s wood purchasing standards. It should be noted that this is i ncorrect. Weldwood was never a direct supplier of wood to IKE A. Until August 2003 Weldw ood sold a wood product to a local Edmonton-based manufacturer which in turn remanufac tured i t int o a she lving pro duct for IKE A. However, the local company stopped using the supply from Wel d- wood for this particular product because the product specifications from IKEA c hanged.

T his decisi on was ba sed on the a dequate nature of the s upply, not a concern for environmental standards. Weldwood continues to sell its product to the local company, but it is used in the manufacture of products. I wish to c larify that Wel dwood’s Hinton fore st ma nagement agreement is re cognized n ationally and internationally as an exceptionally well-managed forest, receiving numerous awards over the 50-year period they have managed Alberta’s first FMA.

Weld- wood’s Hinton FMA was the first in Alberta to commit to sustain- able forest management as a fundamental component of management plans, and Weldwood was also the first company in Canada to have all of its forest mana gement tenures c ertified under the CSA standard. They are proud of their excellence in sustainable forest manage- ment, Mr. Speaker, and so, too, are Albertans. I would encourage all members to take the time to learn about t his compa ny and the valuable work they do in sustaini ng Alberta’s forests for fut ure generations. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Democratic Renewal Mr.

MacDon ald: Mr. Speaker , I rise today to talk a bout the Citizens’ Assembly on Electora l Reform. A w ave of democratic renewal is sweeping this country. From New s Brunswick to B.C. governments are est ablishing secr etariats, assem blies, and e ntire government departments on democratic renewal. Liberal governments are leading the charge in democratic renewal in Canada. In Ontario a Democratic Renewal Secretariat has been set up. In Ottawa for the first time in a long time there is a secretary of state for democratic renewal.

In Quebec there is a commission on democratic reform, and in B.C., our good neighbour, they are taking steps to loo k seriously at changing the first past the post electoral system in that province. 2:40 How are they doing it? With something called the Citizens’ Assembly on Electora l Reform . The 160-m ember assembly is looking at alter natives to our present-day electoral system, which overcompensates governing parties a nd truly does a diss ervice to every other party.

The assembly in B.C. has m et several times and has rec eived presentations and submissions from electoral experts on what to do with the electoral system. Best of all, the results that come out of the citizens’ assembly will be put to a referendum of B.C. residents so that the people can decide which system of elections they like the best. Today I will be introducing an amendment to the Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2004, w hich would a llow A lberta to s et up a citizens’ assem bly on ele ctoral re form. I would urg e all hon. members of this Assembly to support this amendment.

Let’s vote to take a step towards democrat ic renew al in Albe rta. We certainly need it. Thank you. head: Present ing Pet itions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m presenting a pet ition signed by 119 Alberta seniors petitioning the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to recognize and val ue the contributions a nd sacri fices the se niors have made in building the Province of Alberta, and treat them with due respect and digni ty by reversing those policie s that cause unnecessary financial hardship for them and undermine their quality of life. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre.

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 641 Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to give notice that I plan to raise a matter of urgent and pressing necessity under Standing Order 40 at the appropriate time. I will sen d th e notice of motion to the table. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to give oral notice to members of the Assembly of a motion which I intend to move.

Be it res olved that sinc e the m andatory re gistration of all nonrestricted firearms is a n unnecessary intrusion on the property rights and cultural heritage of Albertans, fails to discourage criminal activity involving firearms, and has wasted an enormous amount of money, the Legislative Assembly of Alberta recommends that the government of Alberta urge the government of Canada to introduce amendments to the Firearms Act of Canada and the Criminal Code of Canada to remove the requirement for the re gistration of all nonrestricted firearms. head: Intro duc tion o f Bills Bill 25 School Amendment Act, 2004 Rev.

Abbott: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce a bill being the School Amendment Act, 2004. Bill 25 implements some of the recommendations of the Learning Commission regarding the statutory responsibilities of teachers, and it also makes legislative changes to improve the board of reference. The Speaker: I’ve been advised, hon. member, that you are doing this on behalf of the hon. Minister of Learning. Is this correct? Rev. Abbott: Yes, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 25 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’d move that Bill 25 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Learning. Bill 26 Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2004 Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of t he hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark, who is doing it on behalf of myself, I would like to m ove first reading of Bill 26, being the Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2004. Mr.

Speaker, this puts into force what has been negotiated with the Alberta Teache rs’ Association, s pecifically the practice review process, which is the first of its kind in Nor th America and indeed maybe the first of its kind in the world. This is a very progressive bill, and I would urge everyone in this Assembly to support it on first reading. The Speaker: I take it, hon. Minister of Learning, that your name is on the bill. Dr. Oberg: Yes. [Motion carried; Bill 26 read a first time] head: Tabling R eturns and R eports Mr. Jonson: Mr.

Speaker, I’m pleased to file today on behalf of the Deputy Premier copies of the news release and attached presentation to the United S tates Department of Ag riculture stating Alberta’s views on the reopening of the border to ruminant livestock trade. I commend it to everyone’s reading. Thank you for your attention. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Lu nd: Thanks, Mr. Speake r. On behalf of the Mini ster of Health and Wellness I have six copies of a le tter dated March 22, 2004, from the Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists. I wish to table those. The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Environment. Dr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I’m pleased t o stand and submit today the req uired number of copies of th e environmental protection security fund annual report. This indicates how much security we’ve taken in the form of bond s and so on f rom various companies that are having actions under the act. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling five copies of a letter dated February 20, 2004, from Mr. Albert Opstad, president of Seniors United Now, known as SUN, addressed to the Premier in which Mr.

Opstad is expressing concern on behalf of the members of the organization that the t hrone speech had fail ed to ma ke any reference to resto ration of s eniors’ lost benefits and is ask ing the government to remedy the growing inequities. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table five copies of a letter from Peter van Hal, who’s the president of the Water Valley Community Association. He is making note that their community centre and heritage building is bei ng ch arged on a demand or needle meter.

He feels that “the argument is not the rate but the classification and the huge portion of electricity charged but not used, this is not logic, unreasonable, unjustifiable and needs to be rectified.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table copies of the correspondence I discussed in question period today. This is from Economic Development and dated March 11, 2004, and it’s asking for close to $3,000 in a ccess to information FOIP request fees. It’s very high. I can’t afford to pay it.

Thank you. head: Motions under St anding Order 40 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre on a Standing Order 40 application.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004642 Ministerial Travel Expenses Ms Blakeman:

Be it resolved that an order of the Legislative Assembly to call for a complete disclosure be t abled in the Legislative Assembly by all members of Executive Council of all expenses incurred during travel outside the province since March 12, 2001, and that each member of Executive Council table receipts for those expenses in the Assembly. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, M r. Speaker. I rise on a Standing Order 40 application to present a motion to the Assembly. The motion has been distributed.

Standing Order 40 applications are to be made in cases of urgent and pressing necessity, and I would argue that that is the case. This government claims that it is open and transparent, and this may be true, but you’re going to ha ve to fi ght your way through a lot of smoke and stone walls to see it. In 1998 the government spent $89 million on travel and communi- cations. In la st y ear’s budget that num ber had jum ped to $131 million, representing a 147 per cent increase.

We’ve been told by the government when we’ve requested expenses before that we need to write the members of Executive Council to get the information. The response that we received was to go to Public Accounts. When we asked the question in Public Accounts Committee, we’re told that Public Accounts isn’t the right venue to discuss expenses, tha t we should bring it up in the House as a written question or a motion for a return. W e bring it up as a written questio n and a m otion for a return, and we a re told that it’s too much paperwork to table the information. 2:50 Mr. Speaker, this is it.

This is our last stop. This is one of the last places that we can ask. I think that in true-blue bureaucrat ic style this particular government has passed us from one body, from one process to another to another and refuses to be open and transparent with the opposition a nd with A lbertans. T hey ra il agains t big government, but they certainly like to use it when it suits their needs. So, Mr. Speaker, this is a chance to show all Albertans that the government is open and has free information exchange for all. Will they do it? I certainly urge all members to grant unanimous consent to this request.

A vote no is a vote for big, closed-door government, and I hope and live in hope that this government will do otherwise. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Hancock: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: We’ll deal with the point of orde r after we call the question. Under Standing Order 40 applications it requires the unanimous consent of the Assembly. [Unanimous consent denied] The Speaker: Now the Government House Lea der on a point of order. Point of Order Offending the Practices of the Assembly Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Under 23(l), “introduces any matter in debate which offends the practices and precedents of the Asse mbly,” the hon. me mber in a very inappropriate way, I would submit, in a situation where she is the only person who gets to speak to a matter before the House, tries to characterize what the meaning of a person’s no vote might be with respect to her motion. Very inappropriate to do it in that circumstance in particular, where no member of the House has an occasion to rise and respond to put forward to the House what m ight be behind their indica tion of support or nonsupport f or a moti on.

I would a sk that the h on. member be cautioned to not do that. We’ve seen quite a number of Standing Order 40 s, and in each case there has been a characterization of some sort which no member of the Hou se gets to respond to except by a no vote on the request for unanimous consent, but this one is particularly egregious because it purports to suggest that members of the House have some other purpose than repre senting their constitue nts when t hey say no to such a Standing Order 40 application. The Speaker: On this p oint of o rder, the hon. Opposition House Leader. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker . I take the citation that the G overnment House L eader ha s listed, 23( l), introducing a matter which offends practices and precedents of the Assembly. What just happened here is a plea in support of a request for a Standing Order 40, and I don’t see how it offended the practice of the House, certainly, in urging members to vote for it. It’s a free vote. In this case it’s requesting unanimous consent.

Members can certainly withhold that, but I don’t think the characterization that I made is untoward, and certainly the members hav e it wel l with in their command to either support or deny the application that was put forward. So I don’t think that any practices of the House were offended by what just happened. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Anyone else on this point of order? Well, one thing is very clear.

Under Standing Order 40 w ith respect to a Standing Order 40 appl ication – and these are our Standing Orders; t hese are written by the m en and wom en of this particular Legislative Assembly and agreed to by them – it says in 40(1), “A motion may, in case of urge nt and press ing neces sity previously explained by the mover, be made by unanimous consent of the Assembly without notice having been given under Standing Order 38.” Only one person can par ticipate. There is no debate. There’s a call for a question, for the mover of the motion to explain the case of urgent and pressing necessity.

That’s what our Standing Order says. So I agree with the Government House Leader with respect to this. If there’s no opportunity for any individual to participate, then one has to be ver y, very cautious about w hat they say in moving their Standing Order. T he Standing O rder basic ally say s, “In case of urgent and pressing necessity,” and that is the case and the rea son and the basis for the argument. To introduce anything else that might impute motives on behalf of another member puts that other mem ber at a total disadvantage, where they cannot come back and say anything.

It’s an acceptable argument and one for clarity of at least decorum and good manners in an Assembly. There can be no imputation of motives as to how any individual can vote or should vote , and no one els e should be able to speak for that individual member other than the individual member himself or herself. I know that in the past, when I sat in the chair in front of me and I had an opportunity to vote, it was no one’ s business , no one’s reason, nor could anyone i mpute to m e why I would v ote in a particular way.

Oftentimes my reason for voting either yea or nay was probably different than the person sitting beside me. Never ever was it as a r esult of belon ging to a group. It was a conscience decision, and that is the important thing with respect to this. I have

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 643 no idea what goes on in the minds of the men and women in front of me when they vote on a particular issue. So I could never ever impute a motive, never ever make the suggestion. Standing Order 40 is a technique that’s available to all members in the case of urge nt and press ing necessity. S o that’s where it’s going to end, please. head: Orders of t he Day head : Government Bills and Orders Third Reading Bill 21 Child Welfare Amendment Act, 2004 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I take leave to move third reading of Bill 21, the Child Welfare Amendment Act, 2004. This bill proposes amendments to the Child Welfare Amendment Act, 2003, a very valuable piece of legislation that rec eived roy al assent last spring . I say “valuable” because this ac t is all a bout protecting and providing support to Alberta’s children, youth, and families. Few things are more valuable than that or more worth our time and attention. We are currently drafting regulations an d working with stakeholders to get ready for the implementation.

It was in the course of this work that the need for some minor amend- ments arose. These amendm ents are largely a mat ter o f hous ekeeping. In general, Mr. Speaker, these amendments will ensure that the Child Welfare Amendment Act, 2004, is aligned with the Family Law Act, the Vital Statistics Act, and the Protection of Children Involved in Prostitution Act, or PCHIP. They will also ensure that the imple- mentation of the new legislation proceeds as smoothly as possible. That’s the overall intent of the amendments.

Members of the Assembly have raised some questions and concerns, and although we’ve already responded to the vast majority of them, there may be some value in touching on them again. We heard in Co mmittee o f the Wh ole fro m the M ember for Edmonton-Glengarry for additi onal clari fication regarding the reporting structure of the children and youth advocate. Mr. Speaker, the advocate works with the m inistry. The cur rent reporti ng relationship is dire ct to the mi nister and a llows f or issues t o be identified quickly and for resolution to be obtained effectively.

This is a r elationship that works well in supporting c hildren and youth and their families when dealing with our child protection system. Under the new legislation accountability will be further enhanced by increasing the number of times per year the advocate must report to the minister. This reporting will now be quarterly. Accountability to the House is achieved through the advoca te’s annual reports, which are tabled in this Legislature. A question has also been raised about the a dvocate’s role. T he hon.

Member for Edmonton-Highlands has asked for clarification on why the child and youth advocate is not able to investigate com- plaints. The advocate does not conduct investigations in the formal sense of the word. The advoca te represents the child’s views and ensures that his or her voice is heard. The advocate works with the system, children, and youth to resolve issues in a collaborative way that is supportive of youth.

Again, the children and youth advocate is there to s upport chi ldren in understandi ng the child protection system and to assi st children or youth who wish to re view t he decisions made by a director. There are a few points around the amendments related to alterna- tive dispute r esolution process es that a re worthy of reite ration. Alternative dispute resolution processes, or mediation, can be highly effective and concilia tory means of dealing with conflict.

In fac t, these processes are already being used to help families resolve issues in a quicker, more effective, and less intrusive manner. 3:00 In response to questions related to the availability of funding for alternative dispute resolution processes, it should be noted that this option is generally less expensive than proceeding through the courts to resolve an issue. We are also planning to build this program on existing programs.

In terms of the regu lations in this are a both opposition par ties receiv ed copies of the proposed r egulatory framework in December 2003 and were invited to seek further clarification if it was required. Another area where there appears to be some continuing confusion is the removal of provisions allowing Children’s Services to obtain child support. I’d like to re-emphasize that these provisions a re entirely manifested in Alberta’s new Family Law Act. This keeps Alberta’s legislation simple and avoids unnecessary duplication.

I would like to quickly recap the reasoning behind changing the duration of an initial secure services order from 10 to five days. Mr. Speaker, this am endment will ensure that Charte r rights a re pro- tected. This change will also ensure consistency with the confine- ment provisions of the PCHIP legi slation. T he details a mending secure treatment are exactly as the Member for Edmonton-Highlands has indi cated. Secu re tre atment is a serious restriction on an individual’s rights of freedom. Even when that individual is a child, these rights must be protected.

For this reaso n secure services are reserved for extreme situations. The goal is to quickly stabilize youth and transition them to the supportive follow-up treatment or services they require. This is very much in keeping with the l egislation’s focus on providing a full continuum of community services and minimizing intervention. Mr. Speaker, the amendments in Bill 21 will prep are Alberta’s new Child Welfare Amendment Act for implement ation. Th is i s important legislation that w ill help us be tter suppor t and pr otect Alberta’s children, youth, and families.

I ask for the support of the House on third reading of Bill 21. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much. We’ve had not a lot of discus- sion on this bill, but we did mana ge to put our c omments and questions on the record, and thank you very much to the member for answering them. I’m sorry; I was a little bit distracted, so I didn’t hear if he answered my questions about maintenance enforcement, but I’ll check the Hansard.

Our concern is less specific to this bill but more that we seem to be adjusting, trying to achieve perfection with the Child Welfare Act in fits and starts. Thi s is one in a series of minor changes to the Child Welfare Act that we have seen since, in fact, we redid the act a year or two ago. So our concern is more about the process and the need for these sort of small adjustments which become cumulative. We are willing to support Bill 21. We have all the way through and given it very rapid p assage. We did not hear from a ny stake- holders in the community that ex pressed grave concerns about it .

Therefore, we are willing to support the passage of the bill, but I do want to put our concerns about amending a larger bill with this sort of instalment program and our concerns about how that reflects on the whole bill in the end. At this point we’re willing to support third reading of Bill 21. Thank you.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004644 The Speaker: The hon. Mem ber for C algary-Buffalo to close t he debate. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. At this time I’d like to close the debate on Bill 21 and call the question. [Motion carried; Bill 21 read a third time] head: Government Bills and Orders Committee of the Whole [Mr. Shariff in the chair] The Deput y Chair : Hon. members, we’ll call the c ommittee to order. Before I call the next bill before us, may we briefly revert to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of G uests (reversion) The Deputy Chair: The hon.

Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It’s indeed a great honour and privilege for me to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly an icon in the business world, both a frie nd of mi ne and a cons tituent. M r. Jim G ray is here visiting from Calgary, and I would ask him to rise and please receive a warm welcome from this Assembly. Bill 24 Appropriation (Interim Supply) Act, 2004 The Deputy Chair: Are there any comments, questions, or amend- ments to be offered with respect to this bill? The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Dr. Nicol: Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. It’s a pleasure for me to stand and discuss the Appropriation (Interim Supply) A ct, 2004. The focus of interi m supply is to make sure that the government has operating grants w hen th ey’ve not ye t comple ted the budge ting process. I guess one of the things that’s rea lly d ifficult as w e go about talking with Albertans about interim supply is focusing on the kind of debate around: what expenditures a re there? I know t hat the normal answer to th at is: w ell, wait till the budg et.

But if we’re supposed to vote on this judiciously and in the spirit of appropriate government recognition of expenditures, we need to have the detail that’s associated with being abl e to say that these are the t ypes of expenditures. As an example, in Learning we ’ve heard all kinds of announce- ments, pronouncements, expectations being set out by the govern- ment to deal with changes in exp enditures within t he Le arning budget, but also we need to know, in order to see how that works, what is the appropriate level of mix.

As an example, the government has been talking about basically a $500 million boost to the educa- tion and health budgets. Well, how much of that is going to go into the Learning budget as opposed to the Health budget? How much of it is going to go towards t he im plementation of the L earning Commission’s report? These are the kinds of things that we have to be able to look at in terms of: are these interim supplies in line with the budget, or are they in effect not going to reflect relative increases or relative decreases in line with what we can see in the budget?

There’s been a real debate about postsecondary education. How much of the money is going to be used there to provide assistance?

Students are talking at length about the additional costs of education, the impact that this has on their ability to borrow money, the ability that they have to, in effect, get out and make sure that when they get finished with their education, they’re not burdened with unbelievable debts, financial obligations that prevent them from participating as fully as they’d like to participate in the context of the benefits that come both to them as individuals but mostly to us as a society from a population that is properly educated. 3:10 There’s approximately $29 million g oing to Municipal Affairs.

How much of this is going to be out there in line with the new Roles, Responsibilities, and Resources discussions? Will that reflect any of the new agreements that are there? Is it going to outline some of the things that are associated with the approach that the government is taking toward providing a new sense of participation by the order of government that’s closest to the people of Alberta? We nee d t o make sure that this kind of approach is put in place. The question that com es up in m y community most of all, y ou know, is: what is going to happen to the expe nditures for seniors?

The seniors lost both their dental and opti cal benefits, or some of them, in recent budgets. Will they be restored through this program? Is that going to be part of the focus that will be there for seniors? The focus a lso that com es up in a num ber of othe r discussions would be: will there be dollars in the budget and are they included in this interi m supply to initiate and expand the in vestigation of complaints by all Albertans about abuse of elders?

You know, the elder abuse situation is really getting to be critical when we look at it from the point of view of the number of concerns that come to our offices and get raise d about: are seniors getting proper c are? Are seniors being looked after appropriately in their homes and in care facilities? These are the ki nds of th ings that i ndividuals want to know and want answers to. When we see just major lines with departmental expenditures, we don’t know where these are going, so how can we comment on them appropriately when individuals ask us?

They’re not in a position to accept the answer: well, let’s wait for the budget. We also noticed with interest the fact that the Solicitor General has requested an interim supply that is much higher in proportion to what was in the interim supply budget in the last three years. Well, what’s going on in the Solicitor General’s office that necessitates such a significant increase for interim supply? Will this be used to initiate and start a p rogram for polici ng standar ds, provide m ore support to local communities for policing so that they can put that into their budget?

What was the rationale behind trying to make sure that the Solicitor General had such a significant increase in budget for the interim supply component this year when it hasn’t been there in other years? The same kind of an argument is there for Sustainable Resource Development, where we see $52 million being allocated in interim supply to that ministry. How much of this will be available for fish and wildlife officers?

Is it there now so that they can be put in place, in effect, for the summer season when their duties and responsibili- ties associa ted with m onitoring and checki ng fish l icences and appropriate catch limits will be there? Is that one of the reasons that we do have the additional dollars in Sustainable Resource Develop- ment? The other qu estion that comes up and a number of people h ave asked is: how are we making out on Dutch elm disease? Will there be additional dollars in this i nterim supply to support the fight on Dutch elm disease? Mr. Chairman, I’ve had a number of calls from

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 645 individuals in the Medic ine Hat are a who ar e leading this debate across the province to contain Dutch elm disease. They’re watching with interest to see w hether or not these dollars ar e available for them. You know, when we’re dealing w ith interim supply, the re should be a s ignal sent that say s that, y es, these are the k inds of things that are there to plan so that we can put in place the long-term programs that are necessary to implement new initiatives or change initiatives in t he u pcoming ye ar.

When you just have a block number for a ministr y, you don’t have the same kind of ability to plan. The same goes for all of the different aspects that are there for the areas of wildlife, wildlife management. Are we going to be able to look at new initiatives, new programs, that have been requested by communities, by the fish and wildlife associations? That’s important as they g o through sett ing up their summer programs, and that’s what’s critical right now. We’re getting into the su mmer season, summer planning component. I guess the area that also has to be looked at is Transportation with $367 million.

How much of it is going to be used for construction? How much of it’s going to be used for road maintenance? Which areas are going to be targeted? The appropriate regional needs aren’t reflected here in the sense of which highways will be given mainte- nance.

I’ve travelled the provi nce an aw ful lot in th e last y ear in the responsibilities that I had, and we’d look at a lot of areas where you see road ma intenance g oing on and other places w here th e r oad seems to be really not as well looked after in the sense that you see roads that are really heavily used, starting to break up, yet there’s no maintenance going on to the same level that you see in other areas. Why is it that those roads are being maintained, resurfaced, redone in some ways when in other area s that i sn’t happening?

Is this a reflection of negotiations with local governments, local priorities? We need to know that so we can judge whether or not this int erim supply is appropriate and does reflect the kind of initiatives that will be undertaken during the construction and maintenance session. The other thing is traffic safety. We’ve heard a lot of requests for additional traffic safety initiatives and how that’s going to work, how that’s going to offset our auto insurance increases. We need to put money into public traffic safety to help to in many ways reduce the increases that are being reflected in our insurance.

This is one of the initiatives that we see our ne ighbour to the west has done when they’ve had a com ponent of the ir auto in surance that ha s the opportunity to spend on the public safety, the traffic safety initia- tives, and get the feedback directly to the auto insurance system by having reduced premiums. So you get a direct cost-benefit trade-off, but when you’ve got two different agencies dealing with cost benefits – you know, the cost is associated with your auto insurance – where do you go from there when they don’t have the option to undertake traffic safety?

We have to make that assumption and that decision in terms of the public expenditure on traffic safety, yet we don’t get any of the benefits by having lower pr emiums refle cted in that same decision-making process. Yes, we are all taxpayers. Yes, we are all insurance payers. But there’s no direct relationship in the decision-making process. We’ve got two indepe ndent decisions there w hen that kind of a dec ision should be a joint decision about if we put more dollars into traffic safety, then we save money in our auto insurance. Yet that’s not reflected in this budget. So how do we make those judgments?

How do we go out to Albertans and sell them appropriately on the benefits that are coming by having this interim supply? I guess the thing as I conclude, Mr. Chairman, is the fact that as we look at the interim supply process, the very fact that we do this is a refl ection of the gove rnment’s inability to bring tog ether a budget that can be voted on, c an be im plemented in time for the fiscal year.

You know , why is it that w e keep moving the budget back, keep moving the approval of business plans back? 3:20 I know that there were a number of health authorities and school boards that were well into the second half of the fiscal year before they had their budgets approved. Yet how do w e expect them t o make critical decisions about th eir expenditures when all we give them is broad outlines in an interim supply and say: go to it. When the final budget is still two months away, what is it that they can do in terms of their planning so that they can get their budget submitted for approval to the minister?

They don’t know the parameters under which they’re working. If we’re going to have prudent fiscal management in the province, we’ve got to have timeliness associated with that. We have to be able to make sure that as the budgeting process is put in place , the signals are sent out to the ag ents that use the dollars that are allocated by those budgets so that they have time to plan subject to their fiscal year.

School boards start basically in July with the next school year, yet we’re not going to give them an opportunity to have their business pl ans approved unti l very late in the ir planning process, sometimes even on into the start of their new year. So I think it’s appropriate that as we debate interim supply, we do raise issues a bout priorities; we do ra ise issue s about d o we have appropriate planning capacity so that we can make sure our dollars are used prudently . There’s a waste of public dollars if these agencies go ahead planning expecting some kind of an allocation.

I talked a few m inutes ago about the government saying that there’s going to be $500 million available for education and health. What if the education system assumes that some of that’s coming to them and finds out t hat it’s n ot the sam e as thei r expect ation? They’ve wasted a lot of public dollars doing planning that in effect was misdirected because of misinformation or not full information, which we could be giving them in this interim supply process. We could be telling them if there are new initiatives that they can work with, if there are changes in priorities that they need to work with.

That should all be reflected in this interim supply. The argument then comes: does this pre-empt the budget? Well, no, it doesn’t pre-empt the budget. It tells us that there are processes in place to start planning, and that’s what’s critical if we’re going to be fiscally responsible and fiscally prudent in this province. We’ve got to have the signals out there so that proper budget planning can be undertaken so that w e can have a reflection of the needs of the agencies that are going to be doing the expenditure planning on our behalf. You know, Mr.

Chairman, this probably wouldn’t have been an argument that would have been relevant 10 o r 15 y ears ago when most of that kind of planning was done under the auspices of the ministries. But each time we m ove to create new authorities, new agencies, new arm’s-length managers for us, we have to be responsi- ble and treat them fairly by giving them a sign of their budget in time for them to do planning, in ti me f or them t o make appro priate adjustments so t hat they can in ef fect g uarantee the delive ry of quality services or quality goods based on their relevant mandates. Mr.

Chairman, it’s important that we work through these kinds of things on a continual basis becau se if we don’t, we’re going to in effect end up with i nappropriate expenditures, misdi rection by decision-makers at the different levels. If the process isn’t going to work, what ca n we ex pect then e xcept f rustration, e xcept these agencies saying one thing at the com mittee level, y et here in the Legislature we’re debating and making decisions based on different assumptions?

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004646 With those comments I think I’ve used up most of my time that’s available, so I’ll take my seat and we’ll let the debate go on. I may be back if discussion leads to a good give-and-take. Thank you. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. C hairman. I’m pleased to be able to have another opportunity to address the debate around the interim supply e stimates th rough this Com mittee of the W hole

section debate on Bill 24, the Appropriation (Interim Supply) Act, 2004. I’ve just been g oing through my f ile that I keep on sor t of questions that I always m ean to ask that aren’ t urgent e nough, particularly, to get up in question period but are issues that I would like to see addressed. Part of the issue for me around interim supply is granting this money without a lot of discussion ab out h ow it’s going to be used, just that it’s a special warrant. So I do have some questions that I’m going to put on the record.

If the ministers don’t have the time to answer me now, then I invite them to please do it in writing. It does range across a couple of different ministries. One of the questions that keeps coming up for me – not often, but a couple of times a year two or three different people bring it up – is the question around the cost of blood glucose monitors, test strips, and insulin paraphernalia for type 2 diabetics and the question about why type 1 diabetics are covered for these additional costs but type 2 are not. It can be a significant amount of money.

Now, if you’re on AISH, for ex ample, or I think even if you’re receiving SFI, particularly the medical portion, you can receive some assistance with this, but I think there’s a cap on it. If you’re not low- income and sort of desperate and suffering, you’re on your own. Yet there are a number of other areas where there are additional accou- trements for a particular illness, and you can often find that those are covered, or they’re covered through a prog ram like Aids t o Daily Living or something, but never these. I’d lik e to sort of re fresh a nd get a c urrent answ er from the minister on this.

I think the last time I asked was several years ago. So the question for the Minister of Health and Wellness is: why are the blood glucose monitors, the test strips, and the other testing and monitoring products associated with type 2 diabetes not covered by Alberta Blue Cross when they are for persons with type 1? For the Minister of Community Development, again, a couple of update questions here.

The federal government and Quebec and, in fact, I think even in Manitoba and perhaps B.C. there’s been serious consideration – and in Quebec I think they passed it – on enacting provincial status of the artis t legisla tion. Now, t he Minister of Human Resources and Employment did do some work on cultural workers and did start to identify that there are a number of gaps that our artists fall thro ugh as they tr y and mo ve thro ugh life. So it identified them but didn’t offer any solutions to the problems.

Part of it is that we have to go at this in a holistic manner and look at all possible programs and areas, sectors that the ministries touch on to be able to form a co-ordinated response. That’s what status of the artist legislation, in fact, covers. So it’s a large undertaking. It would take some time and a lot of consultation, but given that cultural workers are such a fast-growing sector of the economy – for ex ample, they em ploy more than 900,000 people, at least 5.2 per cent of t he Canadian labour force, more, in fact, than agriculture, forestry, mining, and oil combined.

The average annual income of most professional artists is less than $20,000. I can vouch for that. So this is a fast-growing sector. There’s a large number of people involved in it. The y contribute far wider than their own sector. I think if the government’s legislative agenda is a little thin, which I think it is, there’s something that they could really sink their teeth into and start to work on. So I’d like an answer back on that. 3:30 There’s been some promotion recently around the Alberta motion picture industry.

The minister with the pompoms, the cheerleader for economic developm ent, has dis covered t he Alber ta mo tion picture industry and is cheerleading for them. Excellent. Glad to see that. However, I don’t know that we’ve ever gone back and really looked at the choices t his government made in the early- and mid- 90s, the effect that it had on the sector. That’s when they shut down the AMPDC, the loan fund that they had in place. After quite a bit of lobbying, I think in ’99 or 2000, they were able to get a labour credit that was put in place, and the industry started to rebuild itself.

It still has n ot achie ved back the level of activity that it was at when the AMPDC was closed down, and I’m wonder- ing if the minister responsible has ever really looked at the whole larger picture and what effect the choices made had on the industry and where we could best go next. One of the things the industry has said t o me is around not only these labour credits but also a t ax credit. So where is the minister on that exactly? Right now the A lberta Foundation for the Arts will not collect nonpaper archives.

We’re a pretty creative bunch here in Alberta, and we’ve got som e really cutting-edge artists, and not al l of our work is produced neatly quantifiable on paper with ink or pencil or in the form of a painting. So for those that are doing work on the Internet or doing multidisciplinary work or where they’ve archived their work through a video or DVD, the AFA will not accept these archives. So we have no way of keeping track of this work. Part of both the joy and the tragedy of live performing arts is that it’s live; you’ve got to be there.

If you’re not there, you’ve lost the opportunity to join in the pe rformance. We often do in the theatre take archival videos just to be able to preserve some recollection of what the live performance was like. We do have theatres that merge with others. They close down; people leav e town . All k inds of things happen, and we have right now no central collection agency that will keep this work. At this point I don’t think the Prov incial Archives of Alberta is accepting it either, so we’re losing it. You know, it’s in cardboard boxes in people’s basements, and they leave town and it’s gone.

It’s thrown out and we’ve lost it forever. So I’m looking to see whether we could get some processes in place to start keeping and accepting nonpaper archives. Also around that area I think one of the most important things that the Minister of Community Development could be adv ocating for right now is to increase the minimum wage because artists subsidize their art for all of us.

We ge t to benefit from cheap er art prices because the artists are subsidizing the art, but the way they’re doing it in a lot of cases is working for minimum wage, and an increase in the minimum wage would be one of the most concrete ways to help the arts and cultural sector that I can think of right now. I can raise the rest of these issues w hen we actually hav e a Community Development debate, but those were some that I thought I’d get the minister thinking about.

A while ba ck in quest ion p eriod I raised a question w ith the Minister of Seniors about what the basis was for the a mount of money that the Department of Seniors decided below which a senior would qualify for ass istance a nd above w hich a seni or would not qualify for assistance. I asked if it was tied to the LICO, the low- income cut-off. It’s not; the numbers aren’t the same. Neither is it tied to the mar ket-basket measure that is ava ilable, which is anothe r meas urement and one that t he gover nment is accepting in other areas. It’s essentially for a market basket of food,

March 23, 2004 Alberta Hansard 647 the same sort of it ems, plus things li ke rent and teleph one rental: how much does that cost? Once you establish those base costs for those items, you have an idea of how much it costs to live in a given centre. You know, as we expect, some things are more expensive in rural areas and some are less expensive. Same for living in the larger urban centres. But it does help to set the level of as sistance that people require by examining what’s in that basket of goods.

So I’m pressing the Minister of Seniors once again to see what the connection is between this or whether he would consider looking at the market-basket measure as a way of setting that rate for seniors. Right now it seems to be completely arbitrary but not connected to anything that we can discover. So either answer the question about how he’s arriving at that figure or let’s start to talk about connecting it to something that people can understand, because right now it’s not connected to anything. I’ve been wor king a lot with s tudents.

I ha ve a num ber of postsecondary students that live in my constituency, and of course I’ve been really working hard on try ing to encour age more youth voting – that is, between 18 and 30 – for those people to come out and vote. As I spend m ore and more time with those particular groups of people, I get more information about what are really the barriers to their advancement. It’s around a couple of things. Ce rtainly, the university students are very clear. There needs to be an increase in the university base operating grants.

I’m hoping that that’s going to be considered or that that’s included in this interim supply or in this budget that’s coming. The planned 2 per cent increase does not meet the requirem ents of the University of Alberta, which is the postsecondary institution tha t I’m most connecte d to aside f rom Grant MacEwan College. The U of A is expecting another shortfall, which will have to be made up likely through tuition fees. The students ask for a tuition freeze, and I certainly support that, but I would really far prefer to see a reduction in tuition fees.

I’m willing to enter into the debate about having the first year or two of postsecondary education completely paid for anyone that’s interested in engaging in it. I think that’s where we need to be looking if we’re going to be pursuing things like the four pillars that the government has right now. One of them is about learning and innovation, and I think that if we’re going to pursue that kind of thing, we need to start looking at accessibility to postsecondary education institutions.

So it’s not just about university, it’s not just about colleges, but we’re also talking technical institutions and NorQuest and places like that. Aside from the actual sort of dollar costs of the tuition, there’s the subsistence costs of the re nt and food and t he other cos ts for the students attending postsecondary institutions. Their ability to get enough from loan programs is not keeping up with their costs, and that’s a nother area tha t we nee d to be looking at.

I am quite distressed when I hear a lot about students working 19 and 20 hours a week at a part-tim e job that really is part-time and still trying to carry a full load of three classes or more at university. I don’t know how they’re doing that, and I don’t know that they’re getting full value for m oney out of their univ ersity when so muc h time a nd attention has to go towa rds working. Not that s tudents shouldn’t work; that’s part of your university experience. But, boy, 20 hours a week is a huge haul.

The students are also requesting that we eliminate the parental contribution requirements for the student loan progr am – and that came up in the Cana da-wide study tha t was di scussed e arlier in question period done by heritage scholarships, I think it was – and to improve the remission system to benefit all students, not just those who qua lify for high de bt loads. So a couple of points are be ing raised there. 3:40 We’ve had the traditional leak from the government to the media starting out w ith lit tle dribs and drabs about what we can expect tomorrow.

We’ve heard already about increased funding of policing costs to municipalities. Good. I quite despaired that I was going to have to keep talking about all of that for the next year, but that one looks like it may have been accomplished. I think mostly what I was seeking there was a fair and understandable funding formula. What we had was p retty s chizophrenic, so I’m glad to hea r that that’s coming. One of the notes that I had in my file of budget questions to ask was around AUMA’s call for the provinc e to pay their fair share of policing costs, and it sounds like that’s going to happen.

I have a question around Lacombe. Several sma ll Alber ta communities are facing the loss of their specialized transportation, like handi-vans or – what’s the one in Edmonton called? – transpor- tation services for people with disabilities. This has become quite costly for small communities to continue to fund. The demand, the volume increase, has happened, and also the actual costs of operat- ing, you know , gas pric es and other thi ngs, h ave bec ome ve ry expensive for thes e smaller com munities, but the provi ncial and municipal support for activities like this has decreased.

Once again we’re at a question of equality. Do we really mean it when we say that we want as many people as possible to participate in the life of the province? I think sometimes the government does in fact mean that, and at times like that I’m going to press them and say: well, what that really means in very concrete terms is support for things like handi-vans or specialized transportation for persons with disabilities.

One fellow tha t I have hea rd from was s uggesting that if the government were considering reducing the aviation fuel tax in order to promote travel and tourism and the well-being of the Calgary and Edmonton international airports, would they consider reducing the taxes on gasoline and perhaps redirecting some of that toward some of these volunteer-based organizations?

His point is that volunteers from about a hundred small agencies take the time and money out of their pockets to support Albertans with transportation needs related to illness, disability, or advanced age, but the provincial support for specialized transportation has not increased since 1994. I agree. I think there are a number of institutions that the govern- ment has fa iled to kee p up to speed, and it’s re sulted in a poor quality of life for Albertans. W hen we’re in a province that’s as wealthy and as ble ssed as w e are, w e should be a ble to bring everyone along with us.

There should be no need for us to leave any Albertan behind, and I think that’s what’s happening here. So those were some of the concerns that were raised by Paul Siller a round support, both provincially and municipally, for that sort of thing. Some time ago, a couple year s ago, I had talk ed a lot about funding for seniors’ community centres because I felt that they were contributing to lower health costs eventually for seniors because we had increased mental health, and w e had incre ased mobility from seniors that we re out atte nding and participating in these seniors’ centres.

The Minister of Seniors did take me up on this, and he, in fact, I think, did a study on it. Then I think there was supposed to be money, but that was the year that the price of oil dropped, and the budget got cut, and that was the last anybody heard of it. It didn’t reappear in the budget we’re in now, and I’m wondering if it’s going to reappear in this budget. I think there’s a lot to be said for that kind of preventative medicine, if you want to look at it that way. I also would like to check on where w e’re at with the wage disparity between the nongovernment and government sectors.

I’m referring specif ically to groups lik e the Council of Wom en’s Shelters, the Albe rta As sociation of Service s for Chi ldren and Families, Hope Mission, the Alberta Association of Rehabilitation Centres, organizations like that, where the services that their staff are providing are very similar to services provided by government staff. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2004648 [The clauses of Bill 24 agreed to] [Title and

preamble agreed to] The Deputy Chair: Shall the bill be reported? Are you agreed? Hon. Members: Agreed. The Deputy Chair: Opposed? Carried. Bill 22 Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2004 The Deputy Chair: Are there any comments, questions, or amend- ments to be offered with re spect to this bill? The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . Having followed the debate in second re ading on this bill, there were a numbe r o f questions raised by members in debate, and I just wanted to take the opportunity to respond a little bit to some of the issues that were raised.

One of the issues that was raised by a number of speakers, at least two I think, was the whole question of the unique identifier number that’s provided for in the bill. The concept that’s provided for is that each elector would have a unique identifier number that would be particular to the elec tion process. In other words, it wouldn’t be the social insurance number or some other number. It would be a unique identifier number.

That concept was put forward by the Chief Electoral Officer as a way of assisting th em w ith the m anagement of inf ormation r elative to electors so that they would have an easy way of moving information around, and that’s about the best explanation I can g ive as to why it’s necessary. If you could put it into context, you may have, as I mentioned in the House the other day, a situation where there are two electors with exactly the same name. In fact, they might even live in exactly the same house. You need a way to distinguish between the two of them for the purposes of the records.

This unique identifier number is not another way to turn Albertans into numbers instead of people. It has non e of those sinister connotations or contexts. It’s not a precursor to an electronic voting program or any of those things that were suggested.

It is purely and simply – and I’ve had the opportunity to have this again confirmed with the Chief Electoral Officer because it was his recommendation that brought this forward – an administrative tool to be used by the Chief Electoral Officer to identify electors to make sure that they only show up on the electoral list in one spot and that when they move from one riding to another, their information can be tracked and taken with them to the other database and those sorts of things.

So, essentially, it’s a distinguishing number for the sole use of Elections Alberta to differen tiate Albertans, particularly if they have the same name or perhaps even sometimes the same address, and that happens in Alberta. We’re a large population. As I say, there’s nothing in it at this stage. There’s been no discussion with respect to electr onic voting or changes in that w ay or u sing t his electronic identifier for any broader purpose. There were questions r aised about the increa se of the fee, t he deposit, with respect to running for office. In the e xisting act the deposit was $200.

The Chief Electoral Officer recommended that it be raised to $500. I did giv e an explanation of that, but I’ll do it again quickly. The concept that was being raised is that the Chief Electoral Officer wanted to have one more tool to encourage compliance with the Election Finances and Disclosure Act. So by raising the deposit to $500, which is still a rather modest sum of money for anyone who is seeking offic e, then half of that de posit, or $250, w ould be returned to the candidate on the same basis as the deposi t wa s returned before.

I believe that any candidate that wins 50 per cent of the winning candidate’s votes has their deposit returned, so in this case it would be $250 returned and the other $250 returned when they filed their election finances disclosure as required by law. That was the purpose that was put forward by the Chief Electoral Officer in terms of why there needed to be an increased fee and what it was to be used for. 3:50 Edmonton-Gold Bar rais ed a qu estion with respect to special ballots and whether a signature would no longer be required to get special ballots and how many special ballots ar e utilized.

The changes that are being proposed here simply add to the ways t hat people can reque st special ball ots. Right now you c an request a special ballot by telephone or by fax, and in an ele ctronic age it seems appropriate and prudent that you can request a ballot by e- mail. All the tests that the Chief Electoral Officer has in place with respect to ensur ing that t he ballo ts are going to th e appropriat e people wou

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20040323
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L25 S4 20040323 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	9ea3279095fec1c2338a8106e6a8db28bf12b56b

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