Alberta Hansard — 13 April 1977, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 18, Session 3)

19770413

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 691 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Wednesday, April 13, 1977 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, in reply to a question on warble control asked by the hon. Member for Bow Valley on April 6, I answered that three municipalities have currently opted out of the formal provincial warble control program. I should have said two municipalities, in that the county of Stettler requested they be included under the provincial warble control regulations.

Accordingly this request was granted by order in council on January 11, 1977. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 33 The Cultural Development Amendment Act, 1977 MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill 33, The Cultural Development Amendment Act, 1977. This being a money bill, His Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant-Governor, having been in formed of the contents of this bill, recommends the same to the Assembly. Mr.

Speaker, the amendment act will provide for conducting competitions and awarding of prizes in the cultural development area, and will clarify the authority regarding leasing, licensing, and other ad ministrative matters in the jubilee auditoriums of the province. [Leave granted; Bill 33 read a first time] Bill 215 The Environmental Statutes Reform Act MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill 215, The Environmental Statutes Reform Act.

The purpose of Bill 215 is to eliminate the provision for certificates of variance set out last fall in The Environment Statutes Amendment Act. [Leave granted; Bill 215 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table with the Legislature the 1976 annual report of Pacific Western Airlines. Individual copies will be made available to all members of the Legislature. I take this opportunity to pay my respects to the management, staff, and the board of directors for doing such a good job in a difficult year. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. DOWLING: Mr.

Speaker, Je suis heureux de souhaiter la bienvenue a M. Jean Sudreau. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sudreau is seated in your gallery. He represents the Louis-Dreyfus group, which hosted our Alberta delegation and presentation in Paris in January. It was attended by over 100 top executives of industry, business, and finance from France. Mr. Sudreau is here by way of follow-up on the interest shown by a significant number of those in attendance at our presentation on the many opportunities offered in Alberta and by Albertans. We welcome him to Canada and Alberta, and wish him an enjoyable and productive visit.

I would ask that he now stand and receive a Canadian welcome to the Alberta Legisla tive Assembly. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to introduce to the House a group of some 30 students from the Brander Gardens school. They are accompanied by Mr. Wyl- lie, the principal, and Mr. Burkin. They are seated in the members gallery. I'd ask them to rise and be recognized by the Assembly. DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, I'm particularly pleased this afternoon to introduce to you, and through you to the Assembly, 20 students from St. Mary's Salesian school in my constituency of Edmonton Belmont.

They are accompanied by Brother Brian. They are of particular and close interest to me and another member in the House. I should ask them to stand in the members gallery and be recognized by the Assembly. MR. BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and to members of this Assembly Marrianne Lubeseder and 10 students from the Tree of Peace adult education centre in Yellowknife. They are located in the public gallery. In order to facilitate this trip today, the students raised over half the money on their own.

This morn ing they visited NAIT, and this afternoon they'll be visiting the Provincial Museum. I'd ask them to rise and receive the traditional welcome of this Assembly. head: MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Department of Education MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, for many years the gov ernment of Alberta has recognized both official lan guages in Alberta schools. The linguistic diversity of our residents is recognized by providing for instruc tion in languages in addition to English and French. Further to the Budget Address announcement by the hon.

Provincial Treasurer of the continuation of the Ukrainian/English bilingual program and the extension of this program to other languages, I am pleased to provide the following details. Where such a bilingual program has been request ed by a responsible association of parents and sup ported by a school board, instruction in an additional language may be provided to the end of grade 6 for up to 50 per cent of the school day. At least one-half day in English is required of all pupils. Financial support will be provided at the rate of $65

692 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 per participating pupil for those school boards imple menting such a program. For instruction less than 50 per cent of each school day, the amounts are prorated downward. During the first six years, $15,000 for teacher bursaries will be made available annually for teacher preparation and development. School sys tems are eligible for regular transportation grants under existing regulations for pupils being trans ported to the schools offering programs in these languages.

To qualify for provincial support, the school system as an operating authority must employ appropriate teachers and provide facilities and stu dent materials. When a linguistic group is assured of at least 100 pupils in grade 1 during the first year of operation, the curriculum branch of Alberta Education assists in the development of curricular materials. Programs for languages not now offered may be initiated by application to the department. The appli cation should be submitted at least one year before the proposed implementation, to permit appropriate planning and development activities.

All such re quests must be supported by one or more school boards. All new provincially developed programs will be subject to an evaluation, for which Alberta Educa tion will pay 80 per cent of the costs over and above funds already indicated. The remaining 20 per cent will be assumed by the participating jurisdictions. The continuation of programs implemented under

Section 150(1)(

b) of The School Act is subject to continued administrative support from school boards and continued parental support for additional services which are unique to such programs. The evaluation of the successful Ukrainian/English bilingual pilot project in participating Edmonton schools has shown that students in the project achieve as well in core subjects as students not in the project. In addition, they are acquiring another lan guage. Parental and teacher support for the project has been very positive. Mr.

Speaker, the continuation of this program and its expansion to other languages confirms the strong commitment of this government to the concept of Multiculturalism and its recognition of the great value to this province of the nurturing of those treasures which form part of our heritage. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Crime MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct the first question to the Attorney General. It flows from comments the Attorney General made some time ago with regard to the incidence of organized crime in the province.

Will the minister be releasing information this session which will show the extent and type of organized crime in the province of Alberta? I ask the question in light of comments made earlier by the minister that he was seriously considering giving a great deal more public attention to the incidence of organized crime in the province. MR. FOSTER: I don't recall my specific remarks, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the possibility of giving detail on organized crime. Perhaps it came up in the dis cussion about access to criminal intelligence or spe cific problem areas.

Clearly as a matter of policy the Crown does not disclose criminal intelligence specifi cally since, for obvious reasons, while it may be in the interests of certain individual groups it may prejudice sources of that intelligence and indeed cause great harm. I don't want to leave any impression that Alberta is infected by the organized criminal community to the point that the government is seriously concerned about major sectors being taken over by organized crime. On the other hand I don't want to suggest that organized criminal activity has somehow by-passed Alberta. Clearly it hasn't. So I'm wavering, Mr.

Speaker, as I do not see whose interest, including the public, it would serve for me to be specific sector by sector, or business interest, or the like, in this House. If you want to get into problems of specific kinds of offences under the Criminal Code after the fact and how they have or have not been handled in the courts, I would be happy to discuss those kinds of issues. But I don't know what would be served by general exposure here on the subject. Perhaps the hon. leader could expand. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, perhaps I could direct a supplementary question to the minister dealing spe cifically with the area of commercial fraud and relat ing to the RCMP annual report a year ago and to the report again this year. Were members of the RCMP force added in the area of commercial fraud in Alber ta and was the province successful in acquiring, I think the term the government used in the House last year was, an outstanding prosecutor to beef-up the activities in that particular area? MR. FOSTER: Oh, fine. I understand. Mr.

Speaker, perhaps my colleague the Solicitor General might respond more appropriately to the first question in terms of the numbers of staff in the RCMP and their various strengths, but it runs in my mind there are 17 members of the commercial crime squad of the RCMP in Alberta. In my judgment they are an excellent squad doing an outstanding job. I and the RCMP are satisfied that the strength and resources of that ca pacity are quite adequate to serve Alberta's needs at this time.

No doubt the Edmonton and Calgary city police departments are interested in expanding and perhaps improving some areas of their commercial crime sector, but that's not a problem at all. Your other concern had to do with the capacity of the Department of the Attorney General in its com mercial crime prosecution

section to adequately han dle that. The answer to your question is indeed yes. We have a special prosecutions section. We have a few senior Crown counsel who are operating in this section. We are giving very special attention to cer tain major cases. I'm quite satisfied with the level of expertise we have. Of course it can always be im proved, Mr. Speaker, but at the moment I think the area of criminal investigation and criminal prosecu tions is being adequately handled by the Crown. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the Solicitor General.

It flows from a conference held in Edmonton within the last week, when the suggestion was put forward by law enforcement rep resentatives of the city of Edmonton that theft in the

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 693 city could certainly be cut by in excess of 10 per cent if more accurate information was available from cer tain sectors of the business community. My question to the minister is: what action is the Solicitor General's Department taking in this area; secondly, if I could follow up the comments of the Attorney General, is the Solicitor General satisfied with the strength of the commercial fraud group in the prov ince of Alberta? MR. FARRAN: Mr.

Speaker, to answer the last part of the question from the hon. leader first, I'm satisfied with the answer of the Attorney General and agree with his position. So far as alerting business to the prevention of such crimes and frauds is concerned, this is part of our overall crime prevention package which has been financed largely with provincial funds over the last year. I've had discussions within the last month with Calgary city police in regard to future plans they have for increasing the expertise of their particular commercial crime unit.

I haven't had recent discussions with the city of Edmonton, but I will no doubt be doing so in the near future. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister with regard to the question of accur ate information being available to law enforcement agencies and the possibility that this in itself could cut down the amount of commercial theft by in excess of 10 per cent. What specific action is the Solicitor General taking in that area? MR.

FARRAN: As I understood the speech made by the particular officer from the city of Edmonton police department, he was referring to the reluctance of merchants and businesses to prosecute in cases of petty crime. I support his position that this is not wise. Of course it is a public relations exercise for the police to explain to businessmen that putting the telescope to the blind eye only increases the size of the problem. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Perhaps I didn't make the question clear.

What action is the minister taking in dealing with business organizations, be it the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce, but other groups which I think have to be commended for their interest in this area — but now it seems we need some follow-up from either the Solicitor General or the Attorney General, some encouragement in these areas. MR. FARRAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader will appreciate that my jurisdiction over municipal police forces is indirect. It operates through the local au tonomy of police commissions.

For instance in the cities of Edmonton and Calgary, where naturally the problem is of the largest proportion, their own police departments have total jurisdiction to enforce the law. All my department can do is to encourage over all policy for crime prevention and to make state ments, such as I'm doing right now, to the public generally on the wisdom of a certain mode of action. If I were speaking to the Chamber of Commerce, I would endorse the remarks by that particular officer of the Edmonton city police. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one final question to the Solicitor General.

Does the government support the position that in the case where theft convictions are received, printing the names, addresses, and occupa tions of convicted shoplifters is in the public interest? MR. FARRAN: Yes. My position as a former newspa perman is that the media should mirror life as it is, and that it should not be in the position of playing censor and restricting information which is newswor thy and of public interest. But of course I don't intend in any manner whatsoever to direct the actions of a free press. Oil and Gas Prices MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct my second question to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and ask if he can report to the Assembly what progress was made at the meetings in Ottawa last Wednesday. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, the only useful information I could perhaps give would be that there was a general consensus that there should be an increase in price for oil and natural gas. But there was not any agreement as to what shape, at what time, or of what size that increase should be. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, can the minister indicate to us what arrangements there now are to follow this up?

Will the matter be referred to the first ministers? Will it be dealt with by the ministers of energy and the federal government? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I should have mentioned that there also seemed to be a consensus that it would be best to agree on the future price increase, in the form that it comes, at the energy ministers' level and not at a subsequent first ministers' meeting. We determined among ourselves that we would try to do that. The follow-up we have established is that there will be an energy ministers' meeting either in the last week of April or the first week of May.

Before that, there may well be a meeting between the prov ince of Alberta and the federal government. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further question to the minister. Is the minister in a position to indicate the position of the federal government? I raise the ques tion because of statements attributed to the federal minister, who seemed much more interested in get ting the price of crude oil comparable to the Chicago price rather than the world price.

So my question to the minister is: is it still the position of the federal government and the government of Alberta that we should move to the world price as soon as possible? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, when we go into federal/ provincial meetings, it's usually established by agreement that any participant can express outside the meeting the views he expressed in the meeting, but that none of us will speak for any of the others. Since the hon. Leader of the Opposition asked me the position of the federal government, I must say that the federal government, not I, has a responsibility to express that.

He has said certain things publicly that I imagine the hon. Leader of the Opposition is refer

694 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 ring to. It certainly is the Alberta government's posi tion that we should move energy prices to interna tional prices or fair market prices as soon as possible. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, we'll try to get the answer from the hon. minister this way: is the government of Alberta still satisfied with the pace of moving toward the world price, which the federal government until very recently had indicated they were prepared to do? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. leader is asking questions which, from time to time, elicit opinions.

If he wishes to put the question in the context of government policy, that would be proper. But if we're going to ask for opinions, of course other hon. members will want to do the same. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I was just trying to give the minister a chance to give us a very glowing report on the conference. May I put the question to the minister this way: is it the position of the government of Alberta that Canada is still moving toward the policy of getting to the world price as soon as possible? I raise the question, Mr.

Speaker, because the federal Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources seems to have gotten much more interested in the price of oil at Chicago, as opposed to the world price, and if the federal govern ment goes on that tack it will have serious economic implications for Alberta. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, it's certainly a reasonable concern for any Albertan. The federal government's stated policy position has been to move toward inter national prices. I'm convinced it is still following that policy.

There is a large body of opinion amongst energy ministers, particularly those in consuming provinces, that the U.S. average price should be a large factor in determining how fast governments move toward international prices. Now it's quite pos sible that the U.S. price will move even more quickly toward an international price or surpass it, because it is a moving target. Other than that, we are really dealing in speculation. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the minister.

In light of the comment made by the minister prior to the conference in Ottawa that Alberta would settle for nothing less than $2 per barrel, I'd like to ask the minister why he couldn't have made that announcement here in the Legislature rather than in Ottawa the night before the conference opened. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, that is a reasonable ques tion as well. The comment about the $2 price being, I think, rock bottom was made as a result of federal statements in the course of the meeting itself. Whether it was prior to the actual conference at a private dinner meeting or afterwards, I can't quite recall.

But being drawn into that discussion along the lines that the federal government has said it's $1.25 to $2, what's your reaction, my reaction was that the $2 sounded like the absolute rock bottom. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

In light of reports emanating from the conference regarding the use of some of the additional funds from higher oil prices for conserva tion projects, has the government of Alberta develop ed a position — I'm not asking him to reveal internal discussions at the conference — with respect to using part of the increase in the price of oil and natural gas for approved conservation projects? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, at the production level it certainly has been the position of the government of Alberta to have been in a conservation-minded pro gram for some period of time.

As explained in the estimates committee the other night, various depart ments of the government are moving in conservation programs: the Minister of Housing and Public Works, and in Advanced Education the universities are being encouraged. So will the Department of Energy and Natural Resources co-operate with the federal gov ernment in a general conservation program. Howev er, it wouldn't be under any of the discussions or understandings I have of any of those programs that any portion of a revenue source would be tied to the programs themselves. They would be done because they are intelligent things to do.

MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Following from a question put by the Leader of the Opposition dealing with the so-called American blended price and the minister's comment that the price may in fact rise above the world price, has the Petroleum Marketing Commis sion compiled information on an ongoing basis? Are there reasonable grounds to believe that in fact the price in the United States will rise above the interna tional price? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, as I said when I was answering the Leader of the Opposition, that is pure speculation.

The Petroleum Marketing Commission provides information on international petroleum pric ing. I was merely using the potential for the U.S. price moving closer to or past international prices as a gauge for the hon. Leader of the Opposition that a person cannot judge what that is going to be from time to time. Rent Control MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Could the minister indicate whether he has been given the green light to announce the government position on rent controls? MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, no decision has been reached.

However, it's of course being actively con sidered. As soon as a decision has been made, it will be announced in the Assembly. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the minister. Has the minister any new data indicating excessive rent increases being given by landlords across the province? MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, obviously the government has been receiving as much information as possible. When I make the announcement, I assume a certain amount of detail will be given.

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 695 MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Could the minister indicate whether the matter is under discussion in cabinet committee, or will this be a total cabinet decision? MR. NOTLEY: It's stuck in caucus. MR. HARLE: Well, Mr. Speaker, it's receiving the active consideration not only of cabinet but of caucus as well. Oil Sands Environmental Hearings MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct this ques tion to the hon. Minister of the Environment.

Is the minister able to advise the Assembly whether the government is prepared to follow the recommenda tion of the ECA public advisory committee and call public hearings on all environmental aspects of the oil sands? MR. RUSSELL: I've dealt with that question many times before, Mr. Speaker. The answer is no, not for several years. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. In the light of widespread public support for public hearings, documented already by the ECA advisory committee I mentioned and now supported by the Canada-U.S.

Environmental Coun cil, is the minister in a position to outline to the Assembly whether the government is prepared to reconsider its previous position and place greater priority on public hearings? MR. RUSSELL: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think we have put a very high priority on environmental concerns in the oil sands area. As a matter of fact, when I spoke to the annual banquet and meeting of the Public Advi sory Committee last fall, I indicated it would probably be three to four years before we felt any meaningful public hearings could be held. There is a very good reason for this.

We're presently in partnership with the federal government in collecting baseline envi ronmental data which we would propose to make available to the public for the purpose of public hearings. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. In light of the fact that the agreement with the federal government runs for a period of some 10 years, if I'm not mistaken, is it not the view of the government that 10 years is a rather long time to gather information before the public has sufficient background to participate in effective public hearings? MR.

SPEAKER: May I respectfully remind the hon. member about the question period not being a suit able vehicle for eliciting government or ministerial views. MR. NOTLEY: Well, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can rephrase the question, accommodating your concern, and ask the minister: in view of the 10-year period of the agreement with Ottawa, is the minister in a posi tion to advise the Assembly the reasons for a delay in holding public hearings? MR. RUSSELL: Mr.

Speaker, I'll say again that I indi cated it would probably be three to four years from now before any meaningful baseline data is collected under that 10-year agreement. At no time have I ever said it would be until the 10 years had elapsed. Quite frankly, that's a remote and very interesting part of the province about which little baseline data is known, particularly with respect to environmental concerns. I think it's in the general interest to hold public hearings there at an appropriate time based on good information. That's the program the govern ment has in mind. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a further supplementary question to the hon. minister. Will the minister assure the Legislature that there will in fact be public hearings before a third oil sands plant is commenced? MR. RUSSELL: No, I'm in no position to give that assurance, Mr. Speaker. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, one final supplementary question to the minister. Is the minister in a position to advise whether the Department of the Environment is contemplating any administrative or legislative changes in departmental procedure following the failure of the GCOS prosecutions? MR. RUSSELL: Mr.

Speaker, that aspect of legislation is of course under ongoing review, not just in the Department of the Environment but in all depart ments. Incidentally, the failure came under the fed eral Fisheries Act, as the hon. member is probably aware. Hang Gliding MR. TAYLOR: My question is to the hon. Minister of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife. Is the hon. minister or a committee of his department studying hang gliding standards at this time? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I'm not really sure I can respond to that.

I would have to check with the sport and fitness branches whether they are doing a specif ic study on hang gliding. I'm not aware of it. Public Affairs Printing Tenders DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address my ques tion to the hon. Premier. I'd like to know if the Premier can indicate whether he's received presenta tions from concerned printers respecting the method [by which] printing contracts have been handled by the public affairs department. The Premier was asked this question last October and said he would report to the House.

I wonder if the Premier has looked into the matter of how tenders have been handed out in the department of public affairs and can he inform the House. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I recall having that information checked. I'm not sure, perhaps it might have been the sequence of events that didn't bring it back to the Legislature. I'll have to take notice of it and respond to the hon. member.

696 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, is the Premier in a position to indicate if he has had representation made to him personally by members of the printing business? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, again, having regard to the volume of my correspondence, I would have to take that as notice and respond. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, can the Premier check his date book to find out if personal representation has been made to the Premier — I mean not in corre spondence, but a delegation? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I can check it in terms of whether any group or delegation has come to visit me.

I could not give an undertaking to the House as to whether I've had direct representations. I get them walking through shopping centres. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Premier. In light of the fact there's been an allegation of influence peddling in that tendering, can the Premier indicate if there's been any investigation about how tenders have been allowed to be given out by the public affairs bureau? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I think it relates to the very first question and answer. I'll do my checking, and either I or the Minister of Government Services will respond to the innuendoes. MR. SCHMID: Mr.

Speaker, having listened to the innuendoes of the member of the opposition, I would like to state categorically that the last government at no time had any tender . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. DR. BUCK: Maybe he should inform the Premier, Mr. Speaker. Summer Employment Program MR. MANDEVILLE: My question is to the hon. Minis ter of Advanced Education and Manpower in regard to STEP. In reply to the question last week the minister indicated the municipal element of the pro gram would be in operation. Could the minister indi cate if the other six elements will be in operation? DR.

HOHOL: They will be in operation this summer, Mr. Speaker. We're examining very closely the national and the provincial figures with respect to employment and unemployment, the capacity of uni versity students to obtain jobs on their own which as I said before is a significant part of the job itself. I recall to the House the number of hire-a-student of fices we have across the province doing an outstand ing job in assisting other students in getting jobs. But there will be a comprehensive set of programs for assistance to students who cannot get jobs in the first instance on their own efforts. MR.

MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the minister indicate when some of these other elements will be in operation or when the applications will be going out? DR. HOHOL: The programs, their description, the cri teria, will be out to all possible interested groups and groups that will process applications and send them to our department. This information will be out in a matter of days. MR. MANDEVILLE: One final supplementary ques tion, Mr. Speaker.

Has the minister or the depart ment given consideration to having the appropriation for funding this program in the budget instead of funding it through special warrant? DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, I recall we did exactly that in 1971 when the unemployment figures were much higher than they are at the present time. Then we found that we didn't spend some of the money as the unemployment situation changed downward. Even though estimates are estimates and not exact figures, we felt that to anticipate the amount of money we would need for summer or winter employment was not a reasonable approach.

We changed to the use of the special warrant, which in this case appears to be very suitable because we're dealing with something that's pretty unpredictable. We're examining the last two months, in which we have an important increase of about half a percentage point. I do not believe it's a trend, looking at figures over the last months and the last years. But it was a deliberate and carefully considered judgment not to include it in the budget but to look at these circumstances with respect to employment and respond to it using a special warrant. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question for clarification to the hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower. Does the Department of Advanced Education and Manpower obtain its own statistical analysis provincially on the unemployed in Alberta or does it rely on federal statistics? By that I mean the breakdown in age grouping. Do we have statistics on unemployment among younger people as opposed to middle-aged and older workers? Do we obtain those statistics ourselves or rely on federal figures? DR. HOHOL: We have figures from Statistics Canada. I should report, Mr.

Speaker, that we had some important, maybe even significant, influence on the nature of how Statistics Canada is dealing with those figures. They used to be regional. They are now at least by province and by regions within a province. One of my colleagues made the important point today that in view of the fact that the majority of unemployed are between 14 and 25, there's a real question as to whether the 14 to 16 age group, that may not even be covered by workers' compensation, is a reasonable age group to be included in Statistics Canada. But those are the figures, and they include youngsters from 14 to 16.

By far the largest group of unemployed, particularly in Alberta, are in the age group 14 to 24; also the unskilled. So for unskilled people to come here from elsewhere would be an error. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister, following his last answer. As a result of the statistics acquired by the department, is the minister in a position to advise the House what

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 697 the unemployment rate is in the 14 to 24 year old category as opposed to the 4.5 per cent which has been announced for the entire employment picture in the province? DR. HOHOL: I did not bring the sheaf of materials with me to the House. They are on my desk. We can certainly break those figures down by age groups, by sex, by a whole host of criteria. Some are variable and some are constant. While I am on my feet, Mr. Speaker, I might point out that we have the lowest unemployment rate and the highest participation rate.

The labor force is growing, in spite of the fact the unemployment figure is also rising. But as I say, there are places with very high unemployment, and people elsewhere who feel that jobs are extremely easy to find in Alberta would be coming here in error if they did not have jobs to come to. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, one final supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Beyond STEP, designed to provide employment for students out of school and younger people generally, will there be any specific changes in job creation programs, per haps a major facility program directed at those areas of the province that have specific problems of chronic unemployment? Will there be any specific moves this year to push ahead some public projects that might be begun to pick up the slack? DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, over the years we have developed an approach to putting in place work pro grams of two kinds.

One occurs without the capacity of anyone to predict that it would happen: either an industry has moved or some external force. Another is on the basis of trend, what the hon. member is referring to, Mr. Speaker. We do focus our unem ployment programs, or employment programs rather, on those places that have been chronically high unemployment areas. I should mention that in view of the highest unem ployment rate in Canada's history the federal gov ernment has increased by $100 million, on top of $400 million for the nation, to deal with the matter of job creation. I am in contact with the hon. Mr.

Cullen, Minister of Manpower and Immigration. Our officials are working on some of these matters. As we study them and get a real understanding — because the figures just came out this morning — we will try to respond in the most positive way we can. Treasury Branch — HIgh Level MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct this question to the hon. Provincial Treasurer. On March 29 the Provincial Treasurer announced a new treas ury branch at High Level, with mobile service to Fort Vermilion and La Crete.

In light of the fact there are already two chartered banks in High Level and none in Fort Vermilion or La Crete, is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly the reasons the choice was made for High Level as opposed to Fort Vermilion for the new treasury branch? MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, rather than answer that from memory — because I did review it with the members of the department prior to making the announcement — I would like to check further on the matter and respond later. Construction Industry MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon.

Minister of Labour concerns recent decisions by CIL and Du Pont of Canada to scrap plans for petrochemi cal plant construction in Alberta. Would the hon. minister indicate what initiatives the government is taking to achieve industry-wide negotiations between industry and labor in the construction field? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I know the reasons the hon. member would link his

preamble with the question. But they're not necessarily that closely re lated. Nevertheless the answer to the question is: there is a difference of opinion in the trade union movement and in the organizations that represent management as to the best structure for construction bargaining in the province. We have had many useful discussions with representatives of management, and equally so with representatives of the Alberta build ing trades and construction council.

I think it would be too early to indicate we have found a happy overall solution that would assure there would be fewer of the difficulties we and other jurisdictions have had in the past in regard to the very difficult area of collective bargaining in the construc tion industry. However, we are actively working at it, and will continue the consultations in hope that use ful results will come from that. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could supplement the answer, having regard to the pre amble the hon. member raised.

Frankly I did some checking over the weekend, with regard to the pre amble to the hon. member's question, as to [whether] the decision of CIL and Du Pont relative to their petrochemical plants was related to this issue. Our judgment is that that's not a fair statement of the circumstances. If hon. members will refer to my statement to the House in May 1974, it's clear that the decision of both CIL and Du Pont not to proceed at this time with petrochemical developments here clearly relates to the Petrosar project in Sarnia, Ontario, and the mar ket situation with regard to petrochemicals in this province. MR.

TAYLOR: I appreciate the explanation by the Premier. One further supplementary to the hon. Minister of Labour. In the negotiations with construction man agement and labor, is any encouragement being given by either or both groups to register all construc tion contractors in one central agency that hopefully would sign a single agreement with all construction unions, thus avoiding splintering and a multiplicity of agreements? My question simply is: in your negotia tions is there any encouragement from labor and/or management in regard to this? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, this is one of the aspects that certainly is being discussed and, as I indicated to the hon. member, in some respects it's at the heart of the difficulty that exists in coming up with a system that would be better than we've had in

698 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 the past. Reflecting very briefly on that, Mr. Speaker, there's certainly been a great deal of criticism of the effect of splintering of negotiations among various groups. However, doing away with splintering and bargaining in groups is not necessarily the answer. Those are the problems we and the people we're working with both in industry and labor are addressing, having had considerable discussions over the past number of months. MR.

CLARK: I would like to direct a supplementary question to the Premier and ask if he'd be in a position to table in the Assembly the information he pulled together on this question of construction costs in Alberta.

With regard to the Premier's comment, which was that in the government's view, high con struction costs were not the real reason for the deci sion by CIL to cancel its plant here, is the Premier in a position to table in the Assembly the results of his survey, at least one component of which would have to have dealt with construction costs in Alberta and the way they have gone up, let's say, over the past four years? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, the information was not gathered in written form. It is an assessment I have made and the judgment we have on the circum stances.

We're extremely interested in creating skilled jobs in this province, and of course we're alert to the difficulties involved. That's why that assess ment was made. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary to the hon. Premier. Do the decisions of CIL and Du Pont affect the place petrochemical development occupies in government priorities? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, they're a factor. Our position with regard to petrochemicals, as expressed in the House on a number of occasions, is that it's one of a multifaceted approach to economic diversifi cation in the province.

I think it's only now that the citizens of this province and the business and labor communities are beginning to realize the serious implications that we tried to bring to this Legislature's attention with regard to the Petrosar project. The very fact that the federal government through one of its agencies was promoting 12 to 16 per cent use of Alberta's total crude oil production to take jobs away from Albertans . . . and we have questions in this Assembly today with regard to skilled jobs. Right there is the problem with regard to Petrosar and that decision.

No question about it; it's an important set back for this province. Water Use — Joffre MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of the Environment. It deals with the complaints the minister's department has received from farmers in the Joffre area in response to appli cation by Alberta Gas Ethylene for water permits. What action does the minister plan to take in light of the objections filed by several farmers? MR. RUSSELL: The application advertised was with respect to using ground water sources for domestic purposes of the plant, not for processing.

Of course the bulk of that would be used in construction camps for the workers' facilities. The act of course requires that an applicant proposing to do something like that advertise, and this was done. A number of written briefs were submitted. Although they were received after the deadline they are being taken into consider ation prior to any decision being made on the issuance of a licence. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister.

Could I ask the minister what steps the department is taking either to meet with the indi viduals who filed objections or to get more informa tion into their hands prior to the department arriving at a final decision? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, there's a limit to how much assistance you can give citizen groups. I met with them some time ago and explained the situation. The company also convened a meeting with them in their own locality. I'm not sure if somebody from the department was there or not, but I received a report on that meeting.

We did urge the people to get their briefs in prior to the expiry of the advertising period in the local press. Notwithstanding that, we're still con sidering the late submissions that were received. I believe we've given a reasonable amount of assis tance to them. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the minister: will the Department of the Environment be taking any initia tive in holding a meeting in the Joffre area with farmers who have expressed concerns under provi sions of The Water Resources Act? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I don't know really what more we can do.

Such a meeting was already held, and I believe the residents who are concerned under stand the use of the water. The licence will be based on safe criteria with respect to ground water resources. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Has the licence been approved? MR. RUSSELL: No, Mr. Speaker, the application is still under consideration. As I tried to point out, the concerns of the local residents are one aspect that by law must be taken into consideration. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the minister.

Has it been brought to the minister's attention that supposedly some officials of the Department of the Environment have indicated to some of the farmers who have expressed concerns under The Water Resources Act that one of the alter natives the Department of the Environment has is in fact to put a meter on the farmer's well to see how much water the farmer is using? MR. RUSSELL: I haven't heard that particular story, Mr. Speaker.

But it's not uncommon in cases throughout the province where new demands are being made on existing water resources to monitor the production of domestic wells to see if new sources of demand are in fact having an effect on the consumers who were there ahead of the others.

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 699 MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I hesitate to interrupt the hon. leader, but we have passed the time allotted for the question period. I've already recognized the hon. Member for Bow Valley and, if the House agrees, perhaps we might have one short question and one short answer — the proverbial ones. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. Wheat Exporters MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, one short question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture.

Could the minis ter indicate whether the Alberta government will have representation to the officials representing the world's major wheat exporting nations on April 21? MR. MOORE: No, Mr. Speaker. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS (Committee of Supply) [Dr. McCrimmon in the Chair] MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee of Supply will come to order. Department of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife MR. CHAIRMAN: As this department has gone through Subcommittee B, could we have a report from the chairman? MR. GOGO: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Pursuant to instruc tions contained in the Committee of Supply resolution of Monday, March 21, 1977, Subcommittee B of the Committee of Supply has had under consideration the estimates of expenditures for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1978, for the Department of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife. The committee recommends to the Committee of Supply the estimates of expenditures of $52,317,610. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. You have heard the report of the chairman of Subcommittee B. Is the committee prepared to receive the report? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. CHAIRMAN: If you would turn to page 257 of the estimates book.

Mr. Minister, do you have any remarks before we start on the estimates? MR. ADAIR: After four days in subcommittee, I will just see if I can respond to any questions that may come forward now. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I didn't have an oppor tunity to be in that particular subcommittee. I wond er, Mr. Minister, if you might respond to a couple of letters that various MLAs have received in the last several days, one from Morinville and one from an other community in the immediate vicinity, concern ing the major facility program.

The suggestion con tained in both letters was essentially that in addition to making money available through the major facility program, some commitment should be made to oper ating grants once these projects are opened. I've had the same comment brought to my attention by other municipalities as well, although I think in fairness, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Minister, I should say that most municipalities would rather move toward a revenue-sharing program in any event.

But they often fall back on the argument that well, if we can't have revenue sharing and we have these cost-shared programs, what about some form of operating grant, so once the recreation centre is opened, the ribbon is cut, the photograph has been taken, and then the bill has to be paid for the janitor, light, water and what have you, there is some ongoing commitment from the provincial government. As I mentioned, Mr. Chairman, in the last couple of days there have been several letters from communi ties in the Sturgeon area making that same represen tation.

I wonder if the minister would like — he probably dealt with this in subcommittee, but I didn't have a chance to be there — to bring us up to date on where the government sits on that particular question. MR. ADAIR: Yes, I'd be quite pleased to. To start with I'll go back a little and explain that the major cultural/ recreation facility development program is a capital program. As such, when the communities are apply ing for moneys under the program they must provide a five-year operating plan or a potential plan.

We have very clearly stated that if they can't do that they wouldn't be able to tap the program to start with. So that covers at least the first five years of the 10-year program. Now I can go on just a little further. One of the resolutions that was defeated quite soundly at the AAMDC, after a fairly lengthy debate, was relative to operating funds. I was quite pleased to see that. As a matter of fact one of the comments made at that particular meeting was if we in fact might be consid ered welfare waifs of the province rather than that one familiar quote we've heard, children of the province.

I think the program itself has been pretty darn well successful so far, Mr. Chairman. We have had small difficulties in getting applications approved, getting the master planning done. But at this particular point in time we are not prepared to look at any additional operating assistance. I say additional because $1 mil lion for operation assistance is provided, plus the fact that Project Co-operation does provide some addi tional assistance for that. So having said that relative to the major cultural facility program — it's a capital program. As such it will remain in effect for at least the first five years.

MR. NOTLEY: To follow that up very quickly, Mr. Chairman, is there any consideration now to major changes in Project Co-operation in the next four or five years? Does the government see beefing that up in the years ahead?

700 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 MR. ADAIR: I'm not sure in just what particular way your question relates to changes in Project Co operation. Right now Project Co-operation covers capital, equipment, or to some degree some operating MR. NOTLEY: The operating part of it was the . . . MR. ADAIR: We're not anticipating anything right at the moment, Mr. Chairman. We have just made some adjustments in the programs at the request of the municipal authorities. Maybe I should point them out for you right now.

Primarily the two biggest changes are reducing the program to two categories, that is 40 per cent and 50 per cent, then the inclusion of the master planning costs on a 50 per cent cost-sharing basis is now in place. One other change made that doesn't relate to all the communities, but certainly does to areas where they have Canadian Forces bases, is the fact that they are now included in the program on a program basis. One area where we did make a change that we had inadvertently overlooked is where improvement dis tricts may have more than one recreation board within that improvement district.

As the municipal authority they could only apply for one $500 basic grant prior to this. We have now changed that and each one can apply. An example would be ID 17. I believe they have 10 recreation boards within that ID. They would then be getting $50 each per board rather than the $500. That's changed. It makes a difference of about $38,500. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it agreeable to the committee that we follow the same procedure and take the total votes, in light of the fact that this has gone through subcommittee? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. CHAIRMAN: We will follow that procedure then. MR. R.

SPEAKER: I'd like to ask the minister if he has the order for return ready for me yet. MR. ADAIR: No, Mr. Chairman. As a matter of fact that order for return will probably take some time to compile. I only have eight people over there working on that particular program, and I am not prepared at the moment to take them off the applications that are there in order to provide the answers. I would think it would probably take us one or two months. I'm not just sure.

With those eight people working on the applications in place, I've asked them to continue that because the pressure is from the members in this Assembly to get those applications through. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, I think that's a nonsense remark, to take two months for this simple little thing. These are administrative things that are asked for in the department. I'd like to ask these questions of the minister right from the order for return and find out what answers he has available to us in this Assembly.

First of all, could the minister indicate the proce dural steps through which an application for a grant under the major facility grant program must proceed for approval? MR. ADAIR: I haven't really got that particular proce dure here. We went through that in committee, Mr. Chairman. I think really what it amounts to is basical ly, in a nutshell, the application comes in, it's reviewed by the program planning branch, passed on to the programs branch, then goes over to Culture, comes back, and if we need any additional informa tion, it's requested by the department through the community.

In some cases it comes back very quick ly, and in some cases it doesn't. In some cases we may have changed our priority, moved on to another application, and it takes a few days for us to get back to that particular one. As I said in committee, I guess the quickest one we have had is one that moved through from August to the middle of September, and the longest one we've had is eight and a half months. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. Could the minister outline a list of criteria which must be met for the approval of an application for a grant under the program? MR.

ADAIR: I'll just say the same thing again, Mr. Chairman. I haven't got that particular list with me right at the moment. I can get it for the good gentleman. But in answer to the motion for a return where that actually is listed I can provide that, proba bly within the next day or two, so you can in fact have that. But I don't have it with me right now. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. How many applications are at present before the staff in the department? MR. ADAIR: If you'll just give me a moment I have that information here for you. We have 206 applica tions presently before the staff.

There are 106 being worked on over the 100 that are approved right now. Six have been rejected, and the rest are being worked on. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. In general what is the organizational make-up — and I've asked for an organizational chart — of the de partment relative to these facility grants? MR. ADAIR: The same eight people working on that particular program doing, I think, just one heck of a job for the people of Alberta. MR. R. SPEAKER: What's the salary range of the eight employees you are talking about? MR. ADAIR: I haven't any idea, Mr. Chairman. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to ask the minister a question. I also asked in subcommittee if a financial statement of Sport Alberta would be available. I would like to know if the minister has that available before we proceed with the estimates. MR. ADAIR: Yes, I have the '74-75-76 copies of Sport Alberta that I can make available. I have checked that out. We have all of them on file, and I'm sure I can get it to you right away.

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 701 DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, at the same time the minis ter thought he might be able to find the financial statements of all recreational complexes since 1972 in which government money is involved. Was the minister able to get that information? MR. ADAIR: Yes. Let's just clarify that, Mr. Chair man. It wasn't a case of whether we might be able to find them. They in fact are there. The question I had was whether there might be some problems with any of them relative to the financial position of that community, whether they are tendering contracts or what they may be.

What we would in fact have to do prior to making them available is get the consent of those particular communities to release that. I can do that, but it would take some time. DR. BUCK: Well, Mr. Chairman, I can't really under stand that, in that these are public projects. They are funded by local public money and provincial public money. The last time I looked, Mr. Chairman, I understood that the public business is conducted in public, be it at the municipal, the provincial, or the federal level. So, Mr. Chairman, surely that informa tion should be available to us. MR. ADAIR: Mr.

Chairman, the other side of that is also some of the community's own money. Of course when they're involved in actually getting bids on par ticular parts of their project, if they have excess funds available or are having difficulty making payments, it affects their financial position in that community. Until we get their permission to do that in fact, I don't want to jeopardize in any way, shape, or form any position of any community in the province of Alberta. So I would first check with them. I think it's a courtesy check we would make with the communi ties. Once we got that, we could do that. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Chairman, the reason I'm seeking the information is not to badger anyone. But I'm con cerned about the recreation complexes that are in quite shaky financial positions. These people are ul timately going to be coming back to the central government for assistance. This is why I think it's our responsibility, Mr. Chairman, to find out exactly how many organizations are coming back to the minister's department. The ultimate responsibility will be heaped upon his golden locks.

Really, because we are all responsible for voting these public funds, I think it's important we know the financial situation of some of these complexes. I know several that I'm aware of are having serious financial difficulties. So in an attempt to resolve this, I think we should have this information available. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Chairman, under the major cultural/ recreation facility development program, I'm not aware of any that are having major problems. I am aware that a few are having some problems and are working them out.

But just to clarify the air, I think really what you're referring to is some of the projects that came on stream prior to this program coming into place. Now those communities that may have a facility may use this program. That money is there for their use. But as we said in subcommittee, they again must apply and meet the requirements of this program. They can meet it either by debt retirement or by way of additional funds being placed in the pot rela tive to completing that facility, if it's not completed. But if they can't, they won't be able to tap it.

I think that's one of the areas we spoke of fairly strongly in committee, that they must meet these requirements. If they can't, certainly they have some problems. There's no question about that. Now where they go at that point . . . I know when it comes right down to it, the base of the community is raising the funds that will then be matched by this particular program. Every community in Alberta is able to tap on a basis of $100 per capita over that 10 years, either in one project totally or a number of projects individually applied for, one per year. So I am aware there are some problems out there.

Certainly any of those communities are welcome to sit down with any of our recreation consultants and talk about the problem. If we can be of assistance, we'll lay out for them the route they could go and what they must meet. Certainly they can do that. A number of them have. I know of a couple with problems prior to the program coming on stream that have now basically resolved the majority of their prob lems. They still have some minor ones, but they've accepted them. DR. BUCK: Yes, that's exactly the area of concern, Mr.

Minister: basically some of the ones that were built under the agricultural societies grants. So I asked the minister in subcommittee if there was some way these two could be married, because — let's be honest with ourselves — the $50,000 come-on has just really got a lot of people in a lot of trouble. So I hope the minister can somehow marry the two pro grams — a shotgun marriage if it has to be — so we can help these agricultural societies out. The minis ter well knows that some got in over their heads. The $50,000 grant was what really got people going.

In many of the facilities that are being used, the $50,000 was a good first step to get them going. But of course, people being people, they somehow have, I might say, a fallacious philosophy. They build on the philosophy that once we've got it built, the government's not going to take it away from us. That's just not a good enough financial argument to use to build, say, a $250,000 facility. You've only got a $50,000 agricultural societies grant, plus maybe $30,000 of your own money, and maybe a govern ment guaranteed loan through one of the chartered banks or the Treasury Branch for the remaining por tion.

These are the ones causing me concern. I'm sure they will be causing the minister concern. MR. ADAIR: I think I should point out right now that the co-operation between the Minister of Agriculture and me relative to those ag. societies that may in fact be having problems has been just great. We've been sitting down together to work out some of the prob lems for them. Some have been worked out. There are still a number to be worked out, and we're working on them. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister.

With regard to the information I've asked for, in earli er discussions and when it was raised in the House the minister indicated this was the type of material that was looked after every day. It was kept on hand.

702 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 on file and readily available. I wonder if the minister could indicate why it isn't available at this time. In his responsibilities as minister, what kinds of checks and what type of work does he do in assessing the administrative stream in his department? MR. ADAIR: Actually, we meet regularly to go over any problems we may have with the program itself. I have to state again that I think the eight people working on that program are doing just one heck of a fine job. They've had some major difficulties in get ting all the information together.

We're speaking now of the first year of a 10-year program, because we're almost at the end of the second year. Certainly from that standpoint I think we've had some small problems we've been able to overcome. If you wish, I can now go through the 20 steps necessary — I have the list here — if that would help you. The first step is that the community completes the application. Then it's forwarded to the regional office for review. After review by the regional office, it comes into administration. It's then reviewed in all the necessary support . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Chairman, if the minister would like to send the material over, that's fine. What I'm trying to arrive at in my questioning from the minister: is he personally aware of what's going on? Does he know what's going on in the depart ment? Does he know the steps? If he has to have a piece of paper sent in and then quote from it, I'm concerned that he doesn't know what is really going on in some of the administration of the department and the flow of material. That's the first thing I'm trying to establish here. The minister can read these things; that's fine.

But does he know what they are without reading from a piece of paper sent in by a civil servant? That's the one question I want to establish today. I have a second question I want to establish. But the first one seems to be answered. He can send over the written material, and I'll read it. MR. ADAIR: Well, Mr. Chairman, generally I would say I have a pretty good idea of what's going on in the Department of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife. That covers the administration division, the recreation division, the parks division, and the fish and wildlife division.

We're speaking right now of a component of the recreation division. I'll forward this copy to the hon. member so he may in fact review that. If he'd like to ask any more questions from that, he may. As I said before, generally I think the success of the program to date has been the work of the individual communities in their preplanning prior to this pro gram coming on stream. By having done that pre planning, their master planning is basically in place. It's just the smaller components, maybe, that are missing.

We've had some disagreements with some com munities as to what we require and what they think we require. We've been able to work pretty well all of them out. I don't see any major problems. Out of the 209 applications we've had to date, I think something like 17 have had some problems. That to me indi cates the program has been extremely successful. MR. R. SPEAKER: Could the minister indicate what review he has done with regard to material requested from the various communities? Could he indicate what seem to be the main priority objects or the things he is really trying to gain from a community?

What does he need as information here in Edmonton from those local communities? What are the main specific things? MR. ADAIR: Well, if you like to take that particular application, that tells you the main specifics right there. Practically anybody can read that particular document. I can read them if you like, Mr. Chairman. I don't think it's necessary. It's been out for two years. It's in place. Beyond that I really don't know just exactly what you are asking for. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister.

From my observation of these various programs and the fact the government is giving out the grants, I recognize these things as priority items which should be information in your hands, Mr. Minister, or in your staff's hands. Number one: this is where this whole program got off the track in the beginning. My colleague here referred to it because there were ag. and other grants going out and things were happening. Yes, it was a different program. That's correct, sir. But what hap pened was, we built structures that couldn't operate.

So then we raised it in the Legislature and concern about operating grants came up, which is very, very good. So that's number one criterion. I think that the provincial government, through your department, is responsible to assure that somebody locally can pick up the operating costs. That was the first ground rule of a starter. That's number one criterion. That takes either a letter from a taxing authority at the local level, some group that carries it on. I see that as your number one piece of information. Number two piece of necessary information is with regard to the property. Who will own the property?

Who owns the land the property goes on? I think that's important. Then number three is with regard to building standards. I want to be very clear on this. Your department is attempting to make judgments with regard to criteria, quality, type of building, size, in all of these various recreational facilities. I think they're out of their depth in that area. I think your local consultants help an awful lot. That's all right. But the local community knows the kind of building it wants to build.

In the letters that go back and forth between these various local dis tricts and your department I find that we get hung up on all kinds of crazy things. By the time the money should be in the hands of the local people, the local people have got the building built, they're ready to use it and the grant can't come. So it's this third criterion, Mr. Minister, that is holding up a lot of these recreational facilities.

In that third criterion I think you could eliminate a lot of red tape, a lot of responsibilities from these eight people you talk about — and I've no quarrel with those eight people; they may be the finest people in the world. I know they've done some good things.

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 703 They've tried to respond to my hundreds and hun dreds of phone calls to them and tried to do some good things. I don't argue with that. But I think there are people in building standards in this government who can check with regard to fire, insurance, en trances, or materials. The fellow from that particular branch came into my constituency's centres early in the game. Within a day or two we had his recommendations back as to how the building should be changed. The people locally said, that's great.

The one group that was in the course of building just incorporated them right into the building, saved expenses, got things on the road. The next one was able to incorporate right on the blueprints. But the involvement of the department in all these details — I'll just give you an example. I don't know how it happened but one example just illustrates this over and over again, where the projects get held up. I can give you more than one example, but I don't think that's necessary.

A letter went back to this particular community centre — this was after the application was in Culture for three months — that a wing should be added to the stage. By that time the stage was built, the building was practically finished. The local people couldn't incorporate that wing into the stage. So we had to write back and say it was a good recommenda tion but we couldn't incorporate it because it was too late. I find this in other situations. So what I'm recommending to you, Mr. Minister, is that in administering this whole thing you should have another look at your department's involvement.

I think that could cut a lot of time out of the proces sing of these applications. I can show you letters — I'm sure if you took the time and looked at them on file — they were written by the people in your department asking questions. We have the Vauxhall centre if I want to raise that one, the Vulcan centre, other ones. The Vauxhall one for example — the same guy built the Taber one. He's got lots of experience. He toured many centres. He'd had hun dreds of hours of experience that he's putting into that plan. Your fellow from Lethbridge, Morley Roloff, finest guy in the world.

I've never seen anybody who works with communities, facilitates things . . . he makes good recommendations, but they seem to come up here and get all bogged down in many questions which take a lot of time. That's the third criterion I think you're getting bogged down on, Mr. Minister. That's the point I'm trying to make in my discussions with you, privately and otherwise. I suppose my question to you after that statement is: what can be done there? My statements are to be helpful, most likely also critical. But maybe we can facilitate this thing.

Is the gov ernment afraid at this point in time that because of a little controversy earlier we now have to bog our selves down with a lot of red tape? Hopefully not. That's what I get very concerned about now. MR. ADAIR: Well, I thank you for the kind comments about the good member at Lethbridge. I've heard some of the comments made by the hon. member that weren't quite so kind. I think one of the things that in fact we have to instil in the minds of the communities when they apply for the program is not to begin construction until it's approved.

We have communities going ahead and building their facilities, then coming in with that bank loan on their back. That's a problem. We attempt to say, now make sure that you've got it in place. Three items we ask for very critically: have you involved all the other service organizations in your community, have you involved the cultural aspect of your community? If they haven't been, then we ask them to go back and do that. That's really part of their master planning. Most of them talk to them in some degree or another.

But in some cases we may have the cultural component coming to us and say ing, we really haven't had input. At their request we'll go back and ask what input was involved. The input may well be, you want a room, we'll put in a room. That's not really sufficient for that particular group in that community which also has a right to some of these funds and to be part of that particular building. Most of the program is going very well. In 17 out of 206, we've had some difficulties. Yes, Vauxhall was one of the ones where we had a small delay for a while. There are a couple of others we've had some delays with.

But I think we've been able to iron most of those out, getting it down in fact to where we have a shorter time span between them, if we get the co-operation of the communities. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. That's right. There was delay. And there's delay in others, $10,000 or more delay in interest. The money could have been out much sooner. I can list other centres. But that's a debatable point. To the minister again: has the minister assessed some of the criteria?

Has he had someone come in and have a look at it from the outside and say, look, maybe I've placed some responsibility on my staff that just isn't reasonable, maybe I'm asking questions that just shouldn't be asked at the central level. I get the feeling, Mr. Minister — and I want to make this point — it's fine to say, involving all those community groups. When the plan came out I said that's good. I think it's good that we're trying to involve these community-based groups. I like that idea. The idea of trying to put the five-year plan together has merit in the sense that it generalizes a plan.

It doesn't add in all the specifics, hopefully it generalizes a plan and gets people thinking about their total responsibility. I don't argue with that. What I do argue with is: at a certain point I get the feeling that the provincial government's central office — Edmonton, these eight people you're talking about — is asked to make so many judgments about that local facility that it's just impossible to make. And doing so takes away local community responsibility. I want to make this point along with that.

In grants such as this it has been said to every person in Alberta, you have been promised a grant of $10 a year or $100 over 10 years or all in one year however you see fit, if you plan correctly. At this point in time the communities know that grant is theirs, and they want to do something with it under certain conditions. But I'm saying that it seems to me the conditions — that your central office group feels it has to be involved in every little decision made at that local level. That's costing us a lot of money in interest at the local level. We have to borrow money.

Two of my projects at the present time — I have

704 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 had to go out on the market and borrow money to pay the facility, to pay up some of the money. Fortunately you are helping them co-operate, but it is still interest money we are losing at that local level. The point I want to make is that there should be some things there: one, we have to build trust in the local community, hope for the best; and two, maybe we can cut out some of these questions that I really don't think are necessary. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Chairman, I think we have that trust in the communities. We certainly have [in] some areas.

It comes right back to the onus on you and me as MLAs in this Legislature to also lay before those people planning an application to ensure they don't start that application before they get approval. That's where they get into the problem with the interest on the money they borrowed to go ahead hoping to get that other one, which may still be a bit down the road. When you are dealing with $100,000 or $200,000, in three or four months there is a fair amount of interest. Now basically most of them, and pretty well every community and person in Alberta, know the program does not expire at the end of a given year.

They are not rushed into a situation where they have to develop that particular plan and get it in place. They can do it this year, next year, or as it comes down the road. So they aren't forced to take that. It's there for them to apply for as they see fit and when they can meet the various standards we have set. Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I again say to those people working in the field and those eight in here, they are doing just one heck of a job. MR. R. SPEAKER: That's fine and that's right.

The communities, the people out in the field, and most likely your central office are doing a good job under the conditions set by you, Mr. Minister. What I think the minister should recognize is that some of the things like . . . I will make this point here. When communities get an idea or decide to build, they move very quickly and it doesn't take very long to get the plan into implementation. Let's take the Vauxhall one. When we came up here, the mayor and the head of recreation talked to you and other ministers. They had to build a centre. The pressure was on in the community.

The govern ment knew it, everybody else knew it. We hired a first-class guy to put the building together. At that point in time there should have been some trust and some movement to get that money out to them as quickly as possible, and it wasn't. That's the very first thing. You raised the question with regard to MLAs. Maybe we do have responsibility. But I would like to say this: the information with regard to the program . . . And I would like to give full marks to the fellow you have in Lethbridge. He has worked with every community.

I didn't have to run around as an MLA and give them first-hand information, because he was there. When talking to the communities, he gave it to them. That was excellent. I just thought that was perfect, because that's what his job was all about. So in initiating these plans, initiating the pro grams, if a community came to me I would just phone him and say, go out and give them the details and work with their local recreation directors, which he did.

But somewhere in that system, in that discussion, the message you are attempting to give us at this time of the progress [is] that they should have been told not to start their building until the grant cheque was coming down. Well if that's true, you can imag ine the cost of building the million dollar project in Vauxhall, the swimming pool in Vulcan, the project we just built. We all know that building has increased anywhere from 10 to 20 per cent. That's what that decision would have done. That's why at the local level we had to move right off the bat to get ahead of that thing.

So maybe the advice the minis ter is giving now has some hindsight, but I don't think it has any validity. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Chairman, what I'm trying to say to the hon. member — whether he wants to listen to it or not is another thing — is the fact that if that community recreation board and that community fill in that application and meet those particular ones, they can almost get it back in six weeks. Now having said that, that means they have all their pieces in place. Their funds are in place for us to match.

You know, sometimes we are moving slightly ahead of the time when we are providing those funds prior to matching them, and in a few areas we are having some difficulty responding to that or keeping that flex ibility in. We want to keep as much flexibility in the program as we possibly can. But in order for the community to be assured that they in fact have their money in place, have their five-year operating plan, have their master planning finished, they should be aware of the fact that that may take them some time if they haven't done it, because it's not automatic. That's really all I'm saying. MR. R.

SPEAKER: That's fine, but I still have not arrived . . . The second area I want to cover is the way the minister is going to facilitate these applica tions moving through his department and getting that cheque back to the local level. Up to this point they have not been moving fast enough. What are you doing to reassess that paper flow in your department? I am asking for two things: one, how you reassess the paper flow. How does it move from one person to another? I don't want [you] to feel that I did any research in your department, because I haven't. I don't put the employees in any awkward position.

But just by asking questions I find that some people don't know where the paper is coming from at certain times and how it's supposed to flow. There doesn't seem to be any time check on these papers — to say, I've checked it and I move it to that guy — nor anybody following the applications through. There's paper flow and information asked for. What has the minister done to really check those two aspects in his department? Has he put somebody special on it to follow it through, or has he not? MR.

ADAIR: The Deputy Minister and I do a review of the complaints we get relative to the program, as to where they in fact seem to be, where there may be blocks in the program. We are doing an ongoing program trying to update and speed up that particular process from within. The concern we have is that every once in a while when we need additional information, the 14 days it takes for it to come back from the community are not considered in that par

April 3, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 705 ticular area. We would like to get that back as quickly as we can, and I think it would be fair for me to state that we have had some problems in some areas rela tive to getting the final application approved and the cheque out to the community. We are attempting to speed that up as quickly as possible but within the regulations in place. Beyond that, I can't really say anything more. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Minister, can you outline or name for me the person in the department who follows an application through to make sure it goes through the channels as quickly as possible?

I can understand when somebody phones you — or I phone you, or one of the MLAs — and says, look, we are having problems with the application, it's somewhere in your department. You phone the civil servant and say, get it off your desk, get it moving. Each one gets a little incentive push like that. But who in your department is responsible for looking at some kind of flow sheet and saying, that thing is on the move? Is your director doing that? MR. ADAIR: That's right. The director is doing that. I don't ask him to get it off his desk. I ask him to find where it's at, because generally it's past his desk.

A small point, but I thought I would just respond to it. The director of the major facilities program, Stan Fisher, is in fact the one who will follow those through. He and Richard Armstrong do most of that work on the follow-up, and have done an excellent job. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. Do they actually have a check sheet, or do they check the flow of certain applications once a week or every two weeks? Or is it just by whoever the minister phones down — they take that application, run it through first, or what happens?

Is there an actual formal checking process to make that application get through the department? MR. ADAIR: Yes there is, Mr. Chairman. It's got "received, date reviewed, received, accepted, passed on, reviewed, accepted, passed on", and that particu lar one is a copy of it. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. The other point I want to make is with regard to the kinds of information. What checks have you made person ally on the questions for information that have been asked from your department? What things have you cut out as information required by your department? MR.

ADAIR: Really we haven't cut out too many of the areas of requests for information at this particular stage. Because as I said to start with, just completing the second year of the program we did make four major adjustments in it, and we are assessing how those adjustments are going to fit in and just exactly where they [will] go. Again I have to emphasize the fact that out of all of them we have about 17 out of 200 that may in fact have some problems, which may be ours — and I won't say they aren't — and may well be part of ours and part of the communities.

But certainly by working together with the community and with our staff, we will get them out as quickly as we can. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. Could the minister indicate what review he has done with regard to questions about the actual buildings? What type of detail do you want about a building: where the bathrooms are? How nitty-gritty do you get in those kinds of plans? MR.

ADAIR: When it comes right down to it, I guess if it's approved by the building standards branch and reviewed by the department and the fellows we have in that particular area, it will then move on to the program branch and over to Culture. I should state right now that I don't review every application individually. I haven't got the time, nor would I have the time if I were able to direct myself just to that.

But in the same sense, when we do go over the applications — and we go over them every month — we review where the problems are, and attempt to get them resolved by getting that informa tion back to us as quickly as possible. Right now we have in place regulations that must be met. Basically I think the consensus within this Legislature and even among municipal authorities is that we are to be as tough as we can to ensure we get all that information for the protection of the community as well as of the program itself. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister.

I wasn't asking the minister to get involved in review ing where the bathrooms are, and so on. There's enough red tape involved. But would the minister consider going over some of those applications and cutting out some of this material? Has he given any directive to his deputy minister, saying: look, maybe we're asking too many questions. I want a review of that thing, and come back to me. Has he done anything like that? MR. ADAIR: Yes. As a matter of fact, I've asked for a review of the problem areas that seem to keep pop ping up the most.

After we've put that together and had a chance to sit down and review them, we may be able to tighten up that ship a little bit. That's certainly the idea behind keeping as much flexibility as possible in the program. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. Could the minister outline some of the problem areas he's talking about? MR. ADAIR: Primarily getting back from the various communities information we may want. The applica tion may come in without the plans approved by the building standards branch. We may not have a com pleted master plan.

After sending it over to Culture, we may in fact find out that none of the cultural component in the community has been consulted. As a matter of fact, one of the areas we did change — and I think it's fair that I point that out right now — is: initially the program was that you had to have that cultural component. We changed it to ensure they didn't put in the cultural component just to tap the fund, just to get the money. In other words they could go with 75 per cent of the program, or vice versa.

If the application was of a cultural nature, they could apply for the 25 per cent of the program and leave that 75 per cent until they were ready to apply

706 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 for it. So those kinds of changes have been made in the program. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. When I ask what kinds of things you have cut out, and so on, I look at some questions that were asked of one of the centres. Where are the auditorium chairs going to be stored? How are the scenes to be managed? Is the stage to have curtains? What is to be used as dressing rooms? How is the lighting in the classroom and the workroom? Has provision been made for a darkroom? Photography was mentioned in the five-year plan. Maybe that's a legitimate ques tion.

Those kinds of things are asked. And I say, if you hire a local engineer, and the community knows what it wants, are those things that hold up an application relevant? MR. ADAIR: I'm not sure they are actually holding up the application. In some cases where they're asking for that information, I think it's just to verify that it has in fact been included, or to alert them to the fact that they may not have included it in their own. Certainly I agree that some of them may sound fairly insignificant in one sense, and maybe we can speed that up a little bit.

But in the same sense, what we're trying to do is ensure the community gets the maxi mum use of that particular facility. The question about the darkroom — if you're talking about photo graphy — asking where it is and how it's set up is, I think, more than legitimate. Agreed to: Vote 1 Total Program $1,747,370 Vote 2 MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to say a word or two on recreation, particularly in regard to Sport Alberta. In subcommittee the hon. minister told us the games branch had been separated from Sport Alberta. I would like to commend the minister on that move.

I think that's a very excellent move, because in my view the games conducted by Sport Alberta were about the only item I know of that was really done well and was meaningful. I think it's very wise to have separated the Summer Games from Sport Alberta. I am concerned, however, particularly if provincial money is going to continue to go to Sport Alberta, that that body be jacked up to the point where they're going to do something besides hold meetings. I don't want to be unfair, but it seems to me that the direc tors of Sport Alberta have missed the whole point of their creation.

And I had something to do with their coming into being. The whole idea was that they would be a real boost to amateur sport, that they would be a body through which amateur sport would thrive. Instead I find that Sport Alberta is having a lot of meetings and a lot of money going into administration, and a dribble going into amateur sports. I would ask the minister to review this matter very, very carefully. Another item I'm very unhappy about with Sport Alberta, is that to my knowledge they don't have one director from rural Alberta.

Another thing: while I have nothing against schoolteachers — I think they're fine people — having an entire body of schooltea chers direct this is not going to do the job we want done. There should be a variety of people from the community and a lot of lay people who have an understanding of amateur sports. I realize I'm being critical of Sport Alberta, and I really mean to be. I would like to see that body jacked up to the point where it can do the job it was intended to do when it was brought into being; that is, to foster, encourage, and enhance amateur sport in the province.

That's a real challenge for any body that wants to undertake it. All I'm saying at this point, Mr. Chairman, is that I hope the hon. minister will take a very careful look at what remains of Sport Alberta, now that he's moved out the most relevant part, the part that has been doing a very excellent job in connection with the summer games. MR. ADAIR: One comment I might make, Mr.

Chair man, is that the initial objectives of Sport Alberta, as you well know, were to promote amateur sport in the province, to act as a forum of exchanged views of the various sport governing bodies for the province, and to act as a liaison with other government agencies. That really got smothered by the success of the games. One of the other areas where I think they have made some pretty good efforts is that Hall of Fame dinner. It sort of sputtered a little bit. Again, because of the smothering effect of the games, it sort of lost out in some of the areas.

I think that particular area, plus the fact they have a role to play with the sport governing bodies . . . The membership of Sport Alberta is by appointment from the various sport governing bodies. We do not direct what the membership might be. I would hope they may take those remarks in stride, and certainly see that some proper membership is there to repre sent rural Alberta. As a matter of fact, I've made that point to them.

But I think the idea behind it, with us providing additional funds for Sport Alberta to continue, was in fact to allow them to adjust back to their original role and to get on with the job they were originally set out to do; that is, work through the sport governing bodies as an organization to promote amateur sport in the province of Alberta. If they do that, they'll certain ly do a good job for the amateur sports people of the province. MR. TAYLOR: I'm very, very pleased with what the hon. minister is saying.

As we watch Sport Alberta during the coming year, I hope we'll see a new being entirely: one that will keep administration costs to a minimum, and a maximum amount going to encourage amateur sports. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I would also like to second the concern of the hon. Member for Drumheller that the cost of administration with Sport Alberta was eating up most of the budget. I'd like to say that a good friend of mine was the late Dr. Don Smith.

Just prior to his passing I was visiting him, and these were the concerns he expressed too: so much of the budget was being used up by the director at that time that the funds set up for the use of the programs were being eaten up by the administration. So the minister

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 707 of course has mentioned he was aware of that, and steps are being taken to change that. At the same time, the president at that time was concerned about what we're going to be doing with all this high-priced help between one event and the next. I would also like to bring this concern to the minis ter: when we're having the Winter Games and the Summer Games, I think we should guard against duplicating the mistakes that the Olympics make. As a taxpayer, it has always concerned me that we put on these lavish Olympic Games in different cities every four years.

We spend not millions any more but billions of dollars. Surely we as taxpayers should be a little more intelligent and rotate these sites throughout the world every four years. The facilities are available in, say, sites A, B, C, and D; rotate them. Maybe that would take the politics out of the blessed thing and let the sports get back to the athletes. I'm trying to make the parallel here, Mr. Chairman, to the minister: let's not get such a bidding war between communities that we lose sight of the fact that what we're trying to do is promote the sports for the sake of the athletes.

So I'd just like the minister's comment on this. Can he indicate to me the value of having or not having the Summer Games or the Winter Games in a certain community? Are we pos sibly going the route of putting funds into centres where the community would like to host the games and adding facilities that maybe are present in other communities? MR. ADAIR: Well, Mr. Chairman, I guess the best way to respond to that is: certainly we haven't had a "bidding war" going on the games.

The games just awarded to Medicine Hat by the committee saw Jasper, Banff, Grande Prairie, Red Deer, and Medi cine Hat actually applying for the games. Those were the first games which had more than two bidding on them. One of the reasons was that the communities were coming to me and saying, really we would like more time to know what we have to do in order to be able to bid.

So one of the main reasons behind the separation of the games from Sport Alberta was to concentrate primarily on the games and to develop a plan that would see at least a three-year spread between the games and the announcement as to where they would be played. From the standpoint of dollars, based on the public funds that go into it through the department, there is a maximum. Any beyond that has to come either from the community or from the private sector. So I think we've sort of held a lid on that particular area, where we can in fact keep the true idea behind the games at the participatory level.

Now you obviously run into the fact that you get some cream coming out of that. Where does it go? What do we do there? I think that's where we have some assistance in the elite athlete program, as it's sort of called right now. It's the Olympic/ Commonwealth/Pan-Am athlete programs, Olympiad for the Disabled — those areas where we provide additional assistance to athletes who are gifted with a particular trait in whatever sport they're good at.

But I think for the games themselves, we have to maintain the level of keeping as much on the partici patory level, and getting the maximum number possi ble involved in the eight zones and in the games themselves. There is no question about it: almost every other province in the Dominion of Canada is coming and asking us about the games and their success. That has resulted strictly from the accept ance by the people at the local level of the participa tory part of that event. So I think what I would like to see is every community where it's possible to host the games at some stage having that opportunity.

Right now we have the Summer Games one year, the Winter Games the next. They alternate every other year, so there isn't a Summer Games every year and a Winter Games every year. One of the reasons for that was the fact that we begin to run out of volunteers to help, because it takes a tremendous number of volunteers in the community that is suc cessful in getting the games. In fact they really have to work for about a year and a half toward making sure everything's in place: officials, people in charge of accommodation, people in charge of catering, peo ple in charge of the ceremonies.

A tremendous amount of work is done by those people. Without them, the games couldn't be a success at all. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, to the hon. minister. Can the minister indicate how many people are directly responsible for co-ordinating — the director and the co-ordinating people responsible for putting on, let's say, the Summer Games — who are being paid direct ly by the department? How large is this co-ordinating body? MR. ADAIR: I'm not sure if I understand your question. DR. BUCK: Mr. Minister, there must be a director responsible for organizing the Summer Games.

How many people in your department or in this gentle man's or woman's department are there for co ordinating the games per se? MR. ADAIR: Within the games part of what was Sport Alberta, basically two. They are still on staff under the games council that hasn't yet been appointed. Within the department we have our regular people in the sport and fitness branch who work with them and with the host community.

Once the host community has been named, in this case Medicine Hat, they will be naming a person to be the co-ordinator for that community — in the Red Deer area I believe a fellow by the name of Keith Carscadden is the co-ordinator of the games — who then sits on that body to work with them for the balance of the year before the Summer Games this September. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, one other area concerns me. I believe the hon. Member for Drumheller brought this up too.

How is the athlete, the youngster way out in northeastern Alberta, made aware of the fact that the Summer Games are going to be in Medicine Hat on such and such a date? If he's a gifted athlete, how does he make it? The reason I ask this question, Mr. Minister through the Chairman, is that I have four youngsters from grade 12 to grade 5. I haven't had one of those kids come home and say to me, you know we've got a program going in our school; I may be good enough to get down to the games in Medicine Hat this summer. So I'd like to know from the minister, Mr. Chairman: just how good

708 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 is that publicity and co-ordination, so the youngsters are aware that they could participate in the Summer Games? In the minister's opinion, is that sufficiently co-ordinated so that everybody who is gifted has a crack at the games? MR. ADAIR: Well, I guess I should clarify right now, Mr. Chairman, that it isn't a case of the games being for the gifted. The games are for anyone, really from 3 to 90 years of age; it's participatory. Now, from that come some of the gifted. I can go back to a couple of years ago; a young Chinese lad in southern Alberta was quite a good runner.

He was a winner at one of the games in Calgary. Then he went on through the Alberta Track and Field Association to some fairly significant successes. But the way of getting the message back to the grass roots, if I can use that term, in the various zones is through the recreation directors. I really think that in fact is happening. In the regional zone playoffs that led to the winners out there going to the games, for example, in the Summer Games of 1974, there were some 43,000 participants at the zone level.

That increased to roughly 67,000 in 1975 for the Summer Games, for the two games that we had during the summer. We had roughly 38,000 in the regional level for the Winter Games of 1976, held this past February in Banff. So I think there is fair communication with the various organizations in the communities through the recreation directors and zone directors who are appointed by their various provincial sport governing bodies. They're involved with that as to the sports that will be in the games themselves. At Red Deer this year, I believe 26 or 27 sports will be involved in the Summer Games.

Right now that kind of informa tion is being disseminated to the various zones, so they in fact can start gearing toward those particular sports for the Summer Games of September. Agreed to: Vote 2 Total Program $27,252,560 Vote 3 DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to make a comment or two. Looking at provincial parks, in our perusal of the estimates in subcommittee I wasn't really satisfied in my own mind that there was suffi cient co-ordination between the minister's depart ment, the minister responsible for lands, and the Minister of Business Development and Tourism.

When looking at an overall master plan of what we're trying to do to develop not only recreational programs but recreational facilities, it seemed to me the Minis ter of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife, because he's the biggest of these three, should be the guy able to grab the scruffs of the necks of the other two minis ters and say, hey guys, we've got a recreation pro gram set up and it's going to be done this way, this way, and this way.

Because we have a plan, hon. minister responsible for Crown lands, we're going to ask you for the land; and we're going to advise you, Minister of Business Development and Tourism, that we're going to develop a ski facility in X area. I think without that kind of co-ordination, Mr. Chairman, we're really running around in circles. I think the ultimate decision should rest with the min ister in co-ordination with these other two depart ments as to what we're going to do for recreation in the entire province and where we're going to do it. In the hearings of the subcommittee, Mr.

Chairman, I just didn't feel we had that kind of plan. I'd like the minister to give us his feelings on this, because I think it is an area of genuine concern. MR. ADAIR: When it comes to dealing in the area of provincial parks, I have the clout. When we're talking about areas related to recreational use on Crown land, I have a word in with my colleague, of whom I can say very clearly we work very well together. That particular area doesn't really concern me at this point in time because of our ability to work together.

That's not just with the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, the Associate Minister responsible for lands, or the Minister of Agriculture; whoever it may be. When we're dealing in those areas relating par ticularly to Crown land outside provincial parks and the planning for use of that land relative to the trail systems, or whatever we're talking about, when we come down to specifics in the area of parks that certainly fits into that planning as well.

As I stated at that time in the estimates in subcommittee, through the minister we in fact had a plan being prepared for approval of cabinet that would relate primarily to the eastern slopes but could be expanded to the rest of Alberta. That dealt with areas where we could put in place trail systems or outdoor recreational opportunities in addition to the parks. Because we're relating now to all three divi sions of my department: recreation and outdoor rec reation, the parks division and its particular role, and the fish and wildlife division and how they relate to the other two, as well as the lands branch.

So I think we're getting into the more complex areas of that. I can assure you that we have no problems in working together in that area. And I hope you'll accept that assurance. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I have a little bit of a question in my mind. When we revamped — this last round of musical chairs the Premier had, to sort out his ministers and the new ministries — I really think, Mr. Chairman, to the minister, that these three de partments together is just too big a job for one minister to handle. I really do.

Even though the minister is of broad stature and works 16 hours a day, I think this shotgun marriage of these three depart ments was too hastily conceived. I think it's too much. I wish you a long life and hope you don't burn out trying to administer this department. I just think it's too big. I think it's too cumbersome. I think it's so broad that one man can't co-ordinate it. MR. DIACHUK: Walt's going to ask you for a favor now. DR. BUCK: I don't want any more ministers though, Mr. Minister. But I think we could get rid of two or three others and split this one up. We could go that route.

But I think it is a genuine concern, at least from the people who have given me some direction in this department. They feel it's just too large. I'd like to just ask a question, Mr. Chairman, to the minister. On 3.3 and 3.5 — the minister knows we

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 709 had a little go around on this — we're spending almost $2 million in planning parks and only $2 mil lion in building parks. Either we're going to do really a lot of planning and then in the next two or three years build a lot of parks, or we're certainly spending too much money on planning. When we see ads in the Edmonton Journal every weekend looking for these $20,000 and $30,000 per year people, maybe we're spending too much money on planning and not enough on building the parks. So for the record, I would like the minister's opinion on the relationship between 3.3 and 3.5.

I know there's some capital in 3.3 which will jack that figure up. It still seems we're almost going dollar for dollar three as to planning versus construction. I'd like the minister's opinion or his feeling on this. MR. ADAIR: I'm not sure I should give you my opin ion. I'll try to say it in another fashion. I appreciate the comments you made. I really think one of the best moves we made was to put recreation, parks and wildlife together so those particular ones that relate to our outdoor leisure time and recreation use are in fact there.

If I had my choice, I could probably say the one area we missed was putting tourism in with this. We'd have a pretty nice package. But I may have some comments from my colleague. One of the areas related to the amount of dollars is in the Alberta Public Works capital budget, which would more than double that particular one. That'll give you the other amount of money being spent on the capital side. I guess I should point out too that this year 29 provincial parks are being worked on, actually having some construction work done. Plus of course the fact that we're doing the planning for the newer, larger parks.

We're getting into that area now. Primarily the parks department has been made up of a takeover of the old municipal parks through the years. We're now getting to the stage where we're doing complete planning and getting into park devel opment from square one, if I can use that particular point in time, and then moving on from that point to the larger parks. So planning is a very important component of the new policy announced in 1973 by my colleague. Hopefully we'll be updating it some time this summer, for a later announcement in the fall or possibly early next spring when we change some of the areas around.

Certainly from the stand point of dollars, what appears to be fairly close to equal in this particular one does not include the capital budget in APW. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to ask the minister if his attention has been directed to the Clearwater forest reserve and a group of students who did a study on that area and made some recommendations. Has the minister had a chance to look at that and at some of the recommendations by the students who did that study? MR. ADAIR: I have their letter. I haven't had a chance to meet with them as yet. But I will be meeting with them sometime in the near future.

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I just have one or two comments to make. I'd like to commend the govern ment on the work they are doing in provincial parks. I hear one criticism at the grass roots: it seems to be a long time to complete the various provincial parks. The parks affect the everyday lives of almost every body in a community, particularly during the summer period. In the Drumheller community the hon. Dr. Warrack, when he was minister, announced the acceptance of the large Midland area property for a provincial park. This was received with applause by the people of the whole area.

The department has been working on plans for that and I fully support that idea of getting this carefully planned before actual construction starts. However people are becoming very impatient and feel the planning is taking too long. I understand from the minister's remarks in committee that the planning is now reaching conclusion. I hope the minister will then provide an opportunity for input from the community, because many people there have had a lot of experience in this type of thing.

The way it is being planned, in my view it is going to be one of the most interesting parks in western Canada, unique in western Canada, maybe in this part of the continent. I would like to see more money put into parks. But when I look at the budget and see a 15.6 per cent increase over last year — this is beyond the guide lines, although the total program is under the guide lines — I can hardly recommend that more be put into parks this year. But I do think this item might be called one of the bread-and-butter issues, because it affects the lives of men, women, boys, and girls of all ages.

I would like to express the hope that we could advance the cause of provincial parks even more than we are doing today. I realize that Alberta has a very large expenditure on two urban parks, and this too is something unique in Canada and almost unique in this part of the country. When I was in central America some years ago, I was thrilled with the parks I saw right in the heart of the cities. I think it is going to be a real boost for all the people of Alberta when we get the two parks, in Calgary and Edmonton. At the same time, people do like their own provin cial parks.

All I want to say is, I hope the hon. minister will move as quickly as possible not only in completing plans but also in completing construction in our various provincial parks. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister a question or two about the Capital City Park. First of all the original estimate that the Premier somehow pulled out from on high . . . we've never to this moment seen a feasibility study on how we're going to spend just $35 million. Already we've had a little waffle, already it's been said, well that was 1974 dollars.

So if it ends up $110 million, sorry folks, these are 1978 and 1979 dollars. Mr. Chairman, I was driving by the new Common wealth Stadium today. I would like to say that at least one member of cabinet who was quite an athlete in his day — and he's got the bad knees to prove it — was trying to get some money so we could look at covering the stadium in Edmonton and the stadium in Calgary. I say right in my place, Mr. Chairman, that the government should have had the guts to have indicated to the cities of Edmonton and Calgary — which will affect all the people of northern and

710 ALBERTA HANSARD April 13, 1977 southern Alberta — that these two facilities could be covered. I can't think of any other place in North America that has people who support athletic events like we do in Edmonton and Calgary and the sur rounding areas. I can't think of any other places in the cotton-picking world that need a covered stadium more than Edmonton or Calgary. MR. GETTY: Regina? DR. BUCK: I was really hoping the hon. Premier would have gone to Ottawa to bounce 'Joe Who' so we would have had the hon. Mr.

Getty in the Pre mier's chair, so we would have had some leadership in providing covered stadia for these two facilities. [interjections] Because we build a facility like the Commonwealth Stadium with absolutely no provision to cover that cotton-picking facility. If that isn't waste of the taxpayer's money, Mr. Chairman, I don't know what is. [interjections] We could have taken some of the dollars here, because this $35 million was the estimate without any study. I say, Mr. Chairman, without any study at all. It got 19 P.C. MLAs re-elected in Edmonton, so it served that purpose.

But there was absolutely no study [interjections] to indicate it was only going to be $35 million. So I would like to know — after my little plug about getting Getty elevated to the Premier's chair, because he would have covered those two stadia . . . AN HON. MEMBER: Keep it up. DR. BUCK: . . . if the minister can indicate to us how close we are coming to that $35 million figure al ready, and what his estimation [is] of what it's going to cost the taxpayers of Alberta when the Capital City Park's project is completed. MR. ADAIR: Mr.

Chairman, he was making such a good speech that I just didn't have the heart to stop him and tell him that he'll have to ask that question when the estimates of the Minister of the Environ ment come up. I handle the operating costs of that particular park. That's the only involvement I have with the Capital City Park. So I can't respond to the costs or cost estimates of that. You'll have to wait until the esti mates of the good Minister of the Environment come up. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, we'll have a go at Fish Creek, Calgary then, because the minister is respon sible for that one. Right? MR. ADAIR: Yes. DR.

BUCK: Okay, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Minister. The original cost was going to be about $15 million. Can the minister indicate what are we looking at now? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Chairman, I have to say again that the land purchase division of the Department of the Environment handles the land purchase for that park. We haven't completed all the the purchases relating to Fish Creek Park so I can't give you a total figure. As a matter of fact, I can't give you an update as to where they are with the actual land purchases to this particular point. I know we have all the land east of the Macleod Trail.

We're working on that area right now with the development of the park facility in that particular side of it. Beyond that, I can't respond with the total costs or the actual dollars spent to date for land purchase. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, back to covering the two stadia in Edmonton and Calgary. Have there been any meetings recently between the minister and cities of Edmonton or Calgary to look at putting covers over these two stadia? MR. ADAIR: No, there haven't, Mr. Chairman. DR. BUCK: Absolutely no discussions whatsoever? MR. ADAIR: Absolutely no discussion whatsoever. DR.

BUCK: That's the kind of leadership I like to see, Mr. Chairman. No leadership is what we're getting. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the minister a question now about the Alberta Game Farm. [interjections] Can the minister responsible for recreation, parks, and wildlife in this waffle government indicate to us what is the status of the discussions between the minister's department and the owner of the Game Farm? MR. ADAIR: Yes I can. This certainly isn't in any way, shape or form a waffle. This has been straight right from the horse's mouth [interjection] right here.

I don't know exactly what position the people who are negotiating with Dr. Oeming — I don't know where they're at, because that's not between us and Dr. Oeming. That's between the individuals, group, or whoever it may be. They have until April 30 if they wish to apply to us for assistance. If on April 30 we get an application from a group that shows financial capability and what not, at that particular point in time we will begin negotiations with Dr. Oeming for the land. In other words, nothing has happened. We have not received any applications to date.

I am aware that other groups have in fact been talking to Dr. Oeming. But they have been direct negotiations between ei ther the Lions Club, who were asked to wait by Dr. Oeming, or a group that emerged after that particular point. I'm not sure where they're at right now. They have not contacted us — nor do they have to, I should point that out, unless they wish to. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, for the record then, the government has discussed only the purchase of the land so that the Alberta Game Farm location would be where it is now.

So the only negotiations or discussions would be as far as purchasing the land, not the animals? MR. ADAIR: That is very clear. It was very clear on February 1 that we would provide a land base as the provincial contribution to any bona fide organization — I'll go through them again: non-profit service organization, foundation or association, and/or any Alberta municipal authority [who are] prepared to purchase and operate the . . . Game Farm. We would be prepared to assist them by providing the

April 13, 1977 ALBERTA HANSARD 711 land base, either that particular site through negotia tion or an alternate site. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. Has the minister, the cabinet, or the caucus given any consid eration to purchasing the farm per se and allowing the foundation to run it? I know the minister would be hard pressed by his colleagues and say, we just don't want the bureaucracy to get any larger. I've heard that defense already, Mr. Minister. Have ther

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19770413
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L18 S3 19770413 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a1d57df1b939c0e0b38213b4e74a54a2489bbd3f

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