Alberta Hansard — 4 April 2007, Afternoon sitting (13:00) (Legislature 26, Session 3)

20070404

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 397 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Wednesday, April 4, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/04/04 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. We give thanks for the bounty of our province, our land, our resources, and our people. We pledge ourselves to act as good stewards on behalf of all Albertans. Amen. Please be seated. head: Member’s Apology The Speaker: Hon. members, before the Clerk identifies the Routine, we do have a matter of business that needs to be concluded, a matter of business that extends from yesterday.

Yesterday afternoon the chair offered to the Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie an opportunity to withdraw certain comments and to apologize. The member has returned today, so the chair will ask the hon. member if he is prepared to do such. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I recognize that some of the wording in my questions yest erday was inappropriate for this Assembly and that there were some offending comments. I would like to withdraw the comments made during question period yesterday. I’m sorry if anybody was offended by my question. That was not my intention.

Thank you. head: Introduction of Visitors The Speaker: Hon. members, I’m pleased to introduce a distin- guished member of our armed forces who has done much for our country and for this province and the Edmonton region. In the Speaker’s gallery is Brigadier-General Tim Grant, a cavalry officer who has commanded the Lord Strathcona’s Horse. Prior to his deployment to Afghanistan six months ago he was the Commander Land Force Western Area. Here on a brief mid-tour leave, he will resume his duties as Commander Task Force Afghanistan, National Command Element, in Kandahar in just a few days from now.

He is well chosen for what is surely the most challenging operational command in the Canadian army since Korea. His exceptional abilities and unrivalled experience will be put to good use as he is to be promoted to major general this summer to take a key leadership position in the Canadian Expeditionary Force Command. This organization is charged with mounting and sustaining the operations of our forces abroad.

Brigadier-General, it may be of interest to you to know that a former member of this Assembly, Douglas Corney Breton, an MLA from 1926 to 1930, served in Afghanistan during World War I as a member of the British Expeditionary Force. Throughout his long and varied career General Grant has been supported by his very lovely and charming wife, Sharon. The Grants are accompanied by the Honorary Lieutenant Colonel of 15 Military Police Company, Sol Rolingher, and his wife, Marilyn.

Brigadier-General Grant, please return safely to Afghanistan and take with you the thanks, the prayers, and the best wishes of the people of Alberta and convey such to all of those in your command. We’re pleased and honoured to have you with us today. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, please. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On your behalf I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the House 76 visitors: 66 grade 6 students from Westlock elementary school, who are accompanied this after noon by teachers Mr.

Dan McDonald, Mrs. Sandy Jones, Mrs. Maggie Cournoyer, Mr. Marcel Turcotte, and Mrs. Linda Wallace. In addition, program assistants Mrs. Randi Lethebe and Mrs. Chantal Roberts are in attendance as well as parent helpers Mrs. Donna Turner, Mrs. Lynne Proulx, and Mrs. Rachelle Koch. They are seated, I believe, in both galleries. I’d ask that they rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly Danielle Smith, the Alberta director of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, representing over 9,200 Alberta businesses who serve millions of the c itizens we represent. She’s also accompanied today by Janine Halbesma, the senior policy analyst, as well as Daryl Hanak, the executive director of trade policy in my ministry.

This organization represents the entrepre- neurial spirit of Albertans in serving Albertans as customers and in the work of the trade, mobility, investment agreement that we signed with British Columbia. I’d ask th em to rise and receive the very warm welcome of this Assembly today. The Speaker: The hon. President of the Treasury Board. Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Truly, the eyes of the financial world are on Alberta, and it is my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly a number of guests with JPMorgan securities. Their offices are in New York and Denver.

Today, we have joining us Vivian Altman, Paul Ryan, and Marshall Crawford. Also visiting the Assembly today are Robert Clare of Sullivan & Worcester in New York and John Burns of Gowling Lafleur Henderson, based out of Calgary. I would ask them to all rise and accept the warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr. Lougheed: Mr. Speaker, later on this afternoon a group from Ardrossan high school will be here, and with your indulgence I’ll maybe be able to introduce them at that time. The Speaker: Okay. Calgary-Foothills. Mr. Webber: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s been approximately two and a half years since I was first elected to this House, and in that time I’ve never had a visitor. Not until today. Therefore, I’d like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly three constituents of mine from Calgary-Foothills who have come up here today from Calgary to visit the Alberta Legislature and to get a bird’s-eye view of what goes on here in the House. I’d like to thank Mrs. Janice Osgood, Geoff Osgood, and Julie Osgood for coming here today to visit, and I would ask that they please rise and accept the warm welcome of the Assembly.

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007398 The Speaker: And what is the hon. member’s office room number? Mr. Webber: My office is 701, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: All hon. members might want to visit. The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Rev. Abbott: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This morning in your prayers you thanked our Creator for the bounty of our province. Later this afternoon I’ll be having a meeting with a couple of my constituents. I’d like them to rise as I say their names: Erwin Zotzman and Ken Bilou.

We’ll be meeting regarding their concerns over the management of fish populations in Pigeon Lake and in particular the stocking of walleye and the subsequent low numbers of lake whitefish. We hope that those numbers can change. I’d like these gentlemen to rise and please receive the warm welcome of our Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two introductions today, in fact. First, it’s a great privilege for me to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly Bill and Margaret Kurtze of Calgary.

Bill Kurtze is the nominated Alberta Liberal candidate for the Calgary-Hays constituency. Bill brings 30 years of experience in the oil and gas industry to his candidacy, including a stint as manager of the Independent Petroleum Associa- tion of Canada and another as managing director of the Propane Gas Association. Ably supported by his wife, Margaret, Bill promises to be an outstanding public servant when the voters of Calgary-Hays choose him to be their next MLA.

Bill and Margaret, could you please rise and accept the warm welcome of members of the Assembly. 1:10 I’m also pleased to introduce a number of visitors from the Battle River-Wainwright area. They’re seated in the public gallery: Ken Eshpeter, Jerry Iwanus, Paul Schorak, and Roger Holmes. These fine gentlemen are politically minded citizens, very active in the Alberta Liberal constituency association for Battle River-Wain- wright. They’ve made immense contributions to their communities over the years as public servants, entrepreneurs, farmers, and volunteers.

In short, they’re simply really good, civic-minded people, and I’m proud to have them join us today. But, Mr. Speaker, I am most proud to introduce Jerry’s terrific young daughter Jillian. She’s 10 years old, a wonderful y oung lady. Jillian represents the future of this province, and when we MLAs make decisions in this House, we must always keep people like her foremost in our minds. Would those guests please rise and accept the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of my colleague from Edmonton-Meadowlark I would like to introduce 46 students from Aldergrove elementary school. They’re accompanied by their teachers Mrs. Christine Steil and Mrs. Sandy Colquhoun and parent helpers Ms Janet Walker, Mr. Ed Cox, Mrs. Mary Jane Meeker, Ms Tracy Miller, and Mrs. Karen Auger. I’d like to have them stand and receive the warm welcome of this House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly members of the executive board of the Operative Plasterers’ and Cement Masons’ International Association, local 222. In the spring of 1907 a group of tradesmen in the plastering trade formed a local union here in Edmonton and were chartered as local 372 of the Operative Plasterers’ and Cement Masons’ International Associa- tion. For 100 years the members of this union have helped build Alberta as a province, and in 2007 they celebrate their centennial year.

The legacy of their contribution and skills as tradesmen is evident today throughout our province in our hospitals, schools, bridges, and refineries. The members of this local are particularly proud of the ornate decorative plasterwork throughout this Legisla- ture Building, which was applied by the founders of this union. Examples of that can be seen in our Chamber today.

In attendance today is the executive board of local 222, who I will now ask to rise as I call out their names: Richard Wassill, the business manager and financial secretary; Ed Arko, the president; James Conway, the vice-president and business agent; Peter Harvey, the vice-president; and Dennis Ossevorth, the sergeant-at-arms. I would now ask that they receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my extreme pleasure to rise to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly Ms Tiffany McBride, my executive assistant and the constituency office administrator for Edmonton-McClung. Ms McBride is a graduate of Queen’s University, with a degree in psychology and history. She’s currently enrolled at the U of A, taking introductory courses towards her law degree. I probably don’t keep Ms McBride busy enough. This young lady is going to volunteer with the Habitat for Humanity women build program this summer.

What’s more, she also finds time to help with her very own family-run, successful mulching business, and at 23 she’s also the guardian for her two younger brothers. I invite her to stand, please, and receive the traditional warm welcome of this House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and members of the Assembly David Hohnstein and Richard Konkin. Dave has been at the Palace Casino off and on for 11 years and is currently a pit boss.

Dave has made the gaming industry his career and has worked within it for 20 years. Richard is a dealer at the casino and has been there seven years. He is a member of the union’s bargaining committee and provides a great deal of knowledge to the process. On any given evening you can come by the picket line and see Richard working hard for his members. They are valued members of UFCW 401, and they’re looking forward to the end of the strike. I might point out that it’s now the longest strike in UFCW 401’s history.

They are in the public gallery, and I would ask that they rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Speaker. Canadian University Women’s Curling Champions Mr. Marz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have yet another Canadian curling success story. I stand today to acknowledge the Canadian

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 399 women’s gold medal winning university curling team. The team consists of four University of Calgary students: Brittany Gregor, the skip; Katrine Fisette; Heather Hansen; and of course Hayley Pattison from the village of Carbon in my constituency. The team qualified to represent Canada by winning the Canadian university nationals in Winnipeg. They then went on to compete very strongly at the 2007 World University Games in Torino, Italy. These young women demonstrated great poise and confidence coming back from an early deficit in the gold medal match to defeat Russia.

The dramatic conclusion saw Brittany Gregor make her last shot in the 10th end to lead Team Canada to victory. They felt privileged to go abroad and challenge their abilities in an international field. They faced the most elite curlers for their age group, and through determination and great work ethic they accomplished their goal. They represented our c ountry and their university with passion and respect. As ambassadors for their sport they displayed the qualities and characteristics of champions.

I’m sure these young women will have a prominent future in the sport of curling, and I want to take this opportunity to wish them continued success with all their athletic and academic endeavours. Once again, congratulations on their win. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Melvin Crump Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week I had the privilege, along with a number of my colleagues, to attend the Calgary Glenbow Museum’s new permanent exhibition, Mavericks: The Incorrigible History of Alberta.

This new gallery tells the story of Alberta through the lives of 48 mavericks whose stories embody the Alberta pioneering spirit, hard work, passion, and can-do attitude. Some of these historical mavericks are still with us, including former Premier Peter Lougheed and Mr. Melvin Crump. We all know of Peter Lougheed, so today I want to speak about Melvin Crump, a friend and a constituent. In 1910, 160 African-Americans from Oklahoma came to settle in a small community about 100 miles north of Edmonton later known as Amber Valley. Out of this group came a very special individual named Melvin Crump.

Melvin’s childhood was not an easy one. Melvin’s mother died when he was 10, then right after that his older sister died. At a young age his father and older brother left home. He was raised by his grandmother. He had to quit school after grade 8 and find a paying job, from shining shoes to killing chickens and labouring farm work. Where Melvin really shone was his strong passion for self- learning, for human rights, and equality. He worked as a sleeping car porter on CP Rail, travelling across the country. He stood up for the rights of the black porters, who worked long hours and were paid the lowest wages.

He challenged bigotry and the prejudice of those who practise intolerance. It come s as no surprise that he later became the president of the Alberta association for the advancement of coloured people. Throughout his life Melvin Crump sought respect. He received it both for himself and others. Melvin Crump is now 91 years old and still full of life and energy. About the only aspect in Melvin’s life that has slowed down is due to doctor’s orders. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Farm Debt Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta’s total farm debt outstanding in 2005 was $10.7 billion.

Alberta certainly is not debt free. The total farm debt in Canada in 2005 was a staggering $50 billion. Alberta farmers owe 21 per cent of that debt. Interest payments alone on this debt totalled $491 million in 2005. Alberta farmers owe this money to three major lenders: provincial govern- ment agencies, federal government agencies, and our chartered banks. Let’s have a look at what has happened to Alberta farmers’ borrowing trends in the last 10 years. 1:20 In 1996 provincial government agencies held 26 per cent of the debt. In 2005 they held 21 per cent of the debt.

In 1996 federal government agencies held 8 per cent of the debt. In 2005 their loans increased to close to 18 per cent. In 1996 chartered banks held 47 per cent of the debt. In 2005 this had dropped to 41 per cent. Farm income is certainly related to Alberta farm input costs. Fertilizer, seed, fuel, electricity, and equipment costs always seem to be increasing. I hope interest rates for this $10.7 billion debt continue to be manageable. I urge this government to ensure that the cost of credit does not force more farmers into unnecessary bankruptcy. I know that farmers follow commodity price reports daily.

They also follow the rise and fall of interest rates for very good reason. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Shaw. Excellence in Teaching Awards Mrs. Ady: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today it is my sincere pleasure to recognize a very important group of people whose work has a personal and lasting impact on Alberta’s citizens. Of course, I’m referring to Alberta’s fine teachers. Through their passion, commit- ment, and encouragement teachers motivate our youth to achieve their individual dreams. I think of my second son, who couldn’t read; in fact, couldn’t read through a repeat grade 1 year.

Because of the good work of teachers by the end of grade 6 he had read almost every book in the library and is today getting ready to apply to law school. Mr. Speaker, they make a difference. These significant contributions do not go unnoticed. Each year Alberta’s excellence in teaching awards program celebrates the teaching profession by honouring outstanding teachers and princi- pals from across our province. The excellence in teaching award offers a wonderful way to say thank you. In fact, simply being nominated is a tremendous compliment and an honour. Mr.

Speaker, the 2007 finalists were announced today, and I am very proud to say that 22 of the 130 are from Calgary. Soon this year’s recipients will be honoured at a special awards ceremony. Since its inception in 1989 over 400 t eachers have received an excellence in teaching award and over 7,900 have been nominated. This program is possible with the support of many individuals who nominate teachers and organizations and who collaborate every year with Alberta Education.

The supporters are the Alberta Home and School Councils’ Association, the Alberta Sc hool Boards Association, the Alberta Teachers’ Association, the Edmonton Journal, the SMARTer Kids Foundation, and Xerox. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this government and all Albertans and my son I want to say congratulations to all those teachers who have been recognized through this year’s excellence in teaching awards program, and once again say to all our teachers: thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity.

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007400 Pine Beetle Control in Kananaskis Country Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Friday the 13th for the forest: killing the Kananaskis. On Friday, April 13, the Calgary Liberal caucus will be hosting a rally at the McDougall Centre at noon to draw attention to clear-cutting concerns in the unprotected Kananaskis watershed, that supplies over a million Calgarians with their drinking water.

Using the threat of a pine beetle attack as a justification for razing or clear-cutting the forest, the ministry of unsustainable practices with ne gligible public consultation has dramatically worsened its original flawed forest management agreement by ignoring tree size, age, susceptibility, and biodiversity. When the cure is far worse than the disease, ignores scientific evidence, and does not take into account the multivalues of a tree standing in comparison to its bulldozed, bargain basement, glutted softwood market worthlessness, then this government has lost the confidence of its electors.

The term “sustainable resources” has become an oxymoron given this government’s mismanagement of our natural capital. The term “multi-use” is in reality a code word, a licence for multi-abuse. Pine beetles are not locusts that eat every piece of vegetation in sight. Pine beetles are selective of their hosts, preferring wider diameter trees preferably over 80 years of age, which are not typically found in abundance in either the Bragg Creek, Sibbald Flats, or Ghost-Waiparous areas, where the government has relinquished its stewardship to Spray Lakes logging.

Through selective logging and controlled burns pine beetles can be managed without sacrificing our forests, water quantity and quality. A Liberal government will balance both economic and environmental stewardship, leaving a legacy for future generations to value and share. The Speaker: Government House Leader, I was advised that a government member had switched places for Members’ Statements from today to tomorrow. Is there another government member to participate today? head: Presenting Petitions Mr.

Graydon: I’m pleased to present the required number of copies of documents containing 1,602 signatures of residents of Beaverlodge and surrounding areas, including Hythe, Elmworth, Valhalla Centre, Rio Grande, La Glace, and Demmitt, pointing out that the Beaverlodge hospital is th e oldest hospital in Alberta, and it’s time for Beaverlodge to have a new hospital. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have 1,005 signatures: We, the undersigned residents of Alberta, petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government to add the drug Elaprase to the Drug Benefit List approved by Alberta Health and Wellness in order to ensure that those suffering from Hunter’s Syndrome, including Jordan Miranda, Riley Miranda and Tyler Chauhan, get the care they need to reduce their suffering and live full lives. head: Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to Standing Orders the government wishes to give notice of the following with respect to written questions a nd motions for return. On April 16 the government intends to deal with written questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. We also wish to give notice that it is the intention to accept questions 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. We’ll be presenting an amendment to Question 2, and we’ll deal with Question 3 in the usual manner. The balance of the written questions w ill be moved to stand and retain their places. With respect to motions for return the government intends to deal with motions for return 1, 2, and 3.

We’ll be advising that we will be accepting Motion for a Return 3. The balance will stand and retain their places. head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Bill 26 Municipal Government Amendment Act, 2007 Mr. Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to request leave to introduce Bill 26, the Municipal Government Amendment Act, 2007. The bill introduces amendments to sections 322 and 534 of the act. [Motion carried; Bill 26 read a first time] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Agriculture and Food. Mr.

Groeneveld: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to file with the Assembly five copies of my letter to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar in response to questions raised during debate of Bill 20, the Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2007, on March 20, 2007. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, I’m tabling more copies of letters received by my office urging the government to provide funding for the cancer-fighting drug Avastin.

In doing so, I’d like to reiterate that people who require this treatment can expect to pay $1,750 every two weeks and that the drug is already covered by the cancer boards in B.C., Quebec, and Newfoundland. Today’s letters were received from Dennis Koshman, Joanne Nelson, Koreen Bennett, Lillian Procter, Barb Falk, Maggie Bullen, Brian Massey, Victor Cerhit, Allison Diebert, and Laura Lewis. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to rise today to table the appropriate number of copies of the Beth Israel congregation 100th anniversary gala program book. This wonderful book commemorates the congregation’s centennial. The celebration took place on January 28, 2007, at the Beth Israel synagogue in my constituency of Edmonton-McClung. I attended along with the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition, the Minister of Finance, and the MLA for Edmonton-Glenora. It was a wonderful event. All the best to the congregation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: 1:30 Oral Question Period The Speaker: Before I call on the hon.

Leader of the Official Opposition, I have been notified that there will be a point of order at the conclusion of the Routine by the hon. Member for Edmonton-

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 401 Beverly-Clareview, and I think I should alert the hon. Government House Leader with respect to this matter. First Official Opposition question for today. The Leader of the Official Opposition. Community Initiatives Program Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Minister for Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture was asked why his depart- ment is breaking its own rules for the community initiatives program by allowing nonmatching grants over $10,000, but instead of answering our question, the minister dodged it and simply repeated the rules, the very rules that appear to have been broken so often. So my question to the Minister of Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture: why is the minister refusing to admit that the granting rules for the community initiatives program were broken 43 times in three years, totalling over $2 million?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Goudreau: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m very, very proud to have the first question of question period. I guess suffice it to say, Mr. Speaker, you know, that all of our applicants are reviewed, and certainly our staff go through all the applications to make sure that the group qualifies for funding. Part of the discussions that they have with the applicants is whether or not the particular amount will meet their particular needs, and those applications are adjusted then up and down. It’s based on the discussions . . . The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr.

Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The rules are actually written in black and white, although perhaps for this government they’re in grey. The culture of entitlement around this government is more obvious every day. The people of Alberta want everyone to play by the rules, especially their own government. To the same minister: what safeguards are in place to prevent political interfer- ence in the granting process? Mr. Goudreau: Well, Mr. Speaker, certainly our workers, our staff members are the ones that actually work with the various groups.

They will make the recommendations to the minister, and they will indicate where there’s a need for a certain amount of compassion to allow a particular project to move forward. For the most part, you know, those recommendations are made to the minister, and the minister will agree or deny it on the basis of what comes across his desk. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you. This question is to the Premier. There is an opportunity for the Premier to show real leadership here. The rules are in black and white. They appear to have been broken.

So to the Premier: will the Premier in vite a forensic audit of the CIP program by the Auditor General? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I have great faith in our Auditor General. He’s done a good job over the years, and if he sees fit to undertake whatever kind of audit he wishes, we’re open. We’ve always followed his recommendations in all the years that I’ve served in this government. We’ve always been open and transpar- ent, and we’ll continue to do so. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When a university sorority received an $18,000 CIP grant for posh furniture, the government broke CIP application rule 7. Albertans learned today that this grant was awarded to an organization led by the daughter of a well- connected Tory. To the Minister of Tourism, Recreation, Parks and Culture: given that we only have details of this one grant and it looks highly political, can the minister assure this House that there was no political interference in any of the other grants that violated the rules? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, certainly, I did some digging around on this particular one, and I can table that later if you choose. Alpha Gamma Delta is a registered nonprofit organization. It was eligible and met all the criteria for a grant through the community initiatives program. We need to indicate as well that this organization actually does a lot of fundraising for local communities, and to date it’s raised and donated money to organizations off the U of A campus. They donate money to Edmonton’s Food Bank, juvenile diabetes, and women’s shelters, and it was for that reason that we supported them.

The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. They asked for $10,000 and got $18,000. The volunteers of this province work hard. They’re dedicated and honourable, and they expect to play by the rules. They are offended when the rules are broken. To the same minister: under what circumstances does an organization qualify for having rule 7 broken? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I want to share an example that we went through.

This is a letter – and again, I’m prepared to table this one – written by the Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark, and the letter says: “They informed me that they are facing a ‘grave financial situation’ and without short-term emergency funding the society is at risk of having to close its doors.” We responded to that particular one, and we did break our rules, if that’s what it was, but it allowed this particular organization to stay alive. The Speaker: And we’ll table at the appropriate time, right? Dr.

Taft: So to the Premier: will th e Premier live up to his words about transparency and openness and the secrecy around these deals and table the details of the 43 grants that were given in violation of the rules? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, this is another time, you know, that the Leader of the Official Opposition is making allegations. Remember, this House has certain privileges. To all those students sitting here, this House gives every elected member certain privileges, and they are not to bring about innuendo about any particular member in this House.

Two weeks ago he said he had some sort of a secret agreement between the government and the horse-racing industry. He made that statement in the House. Today he’s still not able to present it. So either stand up and say that you’re totally wrong or deliver on that promise that you made to this House. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie.

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007402 Affordable Housing Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [some applause] Settle down. Settle down. One of the most important issues facing this government is the issue of affordable housing. It affects so many Albertans who are demanding action from a government that has ignored the situation for years. And what a surprise, the government being unprepared for such a serious issue.

Now, while hundreds of Calgarians shiver in the street with the closing down of a temporary emergency shelter, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is blathering about a report that is weeks, if not months, away from seeing the light of day. Will the minister stop prattling on about partnerships and the like and admit that when it comes to providing affordable housing, the buck stops on his desk? If I was the minister, it would certainly stop on mine. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say that the government and the municipalities very much have a partnership in dealing with affordable housing and the homeless. As the hon. member across the way suggested, I want to explain that we do have a partnership in regard to emergency shelters. The province provides $23 million, of which $14 million goes to Calgary. The government also supplies money for the homeless, of which one- third goes to Calgary. As well, we have a program that is being brought forward between seven municipalities . . . The Speaker: Thank you. The hon. member. Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You know, the province has got to take leadership in solving the affordable housing crisis. The cities know it; social agencies know it; builders know it; constitu- tional experts know it; I know it; my colleagues know it; even the third party knows it. It seems everybody knows it except the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The time for solutions is now, not a few weeks from now. Will the minister immediately release the report of the Affordable Housing Task Force so that we can get on with the job? Mr. Danyluk: Mr.

Speaker, I think that for the dignity of all of the members that were on the task force that presented that task force report to the government on March 19, the government is looking at the recommendations, looking at what we can do, and making sure that the job is done right. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier is now the captain of this ship, and as he has said, he is in charge. It is time for him to show that he is up to the challenge of making a decision. We need goals, we need targets, and we need timelines because every- body needs a home.

When is the Premier going to order his minister to put down the shovel and release the report of the Affordable Housing Task Force? 1:40 Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, managing growth pressures is one of our top priorities of this government. Part of growth pressures, of course, is available housing, housing in different forms for the homeless, for the low-income earners, and those with young families that want to purchase their own home. We had a very good discussion, dialogue, with Albertans, an all-party committee. The report has now been delivered to the minister.

He is bringing recommendations to our government caucus. Once those decisions are made, again, we in this House will deliver to all Albertans on those recommendations to ensure th at we deal with this critical situation of housing. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Donations to Leadership Campaigns Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Donations to leadership campaigns for registered political parties are not under Alberta’s archaic election finance laws.

A number of members of this government, including the Premier, have received substantial donations from donors who are shrouded in secrecy. As a result, Albertans are unable to judge whether or not the decisions of this government are fair and free from favouritism. My questions are to the Premier. Will the Premier take steps to live up to his promise of openness and transparency and introduce legislation requiring disclosure of all campaign donations for leadership campaigns, including his own? Mr. Stelmach: That is a good question.

I said in this House that this is a topic of discussion with our party, the Progressive Conservative Party, in a policy conference, whatever the party agrees to do because this is joint party and government. But the one thing I want to say, though, which the opposition fails to mention and to recog- nize, is that finally in the province of Alberta we will have a lobbyist registry so that everybody will know who is lobbying government and – who knows? – they may even know who’s lobbying the opposition as well. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Some members of this Premier’s government have still not kept their promises to reveal financial totals and donors for their leadership campaigns. All of this has Albertans wondering who has the government’s ear. Speaker’s Ruling Oral Question Period Rules The Speaker: Hon. member, please sit down for a second. We’re on the edge here. Is it a government legal requirement in Alberta to do so? The member is insisting then – he’s talking about individu- als. It’s akin to saying the question to an MLA. You can’t do it in the House, so phrase it in such a way that we deal with policy, please.

Donations to Leadership Campaigns (continued) Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Will the govern- ment introduce a policy and bring in legislation, and will the Premier as a matter of policy direct his ministers to reveal how much they raised in their leadership bids and where it came from? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I hope there won’t be a leadership contest at least on this side of the House for a few years. In all fairness I hope there isn’t one on that side with the third party as well. We’d like to keep him where he is.

As I said in all honesty, this will be a topic of discussion at an annual policy conference, and we’ll be bringing that forward.

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 403 The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I noticed that only the front bench applauded that remark. There are many in the back that may have a different idea. Mr. Speaker, the Premier talks about transparency, but Albertans can see right through him. Will the Premier remove the cloud that hangs over this government as a result of secret and unrevealed campaign donations from the r ecent leadership campaign and introduce a policy and introduce legislation requiring real transpar- ency in the government? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, as I said before, we are going to work in this area, but I know what their issue is. There are a number of very good Liberals and good NDs that contributed to a lot of campaigns here, leadership campaigns, and they sure want to find out who the heck those people are. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Hays. Trade Route to Prince Rupert Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The port of Prince Rupert is fast becoming the port of Alberta. The lower elevation of our Yellowhead pass to Rupert means lower carbon emissions, less fuel use, and lower costs.

World maritime container traffic will almost triple by 2024, and this is the best route for the booming China trade. This port and connecting facilities must grow for our Alberta economy to continue to thrive. My question is to the Premier. What will the province do to make grow the vital port of Prince Rupert and the expansion of its container-handling facilities? Mr. Stelmach: Actually, Mr. Speaker, I’ve got to commend the member for quite a visionary question in terms of where this province is going in the future.

We know that to sustain this economy, we do have to increase trade, and we have to be globally competitive. The other most important issue here, of course, is that with respect to Prince Rupert it cuts a return trip by three and a half days. As well, it provides the city of Edmonton an opportunity to be a centre where we would not only collect containers, but we can also stuff them for export. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m surprised that the Official Opposition laughs because there was none of them at the conference on Prince Rupert last week.

A second question to the Premier, Mr. Speaker: what measures will this government take to ensure that railway lines are sufficient, routes are straight and safe, and that rail roadbeds are upgraded to ensure the greatest success of our Alberta Yellowhead route? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, in fact, the question that the member raised was the topic of discussion in a joint cabinet meeting with the province of B.C. and the province of Alberta on how both govern- ments can work towards securing, you know, a dedicated rail. Some dollars, of course, will go into upgrading the facility.

But for agriculture and for manufacturing this has great potential in reducing our costs and getting our product back to global markets. Most importantly, product coming to Alberta, to Canada go back empty to China. We have an opportunity now to stuff them and send them back to China and actually develop the economy. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Backs: Thank you. A supplementary to the Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry, Mr.

Speaker: what will the minister and her ministry be doing to make sure that Alberta business and industry maximize backhaul potential to the port of Prince Rupert for Alberta products? Ms Evans: Mr. Speaker, the Premier has instructed us as ministers to manage growth pressures as an initiative. Recently we hosted with Edmonton Economic Development, the mayors of Edmonton, Prince Rupert, and Prince George, as well as CN a meeting where we talked about how we could work more effectively together.

We’re participating in a study as well with Transport Canada, with Saskatchewan, and with Manitoba to look at how we can co-ordinate backhaul efforts. We recognize that this port shortens the travel time to Asia by at least one and a half days out of Vancouver and three days out of Los Angeles. So it is an excellent opportunity for development. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Hays, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Solicitor General Staff College Mr. Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Early this morning there was an alarming incident at the Solicitor General staff college in Edmonton when as many as 18 people fell violently ill to the point where paramedics were called in to attend the sick. The college remains shut down, and no one is allowed to enter or leave. My first question is to the Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security. Can he provide an update on this very serious situation at the college? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lindsay: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to assure the hon.

Member for Calgary-Hays that this is the first time that we’ve had an incident of this type at any of our facilities. We are working closely with Capital health to determine what caused these 18 people to become suddenly ill. I’m pleased to say that all individuals are recovering, and the staff college will not resume training until we are assured of a safe environment for all of our staff and recruits. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: what is being done to ensure that this type of incident does not happen again? Mr. Lindsay: Mr.

Speaker, Capital health is at the college right now. They are investigating to determine the exact nature of this illness and its cause, and based on their findings, we will take whatever action Capital health recommends to ensure that an incidence like this does not reoccur. The Speaker: The hon. member? The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View, followed by the hon. Member for Bonnyville-Cold Lake. 1:50 Racing Entertainment Centre Project Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Balzac situation has always been a political problem between the city of Calgary and the MD of Rocky View.

The government ignored this when someone in the government made assurances, no matter what denials we’ve

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007404 heard. Now Drumheller very clearly has said that they will not provide water to this project. They’re standing up for their people, and good for them. This government now has no choice but to try and force a deal between Calgary and the Rocky View MD. To the Premier: does the Premier take any responsibility for this fiasco? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, again, a very craftily worded question: someone in the government gave a promise, but, you know, there’s denial, and we don’t know who, but somebody in the government. You have the evidence.

Stand up in front of all these people, and tell me who the person in government is who gave this commitment. Get up. Now’s your opportunity. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government has hung their hat on the premise of allowing municipalities to make their own planning decisions without a regional process. In fact, the former municipal affairs minister stated in the House last August that every municipality “has the ability to make their own decisions” without any regional oversight. Well the Balzac situation is an example of just how flawed a process this is.

To the municipal affairs minister: is this type of land-use planning serving Alberta’s best interests? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, I’m very proud to say that the minister’s council has been working very d iligently for a number of years looking at the best direction for municipalities in Alberta and, more recently, in the last year presented a report to myself. One of the primary subjects in that report is planning, and that’s regional planning for municipalities between themselves, and I commend them. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The town of Drumheller has voted unanimously to reject the proposal to supply water to Balzac. They quite rightly pointed out that any positive economic benefit to the community does not justify the potential risk. To quote the former minister of municipal affairs in this House, August 31 Hansard, “The people of Drumheller know very well what’s going on.” Well, obviously they did not know that this government was selling their water behind their backs, and they have stood up and said no. To the Minister of Environment: how does the minister justify this statement in the House? Mr. Renner: Mr.

Speaker, it’s very clear that the statement that was made at that point in time was as valid then as it is today. The people of Drumheller have made a decision with respect to their participation in this project. No licence has been issued. I under- stand that the MD, the applicant, has asked that any decision be delayed so that they can explore other options. As it stands, that is the status of this particular licence application at this point in time. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Bonnyville-Cold Lake, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Resource Development in Marie Lake Area Mr.

Ducharme: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Many Albertans are very concerned about the proposed seismic testing in oil sands develop- ment at Marie Lake, one of Alberta’s few remaining pristine lakes. OSUM corporation has acquired the mineral rights beneath the surface of Marie Lake. Government rules require seismic testing before a development application can be filed. At a public meeting last night OSUM stated that they have evidence that oil sands exist beneath Marie Lake and that seismic is not necessary. To the Minister of Energy.

Albertans are fearful of possible environmental damage and aquatic life loss due to seismic. Will you waive the seismic testing requirement and allow OSUM to provide their evidence, therefore not putting Marie Lake at risk? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I must say that under this government and under the leadership of our current Premier we have a plan to build a stronger Alberta. Let me make it very clear that absolutely no – no – resource development takes place in the province of Alberta wit hout a very comprehensive approval process.

With respect to seismic it’s critical that adequate resource information is available in order for the proponents and the govern- ment regulators to come to the proper conclusion with respect to a permit. It’s necessary, Mr. Speaker, to pinpoint the location of the resource. We cannot eliminate this important tool. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Ducharme: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: land sales for the right to explore our natural resources occur every two weeks and are conducted under the supervision of the Depart- ment of Energy. Mr.

Minister, does present government policy allow all lands with the exception of parks and protected areas to be sold to the highest bidder without any consideration to quality of life and environmental sensitivities? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you. Mr. Speaker, again, this government has a plan to improve Albertans’ quality of life, and we continue with that plan. Quality of life and environmental sensitivity are top priorities when any development is considered, regardless of whether it’s energy, infrastructure, forestry, the fibre business, agriculture, or manufacturing.

The sale of mineral rights is only part of this process, and a number of very stringent checks and balances are in place to ensure that any development that occurs is done in a responsible manner. Mr. Ducharme: Our new Premier has included improving quality of life for all Albertans as one of the main pillars under his leader- ship. Quality of life for Albertans is more than financial wealth. It includes amongst other things quality education, safe communities, good recreational opportunities, and a clean environment.

By allowing seismic and industrial oil and gas operations on pristine lakes such as Marie Lake, this government allows our quality of life to erode. To the Premier: will you instruct your cabinet to stop industrial development surrounding Marie Lake until the impacts on recreational properties have been addressed to the satisfaction of the residents, who will live with the consequence of this seismic activity? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Member for Bonnyville-Cold Lake for the work that he’s doing with this file.

He has attended all of the public meetings and has been keeping me up to date on how this matter proceeds. I want to tell everyone that prior to any development it is very critical that we must maintain not only the quality of life for the

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 405 residents in that area but also absolutely protect our environment. I’m going to make sure that ever yone is satisfied that there is scientific evidence and a process that is followed that does satisfy the protection of the environment and the people living around that lake. I’ll work with the Minister of Sustainable Resource Develop- ment to ensure that this happens. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill. E-mail from a Government Computer Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier is failing to keep his promise of running an open and transparent government. This was proven again when the Minister of Agriculture and Food would only commit to an internal investigation into the vicious, hate- promoting e-mail that an employee sent from a government computer. Now the internal investigation is over, and the Premier and the minister refuse to give the public any details. To the Minister of Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture: given that

section 3 of the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act, which deals with discrimina ting publications such as this e- mail, applies in this case, did the minister or the department take

part in this internal investigation? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware at all whether we did or did not. I certainly would have to do some research, and I could get back to the hon. member at that particular time. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. That doesn’t surprise me, Mr. Speaker. To the Minister of Agriculture and Food: the Agriculture and Food employee appears to have violated Alberta’s human rights laws. Is it not the minister’s position that such violations are worthy of dismissal? Why was this person not fired? Mr.

Stelmach: Openness and transparency means that this govern- ment is not violating anyone’s rights, especially the employer/employee relationship. Certainly that member, of anybody in this House, should know the rules. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, this time to the Premier. Certainly, the Premier should know the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act if anyone in this House should know it, and the code of conduct in

section 3 was violated. Again to the Premier: why was this person not fired? 2:00 Mr. Stelmach: It actually saddens me, the fact that the individual will talk about openness and transparency. Here, when we’re protecting the rights of an individual – and there is a Public Service Act, and there’s a code of ethics involved. This member is not aware of either one of those and is trying to trample the rights of an individual. That, really, I find quite offensive. Postsecondary Education Funding in Calgary Dr. Brown: Mr. Speaker, on March 22 the hon.

Minister of Health and Wellness justified the disparity in per capita funding for health care between the two metropolitan regions by answering that Calgary region has a relatively young and well-educated population and stated that “health status tracks education.” My first question is for the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology.

Given the positive correlation between parental education and postsecondary participation rates and the positive correlation between the ratio of young people in the population and postsecondary participation, and given that Calgary is a larger city and has had greater increases in population than Edmonton over the past 10 years, how can the minister justify that there are 11,000 fewer spaces for postsecondary education in metro Calgary than in Edmonton? Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Our government is truly committed to making postsecondary education more accessible – and that means increasing capacity where it is needed – and to building a stronger Alberta overall. We’re working with all of our postsecondary institutions on building that capacity, but comparing the enrolment spaces between Edmonton and Calgary is not as simple as just counting spaces. Edmonton institutions tend to serve a broader geographic region that includes all of northern Alberta

whereas Calgary institutions tend to serve learners from south central Alberta as well as areas south of Calgary. Students in those areas also have the benefit of the University of Lethbridge for postsecondary university level sp aces. So when you take the total south Alberta enrolment spaces and the total north Alberta enrolment spaces, actually they’re about equal. Dr. Brown: Is the minister suggesting that students in Calgary ought to travel to get their education

whereas those in Edmonton can stay at home? Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, quite the contrary, and the hon. member knows this very well. There are a number of institutions within the city region of Calgary that are serving a number of the students there. We’ve made a number of investments in the postsecondaries – Bow Valley College, Mount Royal College as well as the Univer- sity of Calgary – and have actually increased the spaces there considerably, up to 7,000 spaces within the city region as well.

Students make the decisions as to where they’re going to go, and sometimes students choose to go to another geographic location for a number of reasons, some of which might even be to get away from home. Dr. Brown: For the same minister. The University of Calgary’s operating grant for full-load equivalent is $10,105, and the Univer- sity of Alberta’s is $11,374, a difference of 12.6 per cent. How can the minister justify this significant disparity, which means that the U of C is shortchanged about $30 million per year in operating grants? Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don’t justify it; the economics do.

Certain course loads cost more money to deliver, and the universities would be the first to admit that. In fact, they tell me that all the time. The course loads of medicine or in some cases agriculture, veteri- nary schools cost more dollars per student to deliver. We fund based on that cost. So to simply say that it should be the same even though you’re delivering different course loads is not playing, really, with the truth quite properly.

I thin k the review on equity across the province that we completed in 2005 indeed did bring equity into the system in Calgary, and the University of Calgary actually received an additional well over $2 million to their base operating grant. We continue to monitor the situation, and we’ll continue to work with the postsecondaries to ensure that we have a fair and equitable system. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre.

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007406 Tuition Fees for Postsecondary Education Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This morning I stood with a large group of postsecondary student leaders on the front steps of this Legislature and listened to their concerns about tuition fees. This government has pushed tuition fees up by 275 per cent in just over a decade, the highest increase in the c ountry. These student leaders have brought the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology a message, a message written on over 1,000 postcards. The students have a simple question for the ministry, which I’m happy to relay.

This government claims that Alberta is debt free and is swimming in unprecedented surpluses. So why are the students forced to drown in debt? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In consultation with those very students, this government came up with the affordability framework as it relates to tuition and came up with a new tuition fee policy. Indeed, we’ve rolled back tuition fees to the 2004 levels. This is going to save students in one year – in one year – over $700 on a four-year program, perhaps even over $3,800 for their course load.

I have, actually, one of the cards the hon. member mentions because we are responding to them. We just received them. It says, “I call on you and your government to immediately reduce tuition to a level that is affordable compared to other Canadian jurisdictions leading the way on affordability.” We are the fourth lowest in the country. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again today student leaders came to the steps of the Legislature for the umpteenth time to draw attention to the Alberta disadvantage that postsecondary students have been experiencing year after year.

Student poverty is their daily experience, debt loads are growing, and their tuition fees remain one of the highest in Canada. Why has this government failed to take concrete action to reduce the crushing debt burden on postsecondary students, and what action is the minister proposing to take to address this serious problem? Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, we do not have one of the highest tuitions in Canada, and it’s a misstatement of the facts to allude to that. We, in fact, have the fourth lowest tuition policy in Canada. We are working, as I said before, with the student groups.

I’ve met with the presidents of their associations. We’re talking about the affordability framework, which includes what it does cost to go to school in the province of Alberta, not just tuition, which is only one factor of that. Capacity is a huge issue for us because even if we lower tuition or make it free, we can’t get more students in it because we don’t have the sp aces. We need to build spaces. We need to make it accessible. We need to manage the growth pressures that we have. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week I asked this minister to commit to reducing tuition levels in Alberta to make them the lowest in the country, a solemn promise made by the former Premier of this province not long ago, but I got no clear answer. The government so far has failed to live up to its promise, and students are beginning to fear their government is getting ready to renege on it. My question is simple and direct to this minister. Will his government, will he honour this promise and reduce tuition fees for postsecondary students so that they are the lowest in the country, and when will he take action to meet this promise? Mr.

Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I continue to say in this House and in answer to this question that we are working to make postsecondary education as affordable as we possibly can in the country. I don’t believe that when the A Learning Alberta report came forward, the students who were involved in that consultation believed that tuition was the only thing out there. Tuition is a part of the affordability piece. Their living costs are a part of that. Their books are a part of that.

The cost of postsecondary is also a part of that, and if we can help work with the cost of postsecondary, driving those costs down, of course we’re going to make it more affordable. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Tobacco Reduction Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Between 2001 and 2005 Alberta retailers received a 49 per cent increase in payments from tobacco companies to prominently display their pr oducts on store shelves.

These power wall tobacco displays are deliberately located at eye level right above the candy and other products clearly targeted at children. Not surprisingly, teen smoking rates in Alberta are on the rise. My questions are to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Will the government follow the lead of most other provinces and the advice of the Alberta Liberals and introduce legislation to ban power walls? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’ve made it very clear that as Minister of Health and Wellness I put a very high priority on making it possible for Albertans to take their health into their own hands, and part of that strategy is, in fact, tobacco reduction. I’ll be bringing forward a tobacco reduction strategy to my own caucus for approval and then hopefully forward to the House and the public in due course. But taking action on tobacco reduction is a very important part of our tobacco reduction strategy, and I was delighted to see the schoolchildren here yesterday as part of the process.

I was only sorry that I had a previous commitment and couldn’t have joined them on the steps. 2:10 Ms Blakeman: Thank you. We appreciate that sentiment. Again to the same minister: aside from the cancer prevention fund this government profits from its investment in tobacco-related companies through the heritage trust fund. Is this the reason that the government is going against the wishes of 80 per cent of Albertans in refusing to implement a province-wide smoking ban? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, absolutely not.

In fact, the question of where investment strategy is lies in the hands of the Ministry of Finance, and I’m sure he’ll be addressing those strategies in due course. As Minister of Health and Wellness I can say that it’s very important that we identify areas where Albertans can help to improve their health. That includes stopping smoking. I will be pursing vigorously a strategy with respect to stopping smoking, and everything will be on the table when we have that discussion.

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 407 The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Well, thank you. On the one hand, this government puts billi ons of dollars into the cancer fund, indicating that cancer prevention is essential. On the other hand, this government refuses to take simple steps to actually prevent cancer. Again to the minister: why would the government rather put money into treating smoking-related illnesses than le gislate a province-wide smoking ban to prevent the illness in the first place? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, this government does not refuse to take steps.

Just a week or so ago I was part of an announcement by the Cancer Board in conjunction with the Capital health authority and the Calgary regional health authority on colorectal cancer screening, which was a leading edge process that we’re engaged in. We’re very interested in identifying cancer early, in screening processes that are early, and we’re working vigorously on those sorts of things. Smoking is clearly a part of it, and I intend to take action on that. The Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Softwood Lumber Trade Dispute Mr.

Strang: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The United States has requested consultation with Canada to address concerns over some issues related to the implementation and

interpretation of the softwood lumber agreement. My questions are to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development. Will any measures of the Alberta government be included in these consultations? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, the U.S. concerns that led to the request for this consultation have to do with industry assistance programs developed by Ottawa and the governments in Quebec and Ontario. At the moment there are no Alberta-specific trade issues that are involved in this, and accordingly we will not be participating.

Of course, we will be monitoring and paying attention to these discus- sions and to these talks, but the responsibility for that falls primarily to my very able colleague, the Minister of International, Intergovern- mental and Aboriginal Relations. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplementary question is to the Minister of In ternational, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations. If the U.S. complaints go to an arbitration panel, what impact would the panel rules have on Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If it does go to an arbitra- tion panel, the panel will be asked to rule on several important issues relating to the operation and

interpretation of the agreement, but it is important to note that the softwood lumber agreement contains a mechanism to resolve these disputes, and that is the mechanism that is going to be followed. The request for consultation indicates that both parties value the agreement and are working to resolve the concerns that are being mentioned here today. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second supplementary question is to the same minister. Can he explain to the House the Americans’ allegation that Canada has violated the agreement re the so-called surge mechanism? Mr.

Boutilier: Yes, it’s very complex, but simply stated, Mr. Speaker: under the agreement Canada can export freely to the United States when lumber prices are high, but when lumber prices are low, such as now, Canada imposes export restrictions on lumber ship- ments to the United States from B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec.

Now, provinces can choose between two types of export rest rictions, and Alberta and British Columbia have chosen a pure export tax, and the other provinces have chosen this hybrid export tax and quota system, which of course is in dispute today but we’re very confident will be resolved. The Speaker: We’ll call on the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon. Member for Old-Didsbury-Three Hills. Alliance-Camrose Rail Line 43.03 Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation.

The loss of local grain elevators has led to massive 30-wheel Super B trucks crumbling down highway 13. A viable sustainable alternative exists in the form of rail line 43.03, which runs in a straight line from Alliance to Camrose. However, CN is threatening to shut down this line, which will result in the further congestion and deterioration of highway 13. Will the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation commit to collaborating with the Battle River Producer Car Group and CN to maintain service on the line? Mr. Ouellette: Mr.

Speaker, I want to make clear to everyone here that Infrastructure and Transportation wants to try to make sure that we can keep all kinds of traffic moving in Alberta, but I also have to make clear that the province of Alberta is not in the railroad business. We have private enterprise doing that business, and we will do whatever we can as far as strategies and stuff to try to help them keep business moving and keep grain moving in the province of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Well, thank you. I hope we do lots of good stuff, then. Mr.

Speaker, in the mid-80s line 43.03 received $16 million in federal upgrading assistance. With 132-pound rail it has the highest carrying capacity going, easily capable of handling major freight. Does the minister believe that the rails are of greater value ripped up and sold for scrap than offering a ready-made, sustainable alternative to take the strain off an already overburdened highway 13? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I’m not in the scrap business either, so I’m not sure what he’s talking about there.

But I do believe that in any capacity to help us move freight to any ports or anything along those lines, we will work towards that goal. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government has provided land for just $1 for a cargo terminal in the MD of Grande Prairie. Will this government show similar generosity and support the Battle River producers with regard to this rail line?

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007408 Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I don’t think there is an MD in Grande Prairie; I think there’s a county up there. I’m not aware of the exact dealings at the time or the $1 deal. If we have excess land and a municipality can use that land, there are always agreements that can be made, and we will help them out as a province. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Maintenance of Secondary Highways Mr. Marz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Many Albertans have expressed concerns over the condition of provincial highways and, in particular, three secondary highways that are so important to our rural communities. My first question is to the Minister of Infrastruc- ture and Transportation. What plans are in place to catch up with this growing problem? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I’m also very concerned about the amount of maintenance that we’ve been able to do on our highways in the past few years.

Quite frankly, we haven’t been able to do enough, but I can tell you that we are working, and I do have a four- year plan to try and do catch-up and address the back issues we’ve had. Funding for this program will be coming shortly, and I hope that my friend the hon. Finance minister will help me to be able to do that plan. Mr. Marz: Mr. Speaker, of particular concern in my constituency are highways 791 and 766. Highway 791 had r ecent s houlder construction on it, but it was an incomplete job, and it’s in a very dangerous driving condition.

Highway 766 is very rough, and I’ve received many complaints a bout damage to vehicles. Can the minister tell what plans are in place in the upcoming construction season for these two roads? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I’m aware of those two roads. In fact, they also run through my constituency. I understand that one of them has been partially repaired, but we need to do some more work there. My department is taking a very close look at and evaluating what needs to be done there, and our next step, I’m sure, will be to upgrade them.

Unfortunately, I can’t give the exact date, but we are aware of the situation and working on it. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. 2:20 Temporary Foreign Workers Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry stated in the House that the province will continue to work with the federal government on the temporary foreign worker program. If the provincial government is prepared to take responsibility for the benefits of this program, it should also take responsibility for the well-being of workers it brings in.

This is an issue of basic human rights. To the Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry: what protocols, if any, does the provincial government have in place to ensure that the basic safety and employment standards are being met for temporary foreign workers? Ms Evans: Mr. Speaker, temporary foreign workers are dealt with the same as any other worker, and they are entitled to the same rights and protections.

So our employment standards, our occupational health and safety standards, all standards that apply to any worker in Alberta apply equally to those foreign workers, whether they’re here on a temporary basis or whether they are landed immigrants. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the biggest problems with a temporary foreign worker program is that these workers come here for a year or two years, gain experience, and then go home. Permanent immigration ensures long-lasting benefits for Alberta’s economy.

Can the minister please tell us if this govern- ment will continue to rely on unsustainable solutions like the temporary foreign worker program, instead of sustainable ones like permanent immigration and expansion of our own apprenticeship programs? Ms Evans: Well, Mr. Speaker, relative to the expansion of the apprenticeship programs the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology can answer that.

But let me just say that the temporary foreign worker program has a wonderful capacity to fulfill those obligations that corporations commit to when they entertain contracts for large projects, where the temporary foreign worker goes in, completes the project, and then can return home. Many of the countries that are exporting, if you will, temporary foreign workers have situations where there’s a lull in their economy, and they relish the opportunity for their workers to go elsewhere in the world, take on a temporary task, and then return to their homes and their families.

So this has a benefit not only to those fam ilies but also to the . . . The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve heard from many people working in the immigration field that Alberta is absolutely not prepared for the temporary foreign worker program. Workers are often socially isolated, bound by restrictive visas, and lack the language skills to seek help if they’re being unfairly treated. Without strong protections in pl ace more and more workers will come forward with experiences of deception, human rights viola- tions, and abuse.

Will the minister please take the initiative to investigate what is actually happening with the temporary foreign workers? The program should be suspended until there’s a thorough investigation. Ms Evans: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, this is a federal program that we are working in co-operation with the federal government on. The federal government provides monies that we also provide for integrated settlement services.

While temporary foreign workers don’t necessarily qualify for those funds, many of the 20 nonprofit agencies that run programs for immigrants will tell you that they have among their clients, if you will, temporary foreign workers that are receiving everything from second language programs to socialization skills. The other thing, Mr. Speaker, that’s worthy of note is that the corporations themselves are active.

Although there has been one complaint that’s been raised in this House, we thoroughly review any kind of indiscretion by anybody employing a worker in any capacity, either as a temporary foreign worker or as a landed immigrant. The Speaker: Hon. members, that was 92 questions and answers for today. head: Tabling Returns and Reports (continued) Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier, I’m now tabling the appropriate number of copies of the letter pertaining to an applica-

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 409 tion which the Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark submitted on behalf of a community association that received $75,000 of un- matched funding through the community initiatives program. No rules were broken. All of the applications have been processed in accordance with the program guidelines. The other one is the paper that I referred to on the Alpha Gamma Delta, and it provides the background information on that particular organization. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have four tablings today.

My first tabling is from Jim Stallard, a Calgary-Varsity constituent, who is the husband of Marlene Stallard, a brave lady fighting a courageous battle against ovarian cancer. Jim passed along his thanks to me for raising Marlene’s struggle in the House and asked me to acknowledge the much-appreciated efforts and support of the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Health and Wellness, and his great assistant, Wendy. My second tabling is from Jerry Iwanus, a constituent of Battle River-Wainwright, who is very concerned about the deteriorating, hazardous conditions of highway 13, in particular the

section east of Camrose at the junction of highways 13 and 56. My third tabling is from Paola Romanelli, who attended the Bragg Creek forum last Thursday, March 29, at the community centre, at which I was a panelist. Paola writes, “Kananaskis is a great forest that residents of the area and Calgarians enjoy all seasons, it would be a great waste for us and future generations to allow this plan to go on.” My last tabling is from David Easton, who is also a Bragg Creek resident.

In his letter to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development he urges the minister to “give earnest consideration to the longer term effects and the detriment of the entire community including the residents of Calgary.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to rise to give two groups of tablings. One is from volunteers at the Unity Centre of North East Edmonton, on some personal testimonials of their need for affordable housing.

A second group is another hundred letters from good Albertans, petitioning our Alberta Legislature to support that the accused killer of Joshua Hunt be sentenced and tried as an adult “due to the nature of this crime, his past criminal history and that he is so close to the age of 18 years.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table a letter dated October 31, 2006, to the former Minister of Finance, before her retirement, and this letter is from myself as chairperson of the Alberta Public Accounts Committee.

I am demanding the release of the blue books immediately, and I’m pleased to say that it was eventually done by this government. Thank you. Mr. Graydon: With your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, the documents that I tabled earlier with 1,602 signatures from people in the Beaverlodge area were not in a form suitable as a petition; however, they are in a form suitable to be presented at this time. Thank you. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited with the office of the Clerk. On behalf of the hon. Mr.

Horner, Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, Alberta advanced education public postsecondary institutions’ audited financial statements, public colleges and technical institutes for the year ended June 30, 2005, and universities and Banff Centre for Continuing Education for the year ended March 31, 2006. The Speaker: Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests prior to dealing with the point of order? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (reversion) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona. Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m pleased today to introduce to you and through you to the members assembled a social studies class from Ardrossan high school. This class is accompanied by their teachers Mr. Paul Schwartz and Mr. T.J. Kennerd. I’d ask them to please rise and receive the traditional welcome of the Assembly. The second introduction, Mr. Speaker, you will recall from the ’94-96 era. Page Carolyn Laird, formerly from Fort Saskatchewan, is here today. These days she works in the U.S. Senate for the Republicans. She’s here accompanied by Kenneth Vogel, who also works in Washington. They are in the public gallery as well.

I would ask them to rise and receive the welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview on a point of order. Point of Order Projected Government Business Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a point of order that I think is worth bringing up in the House today about the way we’re conducting House business. On Thursdays we’re given a general idea of what’s coming in the following week.

I understand that from time to time there are emergencies or we can’t get a minister there and there have to be changes, but I think today, at least, shows you that there is no attempt at all to follow what we talked about. 2:30 I look at what was on government business for Wednesday, and there are four bills here for second reading. I see that what’s actually coming – and we didn’t know about this till this morning – are bills that are absolutely, totally different. None of them are the same, Mr. Speaker.

What is even more worrisome is that for a major bill, perhaps the most major one th at we’re going to discuss here, Bill 3, the emissions act, which we just finished debating in second reading, we had no idea that this was coming down again. We had House leaders’ meetings and other meetings. Now, it takes some preparation for the opposition. I’m not going to speak for them, but I’m sure it would be true over here, that we want to prepare for these sorts of things. Now we see that it’s tentatively on the agenda along with other bills that were not there. I don’t know what will be on Thursday.

There’s not much point giving us the week’s business ahead if it doesn’t mean anything, if you’re going to change it to where in the morning we find out that the bills are totally different. I th ink this is a totally unacceptable way to run government business.

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007410 As I said, Mr. Speaker, I know that emergencies come up, and I understand that from time to time there have to be changes, but when the whole day changes and you don’t know about it till the morning, that’s not the proper way to do government business as far as I’m concerned. Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m pleased to address this point. To some extent I agree with the hon. member: it is very difficult for members in this House to plan far in advance on what the business of the House is going to be at any particular point in time.

There is, by the very nature of the House, some flexibility that’s required from time to time. As House leaders we make an attempt to work as much as possible with all of the party House leaders to discuss what is appropriate business to be dealt with at any particular time. I do point out, Mr. Speaker, that with the new rules that we’re operating under, the time that’s available for the discussion of government business is very limited, so it’s necessary that we have some certain flexibility.

With respect to Bill 3, that the member brings forward, I apologize to this hon. member b ecause I wasn’t aware that he had been advised. Bill 3 is not going to be discussed this afternoon in recognition of the very issue that the member brought forward. We recognize that there are some amendments that are going to be proposed by members, and for that reason we’re not going to be dealing with Bill 3.

But I have to emphasize to the member that while there is some room for flexibility, at the end of the day it is the responsibility of the government to move through the agenda as effectively as possible, recognizing, of course, that it’s up to the co-operation of all members of the House to do it as effectively. So the government gives its assurance that we will do the best that we can to accommo- date the opposition, but there may be times when it simply is not expeditious to meet everyone’s time constraints. All I can do, Mr.

Speaker, is give the assurance of our House leader and my own assurance in my capacity acting as House leader that we will work with the opposition as best we can to alleviate these kinds of concerns. Mr. VanderBurg: I was quite aware last week, when the projected government business was announced, that the Vital Statistics Act, Bill 8, would be brought up today. It’s in Hansard, page 299. It says clearly: “On Wednesday, April 4, under government bills for second reading Bill 8, the Vital Statistics Act.” So, you know, the member stated that none of the bills projected for today was on the Order Paper.

I was aware of it, and it was read here on Thursday. It’s in Hansard. Mr. Martin: Well, we didn’t . . . The Speaker: We only get one shot, hon. member. You know that. Okay, hon. members. Anybody else, by the way? Well, then, let’s deal with this matter. This is more a matter of information, I think, and clarification. First of all, let’s remember that there are three House leaders, whose job it is to communicate with one another. There’s one on the government side, there’s one on the Official Opposition side, and there’s one on the third-party side.

I think the third-party side House leader was the one who raised the point. Incumbent upon all of this is to do some inter- change with one another. This is the harmony thing. This is the you touch me, I touch you, we love one another, and we get on with business kind of thing, okay? I’m not advocating it. I’m just reflecting, okay? Secondly, we have a Standing Order which we didn’t have years ago but we have now in the current environment.

Standing Order 7(6) says: When Projected Government Business is called on Thursdays, the Official Opposition House Leader may ask one question pertaining to the order of Government busin ess to be brought before the Assembly in the next week. There has to be an assumption inherent in all of this that whatever outline is given on that Thursday afternoon is, in fact, going to be the one followed the next week, recognizing the need for some flexibil- ity. Everybody understands that.

Thirdly – and the third point is the most important one, hon. members; the third one, the most important one – is Standing Order 10, which doesn’t give any excuses to anybody: “Every Member is bound to attend the service of the Assembly . . .” If you believe that, there’s not an issue. You’re here. The business will come up. Nobody’ll miss anything. And that’s the responsibility. There are 3.3 million people out there. A handful of them will actually want to come here. Some people actually go through nomination meetings and elections to get here. There must be a reason why they’ve done that.

So what’s getting here? Obviously, they want to be in this building. They want to sit here and debate and participate. So when the chair looks out, the chair should see, actually, 82 smiley faces working in harmony with one another, conducting the business of the people of Alberta. head: Orders of the Day head: Government Bills and Orders Second Reading Bill 21 Securities Amendment Act, 2007 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Montrose. Mr. Pham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand today and move second reading of Bill 21, the Securities Amendment Act, 2007.

This legislation follows a process that began several years ago when the provinces and territories agreed that they need to work together to inspire high investment confidence and make Canada’s capital market more competitive. In 2004 they signed a memorandum of understanding regarding securities regulations in a historic act of co-operation between provinces and territories. The agreement commits Alberta and other provinces and territories to develop a passport system of securities regulations as well as harmonized and streamlined securities legislation across Canada.

Since the signing of the agreement we have been working hard with our counterparts to meet these objectives. The first phase of the passport system was implemented in September 2005 by all provinces and territories except Ontario. It opened a single window of access to capital markets across Canada. Last month the national rule to implement a second phase of the passport system was released for public comment. Phase 2 will be implemented in stages, beginning in 2008, to further our goal of ensuring Canada’s securi- ties regulatory system meets the needs of our stakeholders, including investors and industry.

In effect, it opens the single window even wider. The Securities Amendment Act, 2007, supports the passport system and other national rules that update, harmonize, and stream- line securities regulations across Canada. The legislation includes amendments that do several things: first, it will establish a common business trigger for all regulated activi- ties, which is consistent with practice in the United States and United Kingdom; second, this amendment will require the registra- tion of investment fund managers and individuals who perform

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 411 prescribed functions, such as a chief compliant officer or an alternate designated person; third, replace the current annual renewal system with a system of continuing registration until suspended or termi- nated; and, fourth, move detailed requirements to the national rule, such as particular registration categories, handling of potential conflicts of interest, and registration status upon individuals leaving their employment or being hired by another firm. [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] Alberta is one of the first jurisdictions to introduce these amend- ments.

We would expect the other jurisdictions to introduce similar harmonized provisions at their earliest opportunity. We are also continuing to harmonize our security legislation in the area of enforcement. These amendments ensure that our legislation remains modern, streamlined, and harmonized with other jurisdictions.

It should be noted that these changes follow significant improvements to investors’ protection and enforcement in the past few years, including the introduction of civil liability provisions for investors in the secondary market. 2:40 As the second-largest capital market, it is important that Alberta continue to show leadership and keep its legislation as up to date as possible. I urge all members of this Legislature to give their support to Bill 21. Mr.

Speaker, at this point I move to adjourn debate on Bill 21, Securities Amendment Act, 2007. [Motion to adjourn debate carried] Bill 22 Alberta Investment Management Corporation Act The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Finance. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I stand today and move second reading of Bill 22, the Alberta Investment Manage- ment Corporation Act. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will establish Alberta Investment Management as a stand-alone provincial corporation.

To provide a bit of background, Alberta Finance’s investment management division is responsible for managing about $70 billion in assets, including public-sector pension funds, endowments, and other funds. Some of the funds include the Alberta heritage savings trust fund, which is obvious to everyone, but also the public service’s pension plan, the sustainability fund, the medical research endowment fund, the science and engineering research endowment fund, to name only a few. Our investment staff provide exceptional stewardship of these assets on behalf of Albertans, civil servants, and other clients.

For example, we added 1 per cent in added value above the policy benchmark in 2006, which translated to about 435 million extra dollars. The heritage fund, Mr. Speaker, in the year 2006 returned a 14.8 per cent rate of return. Well, we know that given the right opportunity, our investment managers can do even better. Last year a government-commissioned organizational study concluded that Alberta investment management should be moved out of the Department of Finance and set up as a provincial corpora- tion.

A stand-alone structure is consistent with the current best practices for the top public-sector investment funds, such as the British Columbia Investment Management Corporation, the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, the Ontario municipal employees retirement system, and the Canada pension plan. More specifically, the study concluded that a provincial corporation structure would allow for improved governance, operational flexibility, and a much more focused investment culture. We agree with these conclusions and expect that these improve- ments will result in a greater inve stment return for AIM’s clients over time.

For example, every tenth of a per cent in net value-added investment returns per year would mean $16 million per year net income to the heritage fund or close to $50 million per year on all the balanced investment portfolios AIM manages. Mr. Speaker, in the study they predicted that we would be seeing increases of 100 basis points, which would rise to around a $500 million improve- ment on a per year basis if we achieve that. We’re slightly more conservative, and we’re expecting to receive anywhere from 25 to 50 basis points, but even at that we’re looking at a potential of $250 million.

I can certainly appreciate that there might be some concerns about putting our savings, pension plans, and other funds in a stand-alone organization, but let me assure the Assembly that this has been foremost on my mind as we developed the plan to create this new corporation and is indeed reflected in the legislation that I am moving today. While the new AIM corporation will have greater operational flexibility, the investment policies for the various funds will continue to be set by the clients, including the government and pension plan boards.

I’ll reiterate that: the investment policies for the various funds will continue to be set by the clients, including the government and the pension plan boards. Furthermore, Bill 22 proposes controls and accountability tools. For example, the oversight of AIM will be turned over to a profes- sional board of directors appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. The government will have the ability to issue directives to the corporation.

AIM will be subject to the Fiscal Responsibility Act, and its budget will ultimately have to be approved and pub- lished as part of the government’s budget process in the same manner as other noncommercial provincial corporations. The Auditor General will be the auditor for the corporation and be entitled to attend, call, and be heard at all meetings of the corpora- tion’s audit committee. A memorandum of understanding between the government and the corporation will specify roles and expecta- tions regarding the corporation’s mandate, accountability, and reporting requirements. Finally, Mr.

Speaker, I want to make it perfectly clear that we’re doing this not because we’re unhappy with the performance of our investment operations – our staff does a wonderful job – but we truly feel and, certainly, the study has shown us that by putting in the provincial corporation, we will give them more flexibility, that we have the potential of creating an investment centre in Alberta. This investment fund will be the fifth-largest investment fund in Canada, and it will be centred here in Alberta. So, Mr.

Speaker, I certainly urge all members of the Legislature to give support to Bill 22, which is a very critical bill. With that, I would adjourn debate on Bill 22, the Alberta Investment Manage- ment Corporation Act. [Motion to adjourn debate carried] Bill 6 Post-secondary Learning Amendment Act, 2007 The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-West. Mr. Dunford: Curling capital of the world. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure today to rise and move second reading of Bill 6, the Post-secondary Learning Amendment Act, 2007.

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007412 In 2003 the government of Alberta introduced the Post-secondary Learning Act, which consolidated several pieces of legislation to more effectively govern the postsecondary education system. As our government works with the postsecondary system to transform our practices, we continue to find ways to improve the Post-secondary Learning Act while maintaining accountability. This bill proposes several amendments to the act that will enhance its clarity, flexibility, and responsiveness to the needs of postsecondary institutions.

In addition to the housekeeping amend- ments around the wording of graduate student associations the amendments we are proposing concern expanded regulatory authority for the establishment of alternative academic c ouncils, board terms at colleges and technical institutes, disposition of land, pooled trust funds, and the approval process for private degree programs. I would like to take the time of this House, Mr. Speaker, to briefly outline each amendment.

In regard to alternative academic councils the act allows for colleges and technical institutes, through a regulation, to adopt an alternative academic council model with ministerial approval. The alternative model supports colleges and technical institutes moving to degree granting. It is somewhat similar to that of a general faculties council at universities, where academic staff are more involved in decisions a bout academic programs.

Through the consultation process on the development of the regulation colleges and technical institutes requested that eligibility criteria be reflected in the regulation for transparency and clarity. The current authority outlined in the act only allows for powers, duties, and procedures on establishment. This amendment would allow for eligibility criteria as well. Now, what was asked for in the consultations, Mr.

Speaker, was that to be eligible to adopt an alternative academic c ouncil, the college or technical institute must reflect 40 per cent of total credit FLEs, which are full-load equivalents, enrolment in baccalaureate degree programs as approved by the Campus Alberta Quality Council, and that, of course, is the amendment to meet that recom- mendation. 2:50 Regarding boards, currently college and technical institute board chairs may serve for a maximum of two terms as a member or as a chair.

This means that a member serving his or her second term and who has gained extensive experience and knowledge cannot serve as chair if the position becomes vacant. After consultation with colleges and technical institutes we are proposing that members, if appointed chair during their second term, have the opportunity to serve one additional full term as board chair. This provides some additional flexibility but maintains the term-certain period. The next change is regulating the disposition of land at public postsecondary institutions.

This demonstrates government’s commitment to the autonomous board-governed institution model and the government’s role to monitor institution planning and development. Under the existing provisions institutions are required to obtain Lieutenant Governor in Council approval to sell land being used for the purposes of the board and lease land held by the board for leases of more than five years. Let’s first focus on the sale of land component to the amendment.

Given that land is an important commodity, it is critical that we maintain approval on land sales at institutions to ensure that we are meeting the long-term needs of the province. However, institutions also have land donated or willed to them. Often this land is not located near the main campus and has not been part of the long-term planning for the institution. In those cases the amendment will provide some flexibility and enable boards to sell the land if that seems appropriate.

This amendment also impacts leases, such as leases for coffee shops, food courts, restaurants, and other businesses that provide services to students, staff, and faculty. This legislative change will eliminate the need for institutions to request Lieutenant Governor in Council approval for such routine operational leases. The pooled trust fund amendment is a change that will ensure consistency with currently accepted practices. The change will allow boards to pool trust and nontrust funds and to encroach on capital. Institutions are given a variety of funds as trusts.

There are many that are actually small amounts of money. To help institutions maximize their return on these funds, trust and nontrust funds need to be pooled. The Auditor Genera l monitors institutions’ invest- ments, including those of pooled accounts, as part of its annual audit. There have never been any concerns regarding how an institution invests its trusts. In most cases the institutions advise how they invest any donated amounts. The final amendment deals with the approval of private degree programs.

Currently private ins titutions wishing to offer degree programs must go through a system co-ordination review by the ministry, followed by the Campus Alberta Quality Council review process. Once they meet all of the requirements, they must obtain Lieutenant Governor in Council approval for both designation as a degree-granting institution and approval of the program. This must occur each time they wish to offer a new degree program.

Under the amendment private institutions would still go through the examina- tion of how the degree fits with programs offered across the system and the rigorous Campus Alberta Quality Council review process. If the institution is proposing to offer a degree program for the first time, it would still require Lieutenant Governor in Council approval to become a degree-granting institution. However, any subsequent degree proposals would be approved by the minister, which is consistent with the approval process for public institutions.

This process would be more efficient and timely while still ensuring quality and system co-ordination. Campus Alberta Quality Council closely monitors approved degree programs to ensure that they continue to meet quality standards. As you can see, these amendments are designed to enhance the clarity and flexibility of the Post-secondary Learning Act and be responsive to the needs of postsecondary institutions. I ask that all members support Bill 6. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Mr. Taylor: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to rise today on second reading of Bill 6, the Post-secondary Learning Amendment Act, on behalf of my colleague the hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark, the shadow minister for advanced education on this side of the House, and speak to the bill being brought forward to the House today. In general I would like to tell the Member for Lethbridge-West that we are supportive of this bill. We like this bill. [some applause] I hope you didn’t bruise your hand with all that table thumping there, but thanks for the endorsement of the endorse- ment.

We have just a couple of concerns with it, which I’ll point out in brief here, and then we can deal with in more detail in clause by clause study in Committee of the Whole. First, let me say generally that we have not always supported all parts of the Post-secondary Learning Act. The Post-secondary Learning Act was introduced back in 2003 as Bill 43, a bill which the Alberta Liberal caucus at the time opposed, a pos ition in line with that of student groups. It was amended in 2005 with Bill 9 and Bill 55 and in 2006 with Bill 40. Bill 40, of course, was the bill that took tuition fee limits out of

April 4, 2007 Alberta Hansard 413 legislation and placed them in regulations, a move that the Alberta Liberal caucus strongly opposed and continues to oppose. Bill 55, on the other hand, was something that we very much supported because that was the bill that intr oduced this concept – well, more than a concept – the alternative academic council.

That is, as we talked about in the House at the time, absolutely crucial to making sure that when we grant institutions other than universities in this province degree-granting status, the students get full value for the not inconsiderable amount of money that they and their spouses and their parents and their loved ones sometimes have spent and sometimes that the government of Alberta has advanced them on their education.

A baccalaureate degree granted in the province of Alberta that is not recognized by other institutions outside this province is not worth very much at all to someone who wants to go on to graduate study at the institu tion of his or her choice. Those problems have occurred, and Bill 55 could be accurately described as the first attempt to deal with that in a positive way. What Bill 55 sought to do, of course, was set up these alternative academic councils, which were a way and continue to be a way of achieving the governance requirements of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada, the AUCC.

Now, every university in this province is a member of AUCC. Colleges and technical institutes have not been, and for those colleges that want to move to a broader degree-granting status if not full out university status some day, membership in AUCC, a national accreditation, is absolutely key. There is no accrediting body per se in Canada. There is some thought that’s given from time to time that maybe Campus Alberta Quality Council could grow into that national accrediting body, but it’s not there yet.

The best option that we have is membership in the AUCC because not only does that confer certain recognition and status on the member institution that’s recognized by all other member institutions but it does set certain standards. This is what Bill 55 sought to do.

That was why we were so happy to support it, specifically in the case of Mount Royal College, which has ambitions to become a university some day, sooner rather than later, we on this side of the House hope, as they do at Mount Royal, and in the case of any other college or institution not a university in this province at this time, or not yet, that desires to grant baccalaureate degrees that will be of full value to their students. 3:00 When we look at Bill 6 and its amendment of

section 47.1, we’re very much in support of that. On the surface it appears to be placing more power in the minister’s hands than normally. Those of you on the government side of the House might expect me to rail on about that to some extent, but I think we understand that what’s going on here is just setting out what currently occurs. Proposals for alterna- tive academic councils need to be approved by the minister. This change just means that the minister must set out in the regulations the requirements for that approval. So we’re fine with that.

In fact, we’re fine with most of the bill, and we’re probably going to be fine with all of the bill if we could just get a little bit of clarification on the language in a couple of the sections that are to be amended; for instance,

section 67, the one that deals with changes to how land held by the board of public postsecondary institutions can be disposed of. It allows the lease of any land for more than five years without the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council as long as it is “for the purpose of providing support services to the students” – and it puts support services in quotes – “faculty or staff” of the institution. And the support services are to be determined in government regulations.

So all we need to be happy – unless, of course, you give us the wrong answer, an answer we don’t like – is a clarification on what will be considered support services. I think that when the Member for Lethbridge-West introduced the bill, he gave some indication of what those support services might be. I would like to get more clarification, and if we can do that at committee stage, we’re going to be quite satisfied with where we’re going with that unless, of course, there’s something in there to be considered as support service that just doesn’t pass muster with us.

But we shall see, and we’ll talk about that more at committee stage. The other area that we have a little bit of concern about, again in terms of needing some clarification of the regulation wording, is the amendment to

section 76, which gives boards the ability to with- draw some of the capital of trust funds in order to be able to withstand fluctuations in the amounts distributed by that fund. You know, trust funds are intended to serve as a stable source of funding through interest, but they can be undermined if you take out capital for short-term gains at the cost of long-term interest. So we should find out what kind of situations the government and the boards have in mind that would require these kinds of withdrawals.

Again, as we go through the bill clause by clause, we can probably put those questions to the government, and I think it would be reasonable to expect that we could get a pretty specific answer on that. So those are really the things that we’re looking for. In general, Bill 6 clarifies the language of the Post-secondary Learning Act. In general, it makes legislation reflect current practices. It responds to some of the recommendations made by the Auditor General. It seeks to increase the effectiveness of the approval of degree programs.

So those are all changes that we can support, and in some cases they’re not terribly significant changes anyway. So if we could get some clarification of those proposed regulatory changes, I think that this side of the House, or at least this Official Opposition Alberta Liberal caucus, would be quite prepared to support the government on Bill 6. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise and speak to Bill 6, the Post-secondary Learning Amendment Act, 2007.

I’ve been listening very carefully to the speakers, each one of whom spoke on what’s in the bill and what’s considered desirable, a step forward, what’s just routine, what’s a substantive change. I think, in general, there are some minor amendments, it’s true, that clarify the language of existing legislation. That’s fine with us. There are things that are not in the bill that I would have liked to see. I would have liked for the government to have used this opportunity, for example, to entrench in legislation the cap on tuition fee policy, a cap on tuition fee increases.

We were very unhappy, as were the students, with respect to the absence of this legislative commitment on the part of the government when we had the last opportunity to speak to amendments to the legislation relating to this matter. So that’s a disappointment . I would have thought that the new minister and the government under the new Premier would have quickly responded to the serious concern on the part of students and us to put back in legislation that matter relating to tuition fees and tuition fee increases. That being said, there are some other matters.

I think that the amendment to the existing legisla tion with respect to alternative academic councils adds a provision to the existing ones by way of giving the Lieutenant Governor in Council the power to establish the criteria that a public college or technical institute must meet in order to be eligible to apply for approval to establish an academic council

Alberta Hansard April 4, 2007414 in a given institution. This will be done through regulation, as to what those criteria are. I want to return to it later on, Mr. Speaker, because we have received a fair bit of input and representation from the institution most likely to be a ffected by this change in the legislation, this particular change having to do with academic councils. We have received representation, for example, from ACIFA, Alberta Colleges and Institutes Faculties Association.

I think there are some very constructive suggestions that ACIFA makes with respect to the kind of legislative provisions that need to be spelled out and changes that need to be made in the existing regulations to strengthen the ability of academic staff to play a significant role in the determination of academic matters, as distinct from financial and other administrative matters, which have remained in the purview and under the authority of boards of governors. Mr. Speaker, some of the provis ions in this bill will certainly affect primarily colleges and technical institutes.

Many of the colleges are moving towards either expanding the university type of offerings or preparing to move from two-year preparatory university- type courses to offering degrees. Some are already offering degrees.

So with the expansion of the university degree programs both currently taking place and anticipated to happen to be able to respond to access challenges that we face, I think it is important to strengthen the role of academic facu lties in the decision-making processes of these colleges, particularly decisions that have to do with academic curricula, academic requirements, and other impor- tant academic decisions.

If we expect these colleges and institutions to in fact be able to deliver degree programs which enjoy a credibil- ity equivalent to the one enjoyed by our universities, then surely it’s important that we put in place legislative and regulatory rules which will enable academic faculties to play a requisite role, that faculties now play, within the university structures. That’s what I think I would like to focus on, Mr. Speaker, after making one or two more points. 3:10 I was looking very closely at amendment 8, which amends

section 124. It does in fact repeal

section 124(

h) to (

k) inclusive and is replaced by a number of new provisions and subclauses. The only observation that I want to make about it is a little bit of concern that I developed as I was reading closely the new legislative provisions under

section 124, particularly those subsections that replace existing subsections (

h) to (k). For example, subsection (

i) in the existing legislation reads as follows: “respecting the referral of proposed degree programs to the Campus Alberta Quality Council,” and it says explicitly “for review and recommendations to the Minister.” This provision is repealed and is replaced by a statement which is vaguer than the statement that I just read, that will be repealed.

The new statement reads: “respecting the referral to the Campus Alberta Quality Council of proposed programs of study for which a degree may be granted.” There’s not much said about that the quality council will in fact be expected to make a review and, resulting from that review, that it will be expected to make recommendations. That, to me, is perhaps just an oversight.

Its absence, th e failure to explicitly say that the quality council will be expected to make recommendations to the minister, suggests that the minister may in fact either ignore the recommendations or simply say that no recommendations are needed. I am suggesting that there’s some vagueness there. I’m not suggesting that that’s what’s intended, but there is a vagueness there, and that bothers me a bit. That, in my view, needs fixing. The other provisions that replace the existing ones certainly do refer to resident private colleges.

I have this feeling – and it may be an unfounded concern at this point – that we may be opening the door wider to nonresident institutions, some of which may, in fact, be for-profit institutions from outside of the province or outside of the country that do business in the area of postsecondary education here. Again, this is a concern that I hope can be allayed in our debate, in the discussion, but that certainly is a concern.

The concern that I have on this is not so much about profit, but as you increasingly move some programs into institutions that are private and for profit, I also find that the cost for students to go to these institutions increases very, very dramatically. Going to a private, for-profit institution fo r the same degree that may be available at a public university or college is much higher. Now, it is true that these colleges and universities don’t directly receive any public money, and therefore one can say: “Well, they’re in the market. If the price is too high, then they will not succeed.

They will not attract students.” But we know that given the accessibility problems, many of our students, in fact, have chosen to go to these universities not out of choice but because they have no choice but to go to these degree-granting institutions. And when they go there, they are going there funded liberally by our student finance program. Students who are in fact going to these private, for-profit institu- tions to earn a degree for which they can’t find a place in the public system pay much higher costs for the same thing.

So the issue of equity here is introduced by the expansion and growth of the private, for-profit postsecondary sector, which is allowed to offer these degrees. That’s another concern, I think, that I wanted to raise here, Mr. Speaker. Now, with the limited time rema ining, I just want to draw attention to matters related to academic governance raised by the Alberta Colleges and Institutes Faculties Association. Just quickly, I want to first of all draw attention to the kind of concerns that they raise.

They support the notion of shared governance, that the academic faculty play more role in the determination of decisions, but they think that the present policy limits eligible colleges or technical institutes to those who ha ve at least 40 per cent of FTE enrolled in baccalaureate degree programs or applied degree programs. The difficulty with that is that it leaves most of the colleges and institutes out of the possibility to be able to establish academic councils.

They hope that this regulatory requirement can be relaxed so that more colleges and more institutes, who in future may be able to offer these academic programs leading to degree programs, can have more academic i nput in the decisions that are related to academic matters on their campuses. So that’s one issue. The other one is that ACIFA also advocates for the revision of the academic council structure so that academic staff comprise at least a 60 per cent majority of the membership.

Now I think it’s a 50- plus-1 rule, that they have 50 per cent representation on these academic councils, with a possibility of this going beyond 50 to 55. What they are hoping is to again underline the importance of the academic role in the determination of academic matters, that legislatively or in a regulatory form this representation be increased to 60 per cent so that it approaches close to what the situation is at the universities around our province. The third matter again, I think, relates to the issue of academic governance, and the amendments in this act deal with part of that.

ACIFA advises that the regulation be amended so that the board and the alternative academic councils

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20070404
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L26 S3 20070404 1300 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	b39335d760ea04d9521ec78fa54d7b5780e9308e

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