November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2133 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, November 22, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/11/22 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Welcome. 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: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Stevens: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure this afternoon to make an introduction on behalf of the Premier to you and through you to members of the Assembly. I’m advised by the Premier that the group I’m about to introduce, who are grade 6 students from the Win Ferguson school in Fort Saskatchewan, are the very best grade 6 students in the Assembly today. They are accompanied by teachers Rory Larocque-Walker, Kari Archer, and Kelsey Shaw and parent helpers Joanne Burt, Genny Croteau, Paul Kristensen, Jeff Fischer, Bonny Bowes, Janet Wheat, Patrick Wheat, Lisa Spray, Carol Payne, and Patricia Ferguson.

I’d ask them to please rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona. Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly several classes from Wye school and, not to contradict the Deputy Premier, among the best students in the province. The classes are about 64 students, and they’re accompanied by Mrs. Carol O’C onnell, Mrs. Crystal Wujcik, Miss Heather Whitney, Mrs. Pat Beerwald, Mrs. Eskow, Ms Segura, and Mrs. Lianna Krook.

I’d ask them to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my great honour to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a group of 31 students from Meyokumin elementary school in my wonderful riding of Edmonton-Ellerslie accompanied by their teacher, Dr. Wade Pike, and Mr. Stuart Kelm, a student teacher. They are seated I think in the private gallery. I want to thank them for coming to the Legislature.

I’d request them to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly four newly elected members of the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo’s council.

In the gallery this afternoon we have Mila Byron, who is a successful young lawyer in Fort McMurray; Mike Allen, a former chamber of commerce president; Gordon Janvier, who is enjoying the new highway 881 that was built; and David Blair, who lives in the undisputed oldest community in all of Alberta, Fort Chipewyan. I’d ask them all to rise and receive the very warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Associate Minister for Capital Planning. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s indeed a pleasure for me to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly some very special guests who should be in the members’ gallery. Perhaps they’re behind me in the public gallery, but I’ll introduce them in any event. They’ve travelled a very long way to be here for their first visit to Canada and, obvi- ously, for their first visit to our Legislature. In fact, they’ve come all the way from India. They are Mr. Naranjan Singh Kainth and his lovely wife, Balwinder Kaur Kainth. They are accompanied by two extra special friends who live in my area, Mr.

Parmjit Purba, his beautiful wife, Beant Purba, and their two very well-behaved young children, Harmanjit and Ramanjit Purba. Sat sri akal. [As submitted] I’d ask you to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly, please. Mr. Mason: It’s my absolute pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly Muriel Stanley Venne. Muriel is a Métis woman who was born in Lamont and grew up in the hamlet of Whitford, which was named after her great-uncle Andrew Whitford. She has three sons and a daughter and three grandchildren. Her oldest granddaughter is an RCMP officer in Whitecourt, Mr.

Speaker. Muriel is an ally and advocate for the marginalized and particularly for Alberta’s aboriginal women. Please join me in welcoming this dedicated, hard-working, and compassionate woman, Muriel Stanley Venne. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of my colleague for Edmonton-Rutherford I would like to introduce Peter Adamski. Peter is a resident of Edmonton-Whitemud, in fact. He has a very keen interest in environmental issues and particularly in global warming. He’s come down to see us in question period today.

I would ask that Peter please rise and accept the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-West. Mr. Dunford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce to you and through you today a couple from Lethbridge in the members’ gallery. Donna Bier and her husband are here joining us today. Donna has recently been active in PC politics at the nomina- tion level. I’d like to thank Donna for all of her efforts, and I look forward to working with her in the future. If you would rise, Donna, we’ll all give you the warm greeting of the Assembly.

The Speaker: The Associate Minister for Capital Planning, did you have a supplementary? Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, members, and Mr. Speaker. The guests I introduced from India, the Kainth family and the Purba family, are here now. Sat sri akal. [As submitted] Please rise and receive our warm welcome. Sorry you were a bit late. head: Statement by the Speaker Anniversary of 2004 Election The Speaker: Hon. members, this is also a momentous day for a large number of members in the Assembly who I’d like to introduce to you. First of all, the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview three years ago today returned to the Legislative Assem- bly of Alberta.

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072134 Three years ago today, November 22, 2004, the following members were elected to this auspicious Assembly for the first time: the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore, the hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill, the hon. Member for Calgary- Varsity, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder, the hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung, the hon. Member for St. Albert, the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Food, the hon. Member for Cardston- Taber-Warner, the hon. Member for Calgary-Hays, the hon.

Minister of Education, the hon. Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford, the hon. Member for Edmonton- Glenora, the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, the hon. Minister of Sustainable Resource Development, the hon. Member for Peace River, the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East, the hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka, the hon. Member for Calgary-Lougheed, the hon. Member for Leduc-Beaumont-Devon, the hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View, the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark, and the hon.

Member for Calgary-Foothills. Three anniversaries for all of these members. May I introduce them to you. Mr. Marz: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. It’s rare when such an important date in the history of our Legislature escapes the watchful eye of the Speaker of our Assembly, so it’s my privilege to bring to the attention of this Assembly that yesterday was the 28th anniver- sary of the hon. Member for Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock and Canada’s longest serving Speaker. Congratulations, Mr. Speaker. [applause] The Speaker: That was not a point of order. Hon. Members: Speech.

The Speaker: Well, we have the Routine, hon. members. We have business to do, and that’s what we do. Thank you very much for the acknowledgement. head: 1:10 Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Restoration of Old Wetaskiwin Courthouse Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This past Monday was moving day for the Wetaskiwin city council as they took up residence in a 100-year-old courthouse that has been modernized to serve as the new Wetaskiwin city hall. Construction of the original $80,000 three-storey brick and stone courthouse began in 1907.

By January 1908 the courthouse was completed, with the Wetaskiwin district court presiding for the first time on January 21. The judge had 33 cases before him, many of which concentrated on a promi- nent judicial matter of the day, namely horse stealing. Mr. Speaker, the design of the courthouse, which was considered a modern Renaissance when it was conceptualized, would demon- strate that its structure would stand the test of time. Recently the courthouse r eceived its centennial status. It was also designated provincially and federally as a registered historic resource.

Modern times, increased needs, and security concerns called for the construction of a new Wetaskiwin courthouse in the mid-80s. This development raised many questions regarding what would be done with the original building. Together through a co-operative partnership the Alberta government, the city of Wetaskiwin, and the private sector proposed a great alternative and this week saw the reopening of the original courthouse as a newly renovated Wetaskiwin city hall. The old courthouse was transitioned into an innovative building, which will be heated solely by geothermal technology.

Next Monday, November 26, councillors will partici- pate in the first meeting within the new council chamber, and I look forward to being there on that special occasion. The community of Wetaskiwin will now retain all of the historic aspects of the centennial courthouse for Albertans to appreciate while providing a new forum that will allow civic leaders to share ideas for Wetaskiwin’s future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater. Minister’s Awards for Municipal Excellence Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to acknowledge the recipients of the 2007 minister’s awards for municipal excellence, which recognizes our municipal partners. Municipalities across Alberta are on the leading edge of co-operation and foresight, and it is important that we recognize the great work in providing outstanding services and programs to Albertans at the local level.

The towns of Banff and Cochrane in partnership with the Cana- dian Rockies public schools created an innovative transportation system between the two communities for low-income earners that takes advantage of empty seats on returning school buses travelling between the communities, earning the municipalities the outstanding achievement award. Mr. Speaker, Parkland county, the town of Stony Plain, and the city of Spruce Grove collectively earned the excellence for partner- ship award.

These municipalities have partnered with local RCMP to create a drug unit to combat the problem of illicit drugs within the trimunicipal region west of Edmonton. The city of Calgary took home the innovation award for creating warm mix asphalt technology, which enables asphaltic concrete to be produced and placed at a lower temperature, thereby reducing CO 2 emissions and fossil fuels. The town of Athabasca in my constituency, Mr. Speaker, also received the smaller municipalities award for creating a heritage management plan to protect and manage the Athabasca historic places.

These awards were presented at an annual fall convention of the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties, which wraps up today in Edmonton, and again at the Urban Municipalities Association gathering in Calgary next week. Mr. Speaker, recogniz- ing the success of Alberta municipalities is very, very important, and I invite all members to give warm thanks to these municipalities. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Royal Society of Canada Fellowships Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Royal Society of Canada was founded on May 25, 1882, modelled on The Royal Society of London and the Institut de France to promote learning and research in all academic disciplines. Since its first meeting in Ottawa in 1882 it has met annually to induct new members who are recognized as exceptional scholars with national and even interna- tional reputations. This year the Royal Society met for the first time outside of Ottawa, here in Edmonton. It was an honour for me to attend their induction ceremony last Saturday evening at the Winspear Centre. What was noteworthy for me was the fact that among the 80 new

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2135 fellows elected to the Royal Society, 12 are members of the faculty of the University of Alberta. This is a remarkable achievement.

This year’s new fellows from the U of A include Sarah Carter, History and Classics; Wiktor Adamowicz, Rural Economy; Timothy Caulfield, Law; Larry Heaman, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences; Philip Halloran, Medicine; Gary Lopaschuk, Pediatrics and Pharma- cology; Ronald McElhaney, Biochemistry; Marek Michalak, Biochemistry; Richard Palmer, Biological Sciences; Keir Pearson, Physiology; Diane Taylor, Medical Microbiology and Immunology; Jonathan Schaeffer, Computing Science.

I want to also recognize three other Albertans who were admitted to the Royal Society: Peter Hackett with the Alberta ingenuity fund, Allan Bell from the University of Calgary in Music, and Ian Stirling, Canadian Wildlife Service. Fifteen Albertans and 12 from the University of Alberta. On behalf of all members of this Legislature we congratulate all of these new fellows of the Royal Society, and we congratulate President Indira Samarasekera and the University of Alberta. The dream of creating the University of Alberta into a world-class university is being fulfilled. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for St. Albert School Boards Association Centennial Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A hundred years is a milestone for any organization. This week the Alberta School Boards Association celebrates a century of proudly serving Alber- tans as the stewards of their educational system in this province. A good trustee is an invaluable asset to the community. As local residents they have a unique understanding of particular issues facing their jurisdictions. They have an intimate understanding of their community and as such are in optimal positions to help that wisdom serve the public education system.

Because of their unique and valuable perspective, school board trustees were given powers which allowed them to tailor educational arrangements for their area. In 1994, however, with the sweeping reforms made to education, much of the powers originally held by school trustees were taken away. The drastic funding cuts that followed put boards in an impossible situation where the new centralized model made it incredibly difficult for them to cater or adjust their local schools’ needs or preferences.

Despite this less than optimal situation trustees have continued to distinguish themselves throughout the past hundred years. People such as Don Massey, John Paterson, Dave Fraser, John Shorter, Joan Trettler, Jacquie Hansen, and Lois Hole are but a few of the shining examples of admirable community-minded individuals who have championed our children’s education. As with these individuals, a good trustee will hold that single factor as their guiding principle, objectively seeking out what is best for the children of Alberta, clear of any interfering politics.

On this the ASBA’s 100th anniversary I wish to not only praise the efforts of schools boards but also raise a little bit of caution. With this latest agreement over teachers’ pensions reached without the participation of boards, school boards are yet again f aced with new challenges. It would be an incredible loss to our educational system if we were to see school boards’ powers diminished even further, Mr. Speaker. Let’s make sure that government supports school boards rather than hurting their ability to support children in Alberta. Thank you very much. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. 90th Anniversary of 4-H Mr. Prins: Thank you. I rise today to recognize and bring attention to the 90th anniversary of 4-H in Alberta, which happened on November 17. Mr. Speaker, 4-H is the longest running youth organization in our province, shaping the lives of youth and adults for 90 years; 4-H members and leaders have gone on to be successful and accomplished members of society. I’ve been a member of 4-H, and I’m sure that in the last 90 years 4-H has touched many lives in one way or another, and we can all be part of the celebrations, slated to last for the entire year.

This is an organization that br ings the whole family together because 4-H clubs rely on family support and volunteer leadership from adults and other 4-H members. By following the 4-H motto, Learn to Do by Doing, members take

part in activities that meet their interests, increase their knowledge, and develop their life skills. Whether 4-H members are creating and displaying projects or taking

part in summer camp experiences of canoeing and campfires, they build lifelong friendships with people from all over the province while developing valuable skills. Members acquire an understand- ing of livestock production and horse management by owning, caring for, showing, and marketing animals and maintaining records. They learn about pets, poultry, crops, even bees.

They learn about running a business, preparing food, computer skills, performing arts, photography, veterinary science, and more, and all the while they are making lifelong friends and gaining leadership skills that will take them through their careers and beyond. Our youth want to be involved, accepted, valued, and heard. In 4- H they run the show. I wish to acknowledge the work that Alberta’s 4-H has done for 90 years and continues to do: encouraging young people of all ages to take on leadership roles, make decisions, plan events, and participate in activities within their communities. Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. 1:20 Muriel Stanley Venne Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Throughout her life Muriel Stanley Venne has been speaking out for social justice and the rights of aboriginal women. She is the founder and president of the Institute for the Advancement of Aboriginal Women. She’s been in the news many times calling attention to the plight of aboriginal women who are missing or slain and demanding action.

Muriel’s service includes being chair of the commission on human rights, organizer of the Gathering Our Strength conference on violence against aboriginal women, a former board member of the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation, and founder of the Esquao awards. She helped spearhead The Rights Path, Alberta, a publication that received international praise and was e ndorsed by Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Muriel’s awards include the Alberta human rights award, aboriginal role model lifetime achievement award, the national aboriginal achievement award for justice and human rights, the Hon. Lois E. Hole award for lifetime achievement, and the Governor General’s award in commemoration of the Persons Case. Her Excellency the Rt. Hon. Michaëlle Jean said: your work is an inspiration to women throughout the country, and the award is an honour you well deserve. Muriel is also a Member of the Order of Canada.

On November 7 Muriel’s work was saluted by Canada’s ambassador to the United Nations at the General Assembly, and I

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072136 quote: for over 30 years she has been a leader in Canada’s aboriginal communities, working to fight racism and address the obstacles to equality for aboriginal women, children, and family. In addition, Mr. Speaker, she has been very involved in politics and in the Alberta NDP and was a candidate for our party on four separate occasions. Please join me in recognizing the awards, the work, and the person Muriel Stanley Venne. The Speaker: Hon. members, before we move on, I inadvertently failed to recognize an hon. member who wanted to do an introduc- tion of guests.

Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Sustainable Resource Develop- ment. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to intro- duce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly four constituents from the beautiful MD of Rocky View: two newly elected councillors, Hopeton Louden and Mitch Yurchak, and our vice-reeve, Greg Boehlke, and his lovely wife, Lynn. Could you please rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Peace River. Mr. Oberle: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to table a petition from a number of people across northwestern Alberta. They are objecting to the construction of a nuclear power facility at this time and urge the government to initiate consultation with Albertans. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Today is National Housing Day, and I am continuing to table a petition, this time signed by 50 concerned Albertans from mostly Edmonton, Lethbridge, Athabasca, and Leduc. The petition reads:

Whereas the ongoing rent affordability crisis is contributing to Alberta’s worsening homelessness situation, we, the undersigned residents of Alberta, hereby petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to take immediate, meaningful measures to help low-income and fixed-income Albertans, Albertans with disabilities and those who are hard-to-house maintain their places of residence and cope with the escalating and frequent increases in their monthly rental costs. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to present a petition signed by 251 individuals primarily from Edmon- ton. They are urging the government to ensure that remuneration paid to employees working with persons with disabilities is standard- ized, that they are fairly compensated and wages remain competi- tive, that they have improved access to professional development opportunities, and urging the government to introduce province-wide service and outcomes-focused level of care standards. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition today, and it reads: we the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to launch a full public inquiry under the authority of the Public Inquiries Act into spying practices by the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and the Minister of Energy’s oversight role of the AEUB. This petition is signed by citizens from Edmonton, Days- land, Galahad, Alliance, and Bawlf. Thank you. head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Hays. Bill 52 Corrections Amendment Act, 2007 Mr. Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to intro- duce Bill 52, the Corrections Amendment Act, 2007. These amendments to the Corrections Act will provide for safer facilities and communities, support victims by providing greater access to information about offenders, and enhance inmate disciplin- ary procedures. The bill will allow for electronic monitoring or recording of inmate phone calls to enhance safety within the correctional facility and in the community.

It will also give victims more information about an offender convicted of a crime against them, including the inmate’s date of release and conditions of that release that relate to the victim, and ensure that inmates subject to discipline are dealt with by an independent hearing and appeal adjudicators. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 52 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d move that Bill 52 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Environment.

Bill 54 County of Westlock Water Authorization Act Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being Bill 54, the County of Westlock Water Authorization Act. This bill will facilitate the delivery of treated municipal water within the county of Westlock and, recognizing that the county straddles two water basins, provide for the appropriate legislative approval for interbasin transfers of that water. [Motion carried; Bill 54 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drumheller-Stettler. Bill 55 East Central Regional Water Authorization Act Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to introduce Bill 55, the East Central Regional Water Authorization Act.

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2137 Mr. Speaker, this bill will ensure a safe and secure water supply for Albertans living in east-central Alberta communities. These communities have been impacted by drought and increased growth, and this bill will provide these communities with access to piped potable water. Thank you. [Motion carried; Bill 55 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d move that Bill 55 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table letters from my constituents Bill Elson, David Verkland, Iris Verkland, Mrs. D. Hewitt, Fred Baker, Aaron Staldeker, and Gerry Riva-Cambrin. All of them are concerned about Alberta’s la bour laws, suggesting five changes, but today I will highlight their wish to have full legal recognition of bargaining rights for public employees, including the right to strike combined with reasonable essential services legislation. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. I would like to table the appropriate number of copies of letters I have received from 200 of my constituents calling for changes to Alberta’s labour laws. The letters express strong support for such changes as first contract arbitration, full legal recognition of bargaining rights for public employees, and one labour law for all unionized workers, among other issues. Thank you. head: 1:30 Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Use of Private Investigators by EUB Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

On May 9, 2007, the EUB’s security team leader, Ray Ambler, sent an e-mail to the RCMP and the PI company hired, outlining the details of the covert operation that was to take place in Rimbey. Referencing the attachment the e-mail states, “The Sheriffs department has been provided this document under separate cover and at an earlier date.” To the Solicitor General. The sheriffs knew what was happening before May 9. They knew about these repulsive tactics long before they happened.

When did the Solicitor General himself know that the citizens of this province were going to be spied on, and was it he who alerted the Premier? The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Public Security and Solicitor General. Mr. Lindsay: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. First of all, let me say that our sheriffs’ branch is certainly aware that the EUB intended on using some private investigators for security purposes. That’s my understanding of it. Unless the hon. member has further evidence, that’s the extent of what we’re aware of. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again to the Solicitor General. As Alberta’s Minister of Public Security – and please underline public – what role did the Solicitor General and his sheriffs’ department play in planning and executing this spy operation? The minister knew about it. The sheriffs knew about it. They allowed it to happen, and they took part. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lindsay: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, the hon. member talks about knowledge and a spy operation.

As I indicated before, we are aware that due to concerns for public safety the EUB had hired the services of private investigators, and that’s the extent of it. Mr. Elsalhy: Those private investigators, Mr. Speaker, were not at the courthouse; they were at the community centre. To the Minister of Justice, who is also the Deputy Premier. The Premier and the Minister of Energy knew about this spying plan and initially defended it as something that is not a big deal. Now we find out that the Solicitor General and his sheriffs were at least notified, not involved, and that the RCMP was at least notified.

When exactly was the Minister of Justice himself made aware of this repulsive scheme to spy on unsuspecting Albertans? Mr. Stevens: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think I can safely say that my knowledge of this matter appeared at the same time as others, when they read the newspaper accounts. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In Rimbey this pathetic government allowed a public body to hire private detectives to spy on the very citizens it is mandated to serve.

Three board members from the public body have suddenly, mysteriously retired all at once. They took one for this tired old Tory team. Meanwhile, there is an e-mail trail from the EUB to this government regarding this covert spy plan. My first question is to the Minister of Energy. Will the minister follow the example set by the board members and retire immediately? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, that would be an emphatic no. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister. This spy scandal occurred under your leadership.

Why will you not resign and accept full responsibility for this dismal action? Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, first of all, as the hon. member knows, the EUB and the previous ERCB and other regulators have operated in the province of Alberta, I think, since 1938 or something in that sort of neighbourhood. I was responsible for the EUB from about the 15th of December last to the present day, and I can tell you that anybody that would want to spend the time to see what I’ve done

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072138 from that point to this point would understand that I am working in the best interests of Albertans on this issue, and on a go-forward basis I continue to do that. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Minister of Energy. This is the minister’s accountability statement from his own annual report, which he signs off on, and he should accept full responsibility for his actions.

Again, in light of the fact that your department and you made a poor judgment in initially supporting the EUB’s covert spying operation, will you do the right thing and resign, and resign now? Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, again, you know, here we go chasing things from the past. They live in the past. I’ve addressed this situation. I think the hiring of a new chair of the EUB and the work that’s been done in the interim speaks volumes with respect to what this government is doing with re spect to making this issue com- pletely transparent for Albertans, and the actions that we’ve taken I stand by.

The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Regional Municipal Planning Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Municipal leaders from the capital region will be presented with a plan today on regional planning. However, already some members of the region are criticizing the plan as being unfair to them. This reality is, unfortu- nately, that the city of Edmonton shoulders the infrastructure costs for the entire region and has a population base far in excess of the others combined.

To the associate minister of housing and urban development: do you support the idea that the decision-making for the regional government structure should be weighted on proportion of population? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a technical question. As you know, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is responsible for the regional planning, especially in the capital region, which I understand has been going well. I’ll take that under advisement for the minister. Mr. Bonko: Yeah, there will probably be a lot of advisement today.

The municipal sustainability initiative was weighted towards communities with heavy industrial bases. For the capital region this means that as upgraders are built and many more people move into the region, Edmonton will bear most of the support costs; however, they will receive zero tax dollars from the massive upgraders to help pay for the support services. Those dollars will stay in the rural counties, with a fraction of the population and cost. To the same minister. The MSI funding arrangement was unfair to Edmonton and benefited counties with heavy industrial bases.

If the new model for the regional planning addresses this inequity, will you support this and ensure that regional coun ties pay their fair share for the growth costs? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I understand that this morning the mayor of Edmonton, Stephen Mandel, in his speech for National Housing Day was very supportive of the municipal sustainability initiative. I know the weighting is done by population and assess- ment, and I’d refer this question to our President of the Treasury Board. Mr.

Bonko: Rural counties surrounding Edmonton believe that the regional planning model will take away from the rural power. The mayors of Strathcona and Sturgeon counties have already stated that they oppose any sharing of revenues, any regional model that affects their autonomy. Apparently, they do not care to co-operate for the good of the entire capital region. They will no doubt put political pressure on their MLAs. To the same minister. We already know that certain members of cabinet have been a barrier to this process.

Will you stand up to those mayors and any members of cabinet who try and stall the implementation of the Radke regional planning model? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, it’s a shame that the hon. member would present the response to a report that they haven’t got yet as already wrong. What this Premier has done is made it very clear to Alberta that he is someone who does the right thing, not the easy thing.

No one ever said that to bring the capital region together was going to be easy, and no one ever said that everyone would agree to all the things, but this Premier has tackled a job that has troubled this region for decades. From his past record this year you can be assured that it will be dealt with fairly, and it will be done com- pletely. All sides will be included, involved, and the right thing will result from it. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Use of Private Investigators by EUB (continued) Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The government would have us believe that three board members implicated in the EUB spying scandal coincidentally retired on the same day. Albertans can smell a rat here. They know that these board members were fired for their role in the scandal. The Perras report, which purported to look into this matter, was a whitewash. Justice Perras didn’t even investigate anyone higher than the director of security even though the NDP opposition produced documents which proved board members and officials knew all about the spying. My question is to the Deputy Premier.

Will you commit to a complete public inquiry into this matter which looks into the role of all officials, including the Minister of Energy? Mr. Stevens: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member of the third party is doing what he does so well, and that is criticizing people who are not here to stand up for themselves. Justice Perras was given an assignment. He’s a well-respected former member of the judiciary. He came out with a report that clearly this hon. member does not like the results of, but the fact of the matter is that he’s an honour- able person who did what he was asked to do.

He produced a report that, unfortunately, he doesn’t like but which was of assistance to us. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. What he was asked to do was to whitewash th is matter and protect the govern- ment. Mr. Speaker, the people of Alberta are demanding to know the full

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2139 truth in this matter. These so-called retirements point to nothing else but a blatant cover-up, yet other officials at the EUB, including the director of communications, the legal counsel, and other top officials, were copied on e-mails in which the board’s intention to spy were made clear. This is to the Minister of Energy. When will you end this cover-up and call a full public inquiry? 1:40 Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, again, you know, the question is phrased a bit differently this time, but nevertheless it’s the same question, and I’ll have the same answer for it.

I’ve been responsible for the EUB from December 15 or 16 in 2006. Anybody that would want to take the time to have a look at what I’ve done with respect to the EUB from that point till today would be very welcome to do so. I can stand here and tell the people of the province of Alberta that I believe that we’re moving in the right direction. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Another thing that the so-called investigation by Justice Perras failed to investigate was what role the Minister of Energy and senior energy department officials had in this affair, so I’ll offer the minister a chance to clear the air. Mr. Minister, what did you know about the plans to spy on Albertans by the EUB, and when did you know it? Mr. Knight: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, you know, questions loaded with innuendo. I think that it would serve Albertans very well to understand that the EUB is a quasi-judicial board, very similar to a courtroom setting and very similar to a provincial judge.

I would no more go and influence the hearings that the EUB are carrying on for Albertans than I would attempt to change the decisions of a judge in the province of Alberta. That, in frank words, is the answer. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Ba ttle River-Wainwright, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Water Management Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My grandpa was a wise man, and I learned as much as I could from him while he was alive. He always had a unique way of telling me things that made them stick.

He once told me that we often count things as being more important than they actually are. When you think about what is important, he said: remember, you can go for three minutes without air, three days without water, and three weeks without food. Water is critical. To the Minister of Environment: what are you and your department doing to oversee the wise use of our water resources? Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely correct that we have a resource that, we are increasingly learning, is a limited resource. As we have increased growth pressures, that puts in- creased pressure on our water.

That’s why the government recog- nized a number of years ago that it’s important that we have an adequate plan to ensure the proper use of that water, the proper planning for that water. We developed something that is world renowned, and that’s the Water for Life strategy, that, frankly, is seen as the leading-edge way of dealing with water. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A lot of water flows down our rivers.

The Battle River, flowing through my constituency, is the only nonglacial-fed river in the province and, as such, is subject to incredible highs and lows in water flow, which has great impact on the economics of the region. There’s not a shortage of water on the river; there’s a shortage of water management. My first supplemental to the same minister: what is the government doing to ensure that all watersheds, not just the South Saskatchewan River basin, remain healthy? Mr. Renner: Mr.

Speaker, the South Saskatchewan River basin is the one river basin that is under the greatest amount of pressure, and that’s the reason we’ve been concentrating on that area first. But one shouldn’t assume from that that that is the only basin that we’re concentrating on. Frankly, plans are currently under way to establish similar kinds of regimes on the North Saskatchewan and the Bow River, and we’re also beginning discussion for similar kinds of local decision-making and local input on both the Athabasca and Peace. WPACs, the watershed planning and advisory c ouncils, worked extremely well.

This government not only supports the concept of WPACs but supports them financially to the tune of about $2 million in this budget. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Nothing happens without water. You can’t ensure ag production without water. You can’t do value-added growth, manufacturing, or tourism without water. Indeed, you can’t even grow the size of your town without it being able to supply the new homes with water.

What is your department doing, Minister, to ensure some balance between the ever-expanding demands and competing interests on our water and water supply sources? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, one thing is certain when it comes to water, and that is that one size does not fit all. That’s why we’re so proud of the work that we have under way with the WPACs, currently eight WPACs in different regions throughout the province, expanding beyond that very shortly. In addition to that we have in excess of 100 watershed steward groups that are involved with decision-making on a local level. Mr.

Speaker, nothing works better to deal with planning and issues than dealing with them at the local level. However – and it’s a big however – at the end of the day if the local groups are not able to come up with the kinds of decisions that are required, the buck stops here, and the government will ensure that those decisions are made. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill. Oil Sands Royalty Structure Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Auditor General, the expert Royalty Review Panel, and the Department of Energy’s own reports confirm that Alberta’s royalty system for oil sands was a give-it-away policy. My first question is to the Minister of Energy. When it comes to our oil sands royalty system, why did the govern- ment simply have this give-it-away policy for the last seven years? Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, again, I’ll repeat this until it comes, you know, quite clear to certain individuals in the House. My responsi- bility with respect to th is issue also started in December last year. I will say another thing.

One of the very first things the Premier did was call for a public royalty review. He indicated that that royalty review would be placed in front of Albertans when he received it.

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072140 That’s exactly what he did. We’re moving forward on this issue and many others. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m quoting from a speech by the former Minister of Energy, Murray Smith.

This speech was delivered on October 16, 2006, in Austin, Texas. “The model that has worked so well for us is that the royalty structure for oil sands is we ‘give it away’ at a 1 per cent royalty structure.” To the Minister of Energy: why is Murray Smith bragging that the government’s royalty policy on oil sands is to give it away, when Albertans are told by your government that our policies collect a fair share? Why is that? Mr. Knight: Well, Mr.

Speaker, first of all, I would have to suggest that whatever some former individual may or may not have said in Houston, Texas, is not really so mething that I need to concern myself with today. What I’m concerned with is the policy of the government, and the policy of the government has been and will continue to be that what we will do is get the best benefit for Albertans from their resources. The policy that was in place prior to the time that we’ve done the new royalty framework did exactly that.

I’ve alluded to the numbers of b illions and billions of dollars that have benefited Albertans with the result of this resource and other resources. We will continue to move forward. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Energy should know what Murray Smith is saying because he has got your top patronage job in Washington. Now, I’ll ask a question of the Minister of International, Intergov- ernmental and Aboriginal Relations. He seems so anxious to get on his feet.

Will the Member for Calgary-Mackay be promoting Alberta’s royalty policies as a give-it-away royalty system when he goes to Washington? Is this the government of Alberta’s real policy, this give-it-away policy? Mr. Boutilier: Mr. Speaker, under our new Premier and this new administration it is about striking the right balance for all Albertans. Further to that, I remind the hon. member of when this government in future forwarding had a bridge to nowhere. We had $50 million we spent on infrastructure, preparing for where we are today. At the time we had no homes built.

Streets paved and fire hydrants but no homes on them. The fiscal regime was the right economic policy to get to this point today, unlike the Liberals, who have a policy on the fly. Carbon Dioxide Capture and Sequestration Dr. Brown: Mr. Speaker, last Saturday the Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its synthesis report, which analyzes the probable impacts of increasing green- house gases on nations, including our own.

Although conservation measures and switching to alternative energy sources may have some effect on reducing the release of greenhouse gases, Albertans are going to continue to rely on fossil fuels for the majority of their energy needs in the foreseeable future, and any meaningful reduc- tions in carbon dioxide emissions will n ecessitate capture and storage of those gases. My question is for the hon. Minister of Environment. What is the government doing to move ahead with projects to capture carbon dioxide here in Alberta? 1:50 Mr. Renner: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the member makes a very valid observation, that increasingly the technology related to managing CO2 is looking to be a very significant contributor into dealing with climate change related issues into the future. The government of Alberta will be very much part of working on various projects with respect to CO2 capture and sequestration. There was recently, for example, funding through the Alberta Energy Research Institute, AACI, and Alberta Employment, Immigration and Industry to do a feasibility study into the development of a pipeline from the Industrial Heartland. Dr. Brown: Mr.

Speaker, to the same minister: can you tell the House why this particular project in the Industrial Heartland would be a project to pursue? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, there are a number of reasons. There are a number of alternatives that can be used for CO 2. One, of course, is enhanced oil and gas recovery, the sequestration of CO2 that actually increases the production from existing oil fields. The other is the pure sequestration for the purpose of eliminating CO 2. In order to do any of those, you need to have a source of CO 2, and you need to have availability.

By having the cluster of industrial development within the heartland, it makes a perfect combination of supply and opportunity to sequester. Dr. Brown: Mr. Speaker, my further supplemental question is to the same minister. How do Albertans know that investing in carbon capture and storage would be a worthwhile step to tackling green- house gases? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, this isn’t something that has been dreamt up by Alberta Environment. This technology has been proven for a number of years. We just need to ensure that it can be scaled up to the kinds of developments that we have in this province.

I can give examples of carbon sequestration already under way in Australia, United Kingdom, Germany, the United States. There are 30 years’ experience in enhanced oil and gas recovery. Then there are other ways that I think Albertans should be aware of the recognition of this. Even our own Pembina Institute here in Alberta has pointed out the need for carbon capture and sequestration to deal with climate change. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora, followed by the hon. Member for Lesser Slave Lake. Affordable Housing Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today is National Housing Day, a day to raise awareness about the housing crisis that exists across the country and especially in this province. As a member of the Affordable Housing Task Force I was deeply moved by the stories of despair from so many people who cannot afford a place to live. We desperately need affordable housing. My questions are for the Associate Minister of Affordable Housing and Urban Develop- ment. The task force estimated that delivering a minimum of 12,000 additional units over five years will cost $480 million a year.

How can this government build the affordable housing we need by spending less than half of that amount of money? What are you going to build? RVs? Tent trailers? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, today is National Housing Day. I’d like to begin by thanking the people in the

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2141 communities that are working so hard. There are thousands of people in this province that are working hard in providing affordable housing to low-income individuals and people in need. In answer to the question, this member knows that we have had $285 million that was dedicated just six months ago to the issue of affordable housing, and $195 million of that was for 11,000 housing units to be built over the next five years. That began this year alone. I went on the website for this individual, and I notice that the plan he . . . [Mrs.

Fritz’s speaking time expired] I’ll comment further. Dr. B. Miller: Well, Mr. Speaker, we hear that amount, $285 million, again and again. But it’s not impressive because these are the facts: in 1986 this government invested the same amount of money in affordable housing – 1986 – with half of today’s budget. So how can you say, Mrs. Minister, that you are really serious about solving the affordable housing crisis? Mrs. Fritz: Well, Mr. Speaker, how can this individual say that? It’s remarkable to me.

As I was going to say, on your website you’re calling for a thousand less units than this province is building in the next five years: 10,000 units, and we’re building 11,000. To further back that up, yesterday in this House the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing announced $60 million for projects, one in your own riding, in Barrhead, Mr. Speaker. Excellent project, the community worked very hard. Sixteen communities are participating in that. So we are doing some significant good work. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If this government is really serious about eliminating homelessness in 10 years, will this government look at the task force’s housing-first perspective? It is not enough just to provide shelter sp ace. We desperately need transitional housing with wraparound services so people can move beyond the shelter, through the housing continuum towards inde- pendence and self-reliance. To the same minister: are you commit- ted to funding these necessary services? If you don’t, there will be a reverse flow through the housing continuum into more and more homelessness. Mrs. Fritz: Well, Mr.

Speaker, as I’ve said to you in this House previously – in the last two weeks I think it’s been a few times we’ve addressed this issue, and we know that Housing first is a model that we as a government are following. We’re currently doing that today. We have $16 million in outreach projects given to the municipalities and the communities and agencies, and it is housing first that they’re providing.

I mentioned one project here alone, and that was the hospital discharge project in Calgary, where 50 chronically homeless individuals who’ve accessed emergency are being met by a seven-member professional team of physicians, nurses, and they are being provided with housing first rather than being discharged back to their shelters. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lesser Slave Lake, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Air Quality Ms Calahasen: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. My constituency has been blessed to be a hub for oil and gas activity.

However, the recent releases of sour gas across the province have all Albertans concerned about the quality of their air. My question is to the Minister of Environment. What is it that you’re doing to ensure that we protect all Albertans, even my constituents, about the quality of their air? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, the member is quite right. The recent occurrences with respect to sour gas have certainly highlighted in the minds of Albertans the importance of air quality. But I have to point out that sour gas is something that is dealt with in an emergent way.

We have the highest standards in Alberta with respect to regulations surrounding sour gas. The fact that we dealt with these releases and have in place the necessary plans is, I think, a compliment. But the greater question is: how do we maintain air quality, generally speaking? That really falls into the announcement that I made a while ago with respect to cumulative effects. How do we regulate airsheds within the region and keep them clean? Ms Calahasen: Well, Mr.

Speaker, it’s almost been two months since the government announced the cumulative effects management framework, so my question to the same minister is: what programs and what progress has been made in regard to implementing this framework? Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, there’s been a significant amount of progress on this framework. As an example, we’ve been seeking public input over the last period of time. We’ve had some targeted stakeholder group meetings. Just today I’ve announced the estab- lishment of an airshed working group who will build a system that will allocate, monitor, and evaluate airshed targets.

This group represents industry, environmental groups, municipalities, and, of course, representatives from the government. I have to emphasize that if this group can’t agree on the system that we use on a go- forward basis, then, obviously, the government will be responsible for making a balanced decision at the end of the day. Ms Calahasen: Then, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister: if this working group is only just getting together now, when can we expect the airshed targets to come into effect? It’s only beginning now, so I and my constituents would like to know: when is this going to come into effect? 2:00 Mr.

Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m expecting an initial report from this group as early as December of this year, but the targets themselves come into effect on January 1 of 2009, so we have in that interim period of time necessary opportunities to ensure that the system that we put in place in fact works to protect the environment and allow industry to continue to grow and also that we have an ongoing review of these programs. Every five years we’ll take account of how well the plan is working and make necessary adjustments along the way. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, followed by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Calder. Women’s Shelters Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The lack of affordable housing in this province has been especially harmful for women attempting to flee abusive relationships. Alberta now leads in domestic assault, homicide/suicide, and stalking and is second in domestic homicide. As the Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters states: the impact of these realities on Alberta’s families is enor- mous, and the infrastructure is simply not in place to the extent that it is needed to provide immediate and effective interventions.

To the associate minister of housing: why isn’t there a provision specifi- cally for women who are victims of domestic violence included in the housing plan?

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072142 The Speaker: The associate minister of affordable housing. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will take that question under advisement because we do not have the secretariat membership advertised as yet. I’m assuming that’s what you mean, in regard to the secretariat, so I will take that under advisement and look toward that. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In 2006 the Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters reported the following aggregate information for all 41 shelters: the number of women forced to return to abusive situations due to a lack of affordable housing in Alberta has increased by over 300 per cent. To the associate minister: what, if anything, will be done to provide immediate affordable housing to these women and ultimately prevent unneces- sary tragedies? Mrs. Fritz: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious question as it relates to women’s shelters.

I know that the Minister of Children’s Services has told the House in the past that the budget had increased from $15 million to $22 million in ’07-08 for women’s shelters, but for the emergent needs, which are the critical needs, women can be assisted. We must let women know this as well, about the good programs that we have, that our direct rent supplement programs combined are $33 million to $50 million. A thousand apartments this year in Calgary, for example, were made available through the Calgary Apartment Association, which we’re assisting with the first month’s rent and the damage deposit.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The victims of crime fund consistently runs surpluses of millions of dollars, currently sitting at $18 million and growing every year. To the Solicitor General: why are these funds not used to fund women’s shelters or sexual assault centres? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lindsay: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the hon. member noted, we do at this point in time have a surplus of funds in the victims of crime fund, and those funds are used to assist people who are victimized by crime.

We look at all different aspects of ensuring that the money gets out to those people who need it. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder, followed by the hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Logging in Kananaskis Country Mr. Eggen: Well, thanks, Mr. Speaker. So the Minister of Sustain- able Resource Development gets his way, and the trees are falling as we speak in the Sibbald district of the Kananaskis Country, just west of Calgary.

Despite more than a thousand letters and more than 1,200 petitioners a beautiful woodland in Calgary’s backyard goes down, and an essential watershed for more than a million people is endangered. To the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development: will the minister listen to his constituents and Albertans in general and protect this area and Calgary’s water supply? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, as I’ve explained to the hon. member across the way numerous times, Sustainable Resource Development has not one but two hydrologists on our staff.

Any forestry manage- ment agreement, any detailed forestry management plan, particularly this one because it’s upstream from a big urban centre like Calgary, has detailed water studies and water modelling. We’ve met with the city of Calgary. If you’d read the

article carefully, hon. member, you would have seen that the city of Calgary is satisfied with how we’re proceeding with respect to the water issue. Mr. Eggen: Well, Mr. Speaker, I beg to differ because certainly there are thousands of people who are not happy with this thing. There is a city of more than 1 million people only minutes away from this logging site. Calgarians are proud to consider K Country as part of their own backyard, and I don’t think they appreciate having the watershed for the Elbow River compromised by some half-baked notion of this minister’s right to log with imprudence.

So I’d ask the minister again: what is the backup plan that he has, then, for Calgary’s water supply should the Elbow River be compromised because of this shortsighted logging plan? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’m quite certain that some of my friends on this side would ante up for a one-way ticket for the hon. member to take a trip over to British Co lumbia. We could send him across the way, and he could see what happens when the let-nature-take-its- way group has their way. That’s what they said 10 years ago in British Columbia: let nature take its way. They’ve lost hundreds of thousands of hectares of land.

There are going to be children born in British Columbia now that won’t see a healthy pine forest for 40 years. That’s what we’re not going to allow to happen in this province. Mr. Eggen: Mr. Speaker, I find that the logic of connecting this pine beetle crisis and logging the Kananaskis Country is absolutely ridiculous. It comes from some sort of Paul Bunyan idea of logging as opposed to forest management. Albertans were not consulted in this forestry management plan. The plan was hashed out between the Tories and their big-business buddies, and then the public was brought in. Bought and paid: that’s what we hear.

So the minister should have some inkling that the people in his region do not approve of this logging adventure, and it’s taking place right in his constituency. Why is the minister alienating his own cons tituents and the city of Calgary by allowing the destruction of this important watershed? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, the logging company involved here, Spray Lake Sawmills, is hardly big business. It’s a family-owned business. It’s been logging in the Kananaskis and the eastern slopes since 1946. Many of the recreational trails that we use right now are the result of this logging.

Pe rhaps you’ve been on the Forestry Trunk Road. The Forestry Trunk Road would be a result of that. I’m sure I could collect another little money from this side to send the hon. member on another trip, over to southern British Columbia, down to Radium to take a look at the Kootenay River Valley, burned out for about 40 kilometres. That’s what comes after the pine beetle. If you want to see a half-baked idea, that’s the half-baked idea. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Elbow. Bullying Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you. Mr.

Speaker, bullying is unacceptable any time and anywhere. This week is national bullying prevention week, and we’ve seen a number of stories about bullying in our schools and communities. Most alarmingly, bullying seems to have moved out of our schools and into cyberspace, with online bullying becoming a significant problem. Children and teachers are being

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2143 targeted each and every day by people under the cover of the Internet. My first question is to the Minister of Education. Accord- ing to the Media Awareness Network 34 per cent of students in grades 7 to 11 report they have been bullied within this current school year. Among those, 27 per cent say that they have been bullied over the Internet . . . Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think what the hon. member would like to know is what we’re doing about it.

I’d like to say, you know, that the Internet is going to play an important role in the 21st century with the 21st century learner, but along with that come bad people who do bad things, and they can remain anonymous. It was my pleasure yesterday to join the Minister of Children’s Services as we participated with some 300 students at a west Edmonton junior high school and announced phase 3 of our antibullying initiative. That particular phase is geared towards looking at oneself to ensure that we’re not doing things like bullying. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you.

If we’re going to combat bullying, we need to get to the heart of where our students live, learn, and play. To the same minister: is the government’s bullying prevention campaign doing enough to r each our children and their parents to make sure that they are getting the message? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, phase 3 is rather a unique cam- paign that is going to be released throughout movie theatres in the province. It will complement the two websites that we currently have up and running. The one is called bullyfreealberta.ca, and the other is b-free.ca.

I guess that out of all three of those phases, quite frankly, our message is that bullying is unacceptable anywhere any time by anybody. 2:10 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you. To the same minister. I know that the government’s bullying prevention cam paign is in its third year. What I don’t know is whether or not the campaign messages are actually reaching our students. Do you have any proof that this campaign is working and has had any impact? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the only thing that I think we can report statistically is that thos e two particular websites that I mentioned have had more than 2 and a half million hits. An Hon. Member: How many? Mr. Liepert: Two and a half million hits in about two years. Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, some 500 people have called our 24/7 toll-free bullying prevention helpline. Just to conclude, Mr. Speaker, I think one of the things that all of us need to ensure – I don’t believe that children learn to be bullies in schoolyards.

I think they learn from watching adults, whether it’s how adults perform at hockey games or how we speak to one another. I believe that we can give kids the wrong message. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Elbow, followed by the hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Logging in Watersheds Mr. Cheffins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A portion of Alberta’s oldest, rarest, and most threatened forest, in the Crowsnest Pass on the slopes of Mount Tecumseh, was approved to be logged by the Department of Sustainable Resource Development.

This rare forest has some of the most diverse and vulnerable flora and fauna in the province. It’s a part of our natural heritage which should be preserved and protected for all Albertans. To the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development: will the government protect the oldest forest in the province and stop the logging from proceeding? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member had better check his facts. I believe Mount Tecumseh is in the C5 forestry area.

I postponed the approval of the next forestry management agreement in that area in March precisely because of concern about watershed and habitat issues. We’re not proceeding with the forestry manage- ment agreement there until we receive the report on the Oldman water basin and we see an updated forestry management agreement for C5. Mr. Cheffins: Well, then, the minister acknowledges the importance of water basins. If that’s the case, Mr.

Speaker, Albertans are concerned about logging currently under way in Kananaskis provincial park in the proximity of a vital watershed and within a pristine natural recreational area. Calgarians are greatly concerned with the effect it will have on the quality of their water supply. Logging of this area can cause increased runoff and flooding downstream and increase the level of contaminants in a vital source of drinking water. To the same minister: will this government stand up for Calgarians and all Albertans and stop the logging in this sensitive area? Dr. Morton: Mr.

Speaker, I hate to waste the House’s time by repeating the answers I’ve already given, but we have not one but two hydrologists on staff. Any forestry management agreement is both tested and modelled on water treatment. I met with save a tree, the Kananaskis protection group. I met with them in June. We agree with them that the highest use of the eastern slopes is water- shed and recreation. The question is: how do you achieve that goal? It’s not by sitting back and doing nothing. That’s what they did in British Columbia. That leads to the pine beetle. That leads to the forest fires.

If you want to see real water problems, sit back and do nothing; let nature take its way. That will cause worse problems. Thank you. Mr. Cheffins: Mr. Speaker, this minister knows that clear-cutting is not allowed in various areas in British Columbia upstream from drinking water sources such as in Vancouver. The minister refers to children in British Columbia. Well, if he’d come into some of the schools in my constituency, he’d see the posters there that say: stop logging in the Kananaskis. To the same minister. These are not normal areas for logging activity. They’re vital areas, important watersheds.

Will this government start treating these sensitive areas more responsibly and stop the mismanagement, which is outraging Albertans across the province? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, we won’t even take up a collection for this. I’ll personally take the hon. member down to visit. He’s new to the House, but he seems to have the same problems as the others: he doesn’t listen very well. I’ll take you down to the Castle Crown. I will show you areas that were logged 40 years ago that are now in such good shape, having been reseeded, that the same groups want to protect this area as pristine forest.

Our concern about Kananaskis is just as sincere as theirs. We’re using science, not romantic notions. We’ve seen what happe ned over in British Columbia. We’re using science to do what’s good for the long term – the long

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072144 term – not what’s good for next week but the long-term well-being of the forest. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Edible Oil Tariffs Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Agriculture is a highly competitive international and global business. Changes to protocols or import tariffs somewhere halfway across the world can have an impact on Alberta and its producers. I recently learned that China has lowered its tariffs on soybeans and that this is having a negative impact on Alberta’s canola producers.

My question is to the Minister of Agriculture and Food. Can the minister explain how soybean tariffs affect our canola exports and the impact that this has had on Alberta canola producers? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Groeneveld: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, canola and soybeans compete as edible oils. China is a big and growing market. Their tariff on canola is 9 per cent. Their soybean tariff was 3 per cent, and that has been reduced to 1 per cent. According to industry estimates, equal tariffs could potentially increase Alberta’s canola exports by about 1 million tons, or $400 million.

To give this perspective, in the year 2000 China’s number one and number two agricultural imports were soybeans and canola. Today, Mr. Speaker, canola is not even in the top 20. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The amount of potential revenue being lost by our canola producers is of concern, so I wonder if the minister could tell us what the Ministry of Agriculture and Food is doing to address this situation? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Groeneveld: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My staff of course has been advocating for trade parity and promoting benefits of canola with our Chinese counterparts. We’ve written the federal minister of agriculture. In fact, I talked to him last Friday and Saturday about the issue, and he agreed to raise the issue with the Chinese authorities. Pursuing change to canola tariffs will probably continue to be a part of trade talks with China as we move forward on this. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m glad to hear that the minister of agriculture is continuing to go to bat for the agriculture industry.

I recognize that this is not just an Alberta issue but one also that impacts canola producers across the country. So my final question is to the Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations. Can this minister tell us if there is any other action we can take, perhaps through the World Trade Organization, to remedy this problem? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Boutilier: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I must admit our frustration in the fact that the WTO, the World Trade Organization, is moving at a glacial pace relative to the complexities of countries that are involved.

But I can assure you that working in partnership with our federal government, our cousins, we want to receive the outcome that, in fact, will serve Albertans and serve them better than presently is in place today. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. Regional Health Authority Budgets Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The July 2007 contract agreement between the United Nurses of Alberta and the health regions resulted in a 7.7 per cent salary increase for nurses.

The minister has refused to provide additional funding to the health regions to offset this increase. My question is to the minister of health. The regions are now forced to choose between cutting programs and services or going into deficit. What should they choose? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, by law they’re not able to go into deficit, so they should choose to follow the law, as any prudent board would do.

But it should be mentioned that the regional health authorities, working together, ne gotiate the agreement, so they obviously would have known what impact the agreement would have on their budgets when they signed the agreement and so would have prudently planned for that eventuality. Ms Blakeman: I think the minister left the health regions in a very bad position. Is the minister going to give the regions any direction on what programs he deems expendable that they can cut? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, if I was going to tell the regional health authorities what programs they would cut, what purpose would I have in having a regional health authority at all? I would just run it directly. They’re the ones that are on the ground in their regions, determining what the priorities are for the region, what the priorities are for the investment of the resources that they get. But I would point out that a significant amount of the $12 billion budget that this province spends on health c a r e g o e s t o d i r e c t s e r v i c e delivery through the regional health authorities.

They have signifi- cant budgets, and they have to allocate those budgets in accordance with the needs in their region. 2:20 The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Again to the minister: why is the minister avoiding accountability by forcing the regions to make the difficult and, most likely, unpopular decisions about cutting services? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, the last thing on earth that I’m trying to do is avoid accountability.

I expect that I will be roundly roasted by that very member when we get into debating Bill 41 and Bill 48, which set up an accountability structure which brings it right back to the government with respect to having the tools to serve account- ably to Albertans and deal with the resources we need. The fact of the matter is that we have a complex health system. We have nine health regions that deliver within the context of a provincial health policy framework. Their job is to take the resources that are allocated to them and to allocate those resources in the best interests

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2145 of their region, providing the services that are needed in their region. They have large budgets, and, yes, we can always use more. But part of the role of governance, whether you’re at this level or at their level, is to allocate resources in accordance with priorities. The Speaker: Hon. members, that concludes question period, and that was 90 questions and answers today. head: Tabling Returns and Reports (continued) The Speaker: We’ll now return to the Routine, where we were at, under Tabling Returns and Reports. I’ll recognize the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr.

Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve got two documents to table today. The first one: five copies of a letter from Doug Wiebe, executive director of L’Arche Association of Lethbridge, regarding the urgent need to increase support for persons with developmental disabilities. The second tabling, Mr. Speaker, is five copies of an e-mail from the Energy and Utilities Board security leader, Ray Ambler, advising EUB board members John Nichol, Ian Douglas, Graham Lock of a contract to spy on the landowners at the 500 kV line hearings in Rimbey, Alberta.

Also copied on the e-mail are legal counsel Rick McKee and communication employees Davis Sheremata and Bob Curran, still employees of the AEUB. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling the requisite number of copies of letters I received from six of my constituents, all urging us to look at revamping Alberta’s labour laws, which, in their opinion, are antiquated and not fair to all working people in Alberta. One sample idea in the letters is a first-contract arbitration process, for example.

These letters are from Jennifer Innes, Joyce Hass, Doreen Long, Harold Kitchen, Jarek Wysokinski, and Brenda Freeson. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I have four tablings today. The first is a letter from a constituent, Alfreda Strzelec. This letter indicates that we should have a more positive and fair labour relations climate. The second tabling I have today is in regard to my questions from earlier today to the Minister of Energy.

It’s a transcription of tapes from the Austin annual meeting general session October 16, 2006, minister-counsellor Murray Smith, Alberta. This is the sp eech in Austin, Texas. The third tabling I have is again another letter from a constituent, Donald George Milford, a resident of Edmonton-Gold Bar, of course, who is urging this Assembly to make five significant changes to Alberta’s labour laws. My last tabling is also a letter from a constituent by the name of John McLennan. Mr. McLennan is also advocating there be at least five significant changes to Alberta’s labour laws to make them more fair. Thank you.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have four tablings, and they have come from my constituents. They are Jorge Ortiz, Darren Milward, Ben Carandang, Leonila Carandang. They are all con- cerned about Alberta labour laws and strongly believe in “major changes to encourage fairness to all working people,” strongly urging this government to “implement and support these changes to our province’s antiquated and unfair labour laws” and bring Alberta labour into the 21st century. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr.

Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings. One is the victims’ assistance program, a document on it from the Edmon- ton John Howard Society, and that just shows how to provide assistance to victims of domestic violence as they go through the criminal court system. Another is an excellent document, Wife Abuse: I Want the Violence to Stop! It documents 34 of our very necessary women’s shelters and other resource centres for this difficult problem. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Dr. B. Miller: Mr. Speaker, I have two tablings.

One, a letter from Tina Copp, who came here from New Brunswick to a job but is really concerned about high increases in rent. I have another letter from Diane Currah, who is really concerned about increases in rent. Also, “What are the Seniors, kids going to school and the Working poor going to do in the near future? . . . We need to get this Government Out.” head: Projected Government Business The Speaker: The Official Opposition House leader. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

According to Standing Order 7(6) I would request that the Government House Leader share with us the business next week, the week commencing on the 26th of November, government business commencing on the 27th. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’re hoping to have a very productive week next week. Ms Blakeman: Hope springs eternal. Mr. Hancock: It does. Monday being private members’ day, government business would start on Tuesday, November 27.

After Orders of the Day we would expect to be in Committee of the Whole very briefly with respect to Bill Pr. 1, the CyberPol bill, and I would expect, Mr. Speaker, just for the notice of the House that we would have a statement from the Minister of Justice with respect to that bill and then adjourn it. We would then be in second reading on the appropriation bill and possibly Bill 46, Committee of the Whole on bills 1, 2, 9, 11, 23, 24, 31, 38, and 41. I trust we’ll make some progress on some of those.

Wednesday, November 28, under Orders of the Day we could be in Committee of the Whole on some of the bills left over from Tuesday, November 27, and for second reading Bills 47, 48, 49, 50, and 53 and 46 if it’s in second or in committee, as well as Commit- tee of the Whole on appropriations. Thursday, November 29, after Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole, based on progress from Wednesday, including Bill 46

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072146 and the other bills in committee, and third reading, time permitting, based on progress from Tuesday and Wednesday, but third reading, certainly, on the appropriation bill. Bills 13, 35, 36, and 40 are also possible. When I mention progress on the appropriation bill, of course, the House will be in Committee of Supply this afternoon. If Committee of Supply approves supply and recommends it to the House, we would then anticipate introducing an appropriations bill on Monday. That would be the projected government business.

The Speaker: Hon. members, during the Routine, the Oral Question Period, the chair was advised that two points of order would be raised. The first, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Point of Order Ministerial Responsibilities Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. During the sixth set of questions an exchange between the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar and the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Energy responded by indicating he was only responsible for the actions of the department following his appointment as minister on December 15, 2006.

I’d like to draw the Speaker’s attention to Beauchesne 409(6), which says: A question must be within the administrative competence of the Government. The Minister to whom the question is directed is responsible to the House for his or her present Ministry and not for any decisions taken in a previous portfolio. So it indicates, I think, that quite clearly, but let me also direct you to M and M, page 427, again around question periods.

The advice given there is to “ask a question th at is within the administrative responsibility of the government or the individual Minister ad- dressed.” Further, it comments that one may not “address a Minis- ter’s former portfolio or any other presumed functions, such as party or regional political responsibilities.” 2:30 I’ll also note at M and M 432 that Speaker Jerome in his 1975 statement on question period commented: Several types of responses may be appropriate.

Ministers may • answer the question; • defer their answer; • take the question as notice; • make a short explanation as to why they cannot furnish an answer at that time; [or they may] • say nothing. Clearly, Mr. Speaker, it is laid out that whoever is appointed and holds that position of minister for a given department is responsible for answering questions to that department, not as of a certain date. Nowhere in here does it say: only from the day they are appointed. They are responsible for the actions of that department. They are the member of the government. It is the government’s ministry.

They’re responsible for answering for the choices that have been made in that particular department. Seeing as we cannot question them on a previous portfolio – and that is specifically stated – it does indicate that they are responsible for answering questions for the portfolio that they’re in, and there is no best before date, if I may use that colloquial expression.

So for the Minister of Energy to continue to evade questions by stating that he was only responsible after December 15, 2006, is not an appropriate response, and I do give you those citations in support of my contention that there is a point of order against the Minister of Energy. Thank you. The Speaker: Others to participate? The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, there’s no point of order. There’s nothing in Beauchesne’s or M and M, as the hon. member referred to it, which requires the minister to answer the question in the manner that’s asked.

In fact, with the rules that we have in place now, the 45-sec ond rule, and the abuse of the

preambles that the hon. members opposite are engaging in, it is very difficult sometimes to know even what question is being asked. The hon. Minister of Energy was merely pointing out and I think has pointed out a number of times in this House that the members opposite are often living in the past and they’re asking for answers to questions relative to things that go back historically.

I guess if the hon. members were to read the rules rather thoroughly, they’d find that the rules with respect to written questions are appropriate to ask for issues of the past and question period is really to ask for issues of the day. The Speaker: Are there others? Hon. members, this is one of the long-standing dilemmas that, I guess, individuals have. Because so much in the question and so much in the response these days tends to be more debate than it is actually dealing with policy, we’re invariably going to fall into this kind of a situation.

Now, for me to extrapolate from the Blues with respect to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar: When it comes to our oil sands royalty system, why did the government simply have this give-it-away policy for the last seven years? Then the hon. Minister of Energy – and I’m skipping the first sentence in the response – says: My responsibility with respect to this issue also started in December last year. I will say another thing. I suspect that one could read all kinds of different things in both of those questions, including the second response.

By not saying he’s refusing to answer a question – he doesn’t have to answer a question in this case if he doesn’t want to – I suppose one could make the argument that he did answer the question. That’s the subjectivity that goes with this. I’m afraid it’s all part of the give- and-take in question period and the phrasing of the questions and what have you. The fact that someone says anything, one might argue that he has answered a question. The fact that someone says nothing, that is within their right not to. I repeat: this is Oral Question Period. Unfortunately, it’s not called oral answer period.

So we’re going to have these interpreta- tions from time to time. They will continue. They’re not new. They’ve been here for 102 years. The hon. Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations. Point of Order Factual Accuracy Mr. Boutilier: T h a n k y o u , M r . S p e a k e r . O n t h e t o n e o f y o u r response to that point of order I will say under 23(

l) and 23(i) – if I understood correctly the hon. member mentioned Washington, DC, representative Murray Smith contrary to the fact – and the member may not be aware – that, unfortunately, Mr. Smith no longer works in Washington. It is my understanding from what I heard that he was implying that he still did. I might add that the Alberta representative, while he was there, did an absolute stellar job and helped with our fiscal regime policy, that has injected billions of dollars in to our communities. That was 10 years ago. Here we are today, ten years later: we didn’t generate $25

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2147 billion; we generated over $100 billion because of some of the good work of that member that he had mentioned. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: This appears to be more of a point of clarification than a point of order. Along those lines one might also want to go to this famous M and M. By the way, M and M is Marleau and Montpetit. There are sections in here dealing with all these sorts of things. I suspect that every once in a while it’s a good release of energy. The intention was to have points of clarification, and that’s the most we ever had today.

It was not a point of order either. So along with the Deputy Speaker’s that’s 0 for 3 today in points of order. head: Orders of the Day head: Committee of Supply [Mr. Marz in the chair] The Chair: I would like to call the Committee of Supply to order. Before I recognize the hon. President of the Treasury Board, might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (reversion) The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Today I’m very pleased to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly three members of Greenpeace Alberta. Greenpeace is an independently funded organization that works to protect the environment. These three members of Greenpeace have come to the Legislature today to present their concerns over numerous issues, including Bill 46 and nuclear energy in this province. I would like my three guests now to rise and receive the recognition of the Assembly.

Thank you. head: Supplementary Supply Estimates 2007-08 General Revenue Fund The Chair: Just a clarification for the chair on how we’re going to proceed today. Have the House leaders come to an agreement on whether we’re going to go back and forth within the designated time frame, or is it 20 minutes on one side and 20 minutes on the other? Has there been clarification on that? Ms Blakeman: Well, the Standing Orders are silent on how supplementary supply debate actually gets organized. I left it up to my members to try and organize with their respective ministers.

If they’d like to go to the 20 minutes, they will notify you in advance. Other than that, I assume that we’re into traditional back and forth, but I do hope that the ministers will be cognizant of the short period of time we have to debate this. Thank you. Mr. Hancock: I don’t think anybody on this side would object to answering back and forth if that was appropriate. You know, we want to get as many of the ministries involved as possible. The Chair: Okay. Then that’s what we’ll do unless notified otherwise. The hon. President of the Treasury Board. 2:40 Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is now my pleasure to move the 2007-08 supplementary supply estimates for consider- ation by the Committee of Supply. These will provide additional spending authority to 16 depart- ments of the government. When passed, the estimates will authorize approximate increases of $1.5 billion in voted expense and equip- ment inventory purchases. Mr. Chairman, the majority of these estimates are for savings and capital projects. These estimates will see $825 million going to the heritage fund and $408 million for capital projects, including capital maintenance and renewal and affordable housing.

This is available from higher than anticipated results from last fiscal year and this year to date. The rest of the estimates are for $197 million in disaster emergency assistance and $68 million for public service salary settlements, contracted agency recruitment and retention initiatives, and the Fort McMurray allowance. Also, an additional requirement of $15 million in statutory nonbudgetary disbursements is disclosed in these estimates.

Disaster emergency assistance is funded through the sustainability fund, and other changes are addressed through dedicated revenue expense changes or the contingency allowances announced at budget. Mr. Chairman, as I indicated in the House yesterday, it is important to note that our operating expense is $77 million lower than at first quarter and $53 million lower than was forecast at budget. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We look forward to answering and addressing any questions that the Assembly may have concerning these estimates. The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr.

Chairman. I think I’m going to lay out questions in a number of areas and then allow ministers to respond when they get an opportunity. I would think that the government members would be wanting, crowding, pushing each other out of the way to be here and talking to us a bout the different departments that are up for supplementary supply. [interjec- tion] Oh, I’m getting an indication talking about the number of members I have present. Well, if you’re the government, you want to be accountable.

I notice that there are 16 departments that have additional money, and I’m afraid I don’t have a corresponding number of ministers here, which is a great disappointment. I would have thought they would be proud to be talking about additional money in their departments, but I guess that’s not the case. I would also note, Mr.

Chairman, that members of the Official Opposition r eceived the s upplementary supply during the very beginning of Orders of the Day yesterday, so we’ve had 24 hours to have a look at what is being brought forward in supplementary supply, which is a very quick turnaround for us even with additional staff that we secured. Those staff are for the policy field commit- tees, not to do additional work like this. I’m just querying why the government felt that they had to do such a quick turnaround on this. Most interesting choices there.

We are debating $1.5 billion in today’s supplementary supply, which is a honking amount of money. That comes out to about $1.5 million a minute in the time that we will have this afternoon, which indeed is, again, an awful lot of money to be trying to get answers from ministers as we go through. Starting with the Department of Health and Wellness, for which I am the shadow minister, I’m finding it very interesting that we now don’t really get an explanation of what’s happening with this money in supplementary supply. We used to get a couple of sentences that

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072148 described what was happening. Now we’re just referred back to an announcement that was made on a particular day, to which I thought, “Oh, great; I’ll get a lot of detail out of that.” But I go back and I look, and in the supplementary supply on page 44 it says that $53.5 million is available for additional capital maintenance and renewal projects, as announced on August 22. Well, when I go to the August 22 announcement, that’s a generic announcement for the entire government, and of course you’ve got to dig through it a bit to get your particular department out of it.

That announcement on the 22nd was actually an announcement of $350 million in a number of departments, six different departments. So I’ve been referred to go and look at a press release in which the department I’m trying to inquire about is mixed in the midst of six other departments. I think: “Well, okay. Great. There’ll be a lot of detail about what’s happening there.” No, Mr. Chairman, there isn’t.

It just talks about the $350 million, and some people say some nice things, but it doesn’t actually tell me what the Department of Health and Wellness is planning on doing with the $53 million that they’ve been allocated. Mr. Hancock: I’d be happy to. Ms Blakeman: The minister is indicating that he’s happy to tell me right now, and I hope he can give me the level of detail that I’m looking for because a one-sentence referral to a press release that gives me absolutely no information is not cutting the mustard right now.

The second thing I find very interesting is that if you read the small print that’s available on page 45, Mr. Chairman, it indicates, “Adjusted Gross Amount reflects the transfer of: $23,172,000 for emerging capital purposes from Infrastructure and Transportation.” All right. We’ve got 53 and a half million dollars coming in, but that actually isn’t new money; $23,172,000 is being transferred out of Infrastructure and Transportation. So I’m going back to this original media release of the 22nd going, okay, that $53 million was also indicated there.

Were the transfers from Infrastructure and Transportation included in that $53 million? It doesn’t say that in this media release. Were we going to get $53 m illion on August 22, and now part of it is coming from somewhere else? Where did the rest of the $53 million go? Well, that’s my question. If you take 53.5 and subtract the 23 and change off it, you still end up with $30 million. So where’s that money? Did we not get it, or did it transfer? Why? We were told that this was new money in the August 22 news release that we were given, but when I look at it, the $53 million is not new money.

Thirty million of it is new money; $23 million of it is a transfer from someone else. So I go: where’s the rest of the money? If it wasn’t there, if it was never there, then why wasn’t that in the August 22 announcement? You know, this government gives rise to conspiracy theories because when you start to look at stuff like this – I’m not a great conspiracy theorist. I have some experts that are around me, however, and I have to say that it does give grist to their mill because you do start to wonder what is going on here.

Now, it may well all be above board, but the amount of detail that is made available to members of the opposition, members of the media, and members of the public for how government is choosing to spend their money is reduced every single year. We get less and less specific information about what’s happening. So in this budget for Health and Wellness we have an additional amount of money of $1,150,000 going to the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission. Oh, look, Mr. Chairman. I’m referred back to a press release from November 5. Okey-dokey, let’s have a look at that one, then.

Well, that, actually, is in the middle of a $26 million investment to help contracted agencies hire and keep staff, certainly something that we’ve been asking for as very much needed and, I’m sure, that the sector that is contracted agencies really appreciate. When I’m trying to look at a supplementary supply budget, I’m looking for $1.15 million, and it’s buried somewhere in the middle of this $26 million media release.

So I start skimming through it, looking for details, and there is, indeed, a paragraph: “The government-funded agencies that are contracted by AADAC [are highly valued and] . . . this funding will help these highly valued agency professionals respond” and continue to respond. Okay, well, what programs? I get no detail at all about this. It’s just sort of throw it all in a big pond, you know, and you guys should just trust us that it’s all going to be okay there. You know, Mr. Chairman, when I was elected to this Assembly in 1997, I did trust the government.

I believed they were good and pure people, and I’m afraid that in the intervening years I’ve become a cynical old woman because I’ve been proven wrong in that trust over and over and over again. My specific question around the one million and change to the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission.

I specifically would like to know, because it was through the contracting of other agencies that a previous executive director of AADAC was able to finance himself, in quotation marks, to the tune of some $600,000 or $800,000, and I believe he’s now just been brought back into the province to face fraud charges – here we have an initiative where we’re putting more money into that contracting.

It is supposed to be going for improved wages, one assumes, but what has been done to make sure that we don’t end up with the repeat of that situation, where I think it was $600,000 that walked out the door into that person’s pocket? 2:50 I have a number of questions that are really asking for specifics from the Minister of Health and Wellness. Please explain the discrepancies between the $53.5 million, the money transferred in. How much new money is involved here? Was the infrastructure transfer money in that original press release? If it wasn’t, where did the $30 million go? Specifics, please.

It’s saying that it’s for additional capital maintenance and renewal projects. What we’re getting here is nothing new, I’m assuming, but I’d like that ex- plained. It is ongoing maintenance and larger maintenance projects on existing facilities. Which facilities, please? Also some details. I know that there’s a new executive director in for AADAC. I’m pretty sure it’s a woman, so I’m pretty sure she would have cleaned this up.

I’d like on the record, please, what has been done to make sure that contract money is adequately supervised and there’s a good audit trail in place there, actually, to prevent this kind of thing from happening. Now, I’d like to go next, if you would allow me, Mr. Chairman – actually, as I said, Minister of Health and Wellness, thank you for your eagerness, but I am going to put on record a couple of different departments, and then I’ll sit down. I’m sure he’ll give it to me in writing, so I can peruse it. The next ministry I’d like to raise some issues around, please, is Seniors and Community Supports. Okay.

What we have here is $15 million that “is requested to provide funding for a portion of the $25,000,000 required for cost escalation of previously approved Rural Affordable Supportive Living projects.” For those following along at home, this is on page 58 of your supplementary supply estimates book. Now, I’m assuming that what this is is inflation. You know, I’m sympathetic to the rural areas that are trying to get affordable supportive living projects happening because, given this govern-

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2149 ment’s whipping of the horses of the economy, we are now in hyperoverdrive here and are looking at significant cost overruns on anything that’s being built or probably even maintained. I’d like some descriptions, please, of exactly which projects are being funded under this amount of money. Now, the second part of this says, “The balance of $10,000,000 is available from the budget for the Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped program owing to a lower-than-budgeted rate of growth in caseloads.” I’m really interested, Mr.

Chairman, because there was a change in the spring around the eligibility criteria around AISH. My colleague had done a couple of written questions looking for information because we felt that people were now being denied from AISH that would have qualified previously. I’m specifically concerned about the use of activities for daily living as a criteria for determining eligibility for AISH.

That criteria, for anybody that’s following along at home, essentially is asking a physician to make statements on things like: a mild deterioration of activities of daily living would be if the patient is generally independent in activities of daily living, only requiring little or temporary assistance, and is fully capable to continue involvement in community, social, and recreational activities as compared to, say, severe, where the patient is markedly restricted in their ability to complete activities of daily living, is frequently housebound, is limited in independent interactions with community, social, and recreational activities, and/or the condition is diagnosed to be terminal.

I’m looking at this and going: hmm, $10 million was not spent in an AISH budget. I believe that there is some evidence to suggest that people not successful in getting onto the AISH benefit program would have been under different criteria earlier. I’m also increasingly aware of two situations happening, Mr. Chairman. I have a number of people on AISH who are trying to live independently in the community. I have quite a bit of older housing stock, 1950s and some even before that, those sort of three- floor walk-ups, you know, 12 units in a building. I have a lot of those.

They were, generally speaking, cheaper rental accommoda- tion, and a number of people living on AISH took advantage of that because they could afford to rent one of those apartments. Let’s face it, they were old apartments. They weren’t well insulated. They didn’t have new windows or anything like that, so utility costs were pretty high. But, you know, they were fairly safe, and they were okay accommodation, not grand by any means. They were able to afford to live there.

Since the government’s – I’m searching for a term that is printable – ill-advised decisions on lack of rent control in this province, it used to be that an average one-bedroom unit in these older apartment buildings was around $500, $550. I can’t find one for less than $850 right now. Everyone, I hope, is aware that people on AISH are collecting a benefit of $1,050.

If the cheapest apartment they can find that is still safe, as compared to, you know, something truly horrific in a basement with bugs, is $850, we’ve now left these people $300 for all of their add itional drugs that they have to pay for, for additional medical testing equipment or whatever else is not covered by the program, their food for a month, personal toiletry items, cleaning supplies, and everything else: $300. So I’m a little bit ticked when I see that 10 million bucks is being handed over to another deserving project.

I will say that, but it’s $10 million that I think should have been redirected to people who are collecting AISH benefits to help them pay that increased cost of the rent that they’re facing in independent living situations. The other thing that has been brought to my attention recently – Mr. Chairman, you know, sometimes I go to these meetings at night, and I think: oh, man, I’m just too tired for this. But a very interest- ing evening I had last night.

I went to the local meeting of the PDD board in my constituency, and there was a presentation there from a local society – and I haven’t actually spoken to them, so I’m not going to mention their name so that I don’t embarrass them – that provides services to people with developmental disabilities and also people with mental health issues in a number of locations. In some cases they offer services, and in most cases they offer services and housing.

Their point is that right now for AISH recipients who live in an accommodation that is a nursing home as defined under the Nursing Home s Act, a hospital or auxiliary hospital as defined under the Hospitals Act, a facility or part of a facility approved by AISH as a designated assisted living unit, or in some very unique care needs a residential facility, the private monthly accommodation rate is $1, 469, and the standard rate is $1,205. Now, Mr.

Chairman, if we have nonprofit agencies that are trying to offer housing for hard-to-house individuals who can only charge the basic AISH rate of $315, these groups cannot stay in business. They will have to stop offering housing because they can’t afford to do it. We’ve got AISH people out there on their own who can’t afford the rents. We’ve got 10 million bucks here that has not been distributed back to those people who need it to pay for rent. For shame.

I would like to hear the justification from the minister as to why these choices were made. 3:00 We’ve been talking about the plight of AISH recipients in this province regarding rents for some time now, and we’re not getting a good answer back. The department that is dispensing the rent supplements is completely inconsistent as to who gets these rent supplements and who doesn’t.

My office has been told that AISH recipients can’t get it because they’re already getting a government subsidy, and other c onstituency offices have been given different information, and even from the same office they’ve been told different information on two different people. It’s a mess, Mr. Chairman.

What we really have is vulnerable people that are trying to live their life with dignity who are being faced with paying up to 80 per cent of their income for accommoda- tion in independent living, and we have housing societies and assistance societies that want to help them that are going to go broke trying to offer housing on the reduced AISH rate. Why can’t that money be given to those housing associations and help associations along the rate of what’s being suggested and what’s being given to nursing homes, auxiliary hospita ls, AISH-approved designated assisted living units?

They should be able to get that $1,205 rate that is given to those other agencies. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Chairman, it’s very obvious that the hon. member is not really interested in the actual answers to the questions she started with by the simple fact that she repeated the same things the first three times, but we’re going to give them to her anyhow on behalf of the hon. minister.

She wanted to know about the $53.5 million to address capital and maintenance for health authorities and the $1.15 million to assist AADAC’s contracted agencies in their work to deliver many essential components of Alberta’s addictions services. The $53.5 million will be used to address pressures facing the health authorities such as the need for additional infrastructure maintenance program funds, totalling $9 million. The funds are needed for building systems and upgrading projects in seven health regions.

These projects relate to fire alarm systems, roofing systems as well as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems. We are requesting $8.5 million from the capital maintenance funds under the public health security and safety upgrade initiative.

Alberta Hansard November 22, 20072150 This initiative was referred to in the Provincial Review of Infection Prevention and Control report, which, as you know, was released August 27 of this year. Funding will be used to correct physical plant design barriers that prevent effective infection control. The ministry is continuing to evaluate the use of this funding. We are requesting that $27.5 million of the capital maintenance funding be used for the purchase and installation of mechanical patient lift and transfer equipment and related assistive devices.

The government is taking action to address health workforce needs. The Health Workforce Action Plan, that was released in September, stated that one of our action areas is to reduce and, if at all possible, avoid workplace injury. This funding will support our efforts in this area. By reducing and avoiding workplace injury, the safety of front-line and support staff will be improved as well as the safety of patients. Subsequent absenteeism costs will also be minimized.

Preservation and renewal projects in Peace Country health, Capital health, and the Calgary health region require $8.5 million of the capital maintenance funding. In Peace Country health funds will go towards three specific projects: emergency department redevelop- ment and an endoscopic suite upgrade at the Queen Elizabeth II hospital in Grande Prairie, roof replacement and upgrading at the Fairview Health Complex, and roof replacement at the Sacred Heart Community Health Centre in McLennan.

At Capital health a food production kitchen at Alberta Hospital Edmonton will be repl aced with a food depot to accommodate a f ood r eceiving and holding area. Minor renovations will also be done on in-patient units to develop food rethermalization stations. In the Calgary health region funds w ill go toward upgrading of in-patient unit and emergency department medication rooms at three Calgary acute-care hospitals. This will ensure that current standards are met for the safe storage, preparation, and administration of medications.

In relation to the $1.15 million in supplementary funding needed for AADAC’s contracted agencies, funding will go toward address- ing staff recruitment and retention issues. These agencies provide services in 25 different communities. They deliver many essential programs in Alberta’s addictions services continuum, including aboriginal-based treatment and training programs, gender-specific programs, the AADAC helpline, outpatient and prevention services, residential treatment beds, and shelter services. I know, Mr. Chairman, that the opposition supports all of these initiatives.

This funding is essential in order to provide the addictions services that are needed to help create healthy Albertans. Mr. Chairman, with regard to the questions around the specific seniors’ facilities that were requiring cost overrun funding, we will make the program list available to the hon. member ASAP. The Chair: The hon. Member for St. Albert. Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Since the minister is still here, maybe he’d help me with this. First of all, the total amount I’m going to be talking about is $110,400,000.

As I understand it from what I have here, $97,300,000 is for additional capital maintenance and renewal spending. Specific projects were also announced on August 30, ’07: $11,500,000 to enable school boards to provide a monthly allowance to employees in Fort McMurray and $1,600,000 for a higher than budgeted cost of salary settlements for provincial employees. If we could look at the maintenance aspect of the budget, first of all I think that any additional maintenance that we can do in schools is certainly in order and appreciated.

I guess the question is doubtful that the extra $97.3 million will address the infrastructure and maintenance needs of schools in this province. I wonder if he could comment later, because I haven’t got many questions. Does delaying routine maintenance and major repairs increase the cost to Albertans rather than doing it on a regular basis? The other aspect I just wanted to ask the minister. I don’t know what’s happening in all 62 school districts, so maybe you can help me.

There is an interesting situation – I think it’s in Camrose-Battle River – where they take all the maintenance and keep it under central control and don’t decentralize it to the schools. As a result I’ve been told there – and you’d know more about this, and you can clarify this – that they have one of the best maintenance programs in the province. The point I’m getting at, Mr.

Minister, is the question: when maintenance is decentralized to individual schools across the province through moving the budget from a central office to a decentralized position, much like they do in the public school system in Edmonton, is the maintenance dollar that should be going for the ongoing maintenance in the school being used for other purposes? I don’t know the answer to that. Maybe you can help me with that information. I’d really be inte rested in knowing that, because sometimes individual schools have ways of moving dollars around that are a little easier than, say, at the government level.

Why has the government repeatedly taken the approach to addressing severe maintenance issues of schools in this province? Why did the government choose to announce these funding initia- tives at a certain time? Is there a political reason, or is it simply on demand, when school divisions required the dollars? You probably know more about that than I do, so you’d probably be able to help us. Why does the government not adopt a comprehensive list of priority maintenance projects and make it publicly available? It seems that at times the government seems to make somewhat surprise announcements

whereas in a school year it may be more helpful if you get an idea where maintenance problems are coming up at certain periods of the year. You could make regular announce- ments regarding dollars that are required. The other thing I’d like to know, Mr. Chair, if the Minister of Education would be kind enough to answer, is: given the high cost of living, the cash injection programs in Fort McMurray – this is not a problem that simply appeared in the last few months – why was the high cost of living not factored into the budget and addressed in terms of a longer range plan?

In other words, we know that things are escalating in Fort McMurray. I actually worked there. We know that there is some regularity in te rms of an increase in the cost of living, and can you anticipate that? I’d be interested in knowing if he has insights into that and would share information with me regarding that particular aspect of cost of living and how to deal with it on a more regulated basis. I’m not sure of the answer to that question. Maybe he could help me with it. 3:10 The other question is salary settlements for provincial employees. I’m not sure, but I think this was, if I remember, $1.6 million.

Why was this expense not taken into account in the regular budget? Which employees specifically will be getting this increase? Is there a

section or a branch or a particular aspect in the department that’s getting these incentive dollars? Is that maybe in the reporting mechanism that was going to be set up to, I think, help get parents knowledgeable about the various reporting systems? They were planning to do some work there, and I’m wondering if that’s an additional increase in the budget for staffing. Maybe the minister could share some information on that with us. The other question I’d like to ask him: why has this increase popped up so suddenly as to deserve an additional injection before the next scheduled annual budget? Maybe, Mr.

Chairman, if I could just stop there. He’s here, and I’d like to take advantage of that. The other thing I’d like to ask – and maybe I could continue with this later. I don’t know how this works exactly. In terms of the

November 22, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2151 minister’s goals, I think there were three. I think the teachers’ unfunded liability was one of them, and I would formally like to thank him today for the good work he’s done there. I actually enjoyed his speech the other day. It was calm. I guess that when you have money on your side, it makes it a lot easier to be generous and smile all through it. I’ve never had that experience at my age. Maybe the hon. minister would share some money with me there in building those P3 schools, that P3 school that we’re looking for, and I would smile with him. I hope it’s not going to be moved out of the one district that I want to see i