Alberta Hansard — 28 October 1983, Morning sitting (10:00) (Legislature 20, Session 1)

19831028

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

October 28, 1983 ALBERTA HANSARD 1521 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Friday, October 28, 1983 10:00 a.m. [The House met at 10 a.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SELECT COMMITTEES MR. KOWALSKI: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the report of the Select Standing Committee on the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Act, relating to the 1982-83 annual report of the Provincial Treasurer on the fund.

The committee has made every attempt to fulfil its duties as required by the Act and as expected by the Legislative Assembly. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 91 Pacific Western Airlines Act MR. M. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a Bill, being the Pacific Western Airlines Act. The purpose of this Bill is to facilitate the continued broad ownership of Pacific Western Airlines when the government sells some of its interest in that company. [Leave granted; Bill 91 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. ADAIR: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to file with the Legislative Assembly five copies of a telex message received by the organizing committee of Calgary's 1988 Olympics from the Federation Internationale de Ski, Mr. G.F. Kasper. MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table the 1982-83 annual report of the Agricultural Development Cor poration and the 15th annual report of the Alberta Hail and Crop Insurance Corporation, for the year ended March 31, 1983. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MRS. FYFE: Mr.

Speaker, this morning I have the pleasure of introducing to you and to members of the Assembly 35 grade 8 students from the village of Legal, which is located within the northern part of the St. Albert constituency. The students are accompanied by their teachers, Joan Crockett and Diane Beaudin. I would ask them to rise and receive the welcome of the Assembly. DR. CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of my colleague the Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park, who is absent today because of his duties on the Committee on Tolerance and Understanding, it is my pleasure to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly 25 grade 6 students from the Father Kenneth Reams School in the constituency of Edmonton Sher wood Park. They are accompanied by their group leader. Diane Pidhirniak. I would ask that they all rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I take great pleasure this morning in introducing to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, 74 grade 6 students from the Fort Saskatchewan elementary school. They are accompanied by their teachers. Ellen Clark, Diane Scott, and Mrs. Sprague, who they left off the list, but I know her so well; by parent advisers Rose Magee. Janet Shafer, Donna Cranston, Brenda Norman-Kilpatrick. Lome Schneider, Isabelle Mohr, Anita Nairn, and Judy Cho- lowski; and by their bus driver, Eric Van Camp. They are seated in the public gallery.

I would ask them to rise and receive the welcome of the Legislature. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Olympic Facilities Development MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the first set of questions to the Minister of Tourism and Small Business. Has the minister reviewed the report of the OCO citizens' advisory committee on the use of Lake Louise for the 1988 Winter Olympics? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, no I have not. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Is the minister in a position to confirm that officials of the pro vincial government requested that the independent advisory committee report not be made public until certain changes were made to it that were acceptable to the government? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, no I am not. It should be pointed out, however, that the citizens' advisory committee was appointed by the Calgary organizing committee for the 1988 Winter Olympics.

It was my understanding that their terms of reference were to assist the organizing committee with the decision as to how to make the site selection for the men's downhill venue; in other words, whether it should be Lake Louise or Mount Allan. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the minister. Mr. Speaker. What consideration will be given to the committee's warning that the use of Lake Louise may result in millions of dollars of unnecessary expenditure? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I can't comment on the statement made by the hon. member, because I have not seen the report.

They were appointed by the organizing committee. It would be submitted — and my understanding is that it has been sub mitted — to the organizing committee. We should keep in mind, too, that it is the responsibility of the organizing com mittee for the 1988 Winter Olympics to make the site selections for all the venues of the Olympics. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Has the minister received any recent representation from the Alberta division of the Canadian Ski Association regarding their official motion of September 25, which expresses regret about the decision to use Mount Allan?

1522 ALBERTA HANSARD October 28, 1983 MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I have not. However, I should point out again that the Alberta division of the Canadian Ski Association may in fact have one position. The Canadian Ski Association would be reporting directly to the Calgary organ izing committee for the 1988 Olympics. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. In view of the fact that the independent advisory committee has made a report, will the minister check to find out if there was interference by provincial government officials? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, yes, certainly I can do that, without question.

But I should again remind the hon. member and the members of the House that the report would be submitted to the organizing committee that appointed them, and they would choose — as I would assume is the case with any reports that are submitted by committees to whatever the parent body may be — to accept or reject them in whole or in part. MR. MARTIN: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister reconsider previous decisions about Mount Allan and Lake Louise, in light of the advisory committee and the Ski Association recommendations? MR. ADAIR: Mr.

Speaker, I should point out that it is the decision of the Calgary organizing committee, supported by the government of Alberta, that Mount Allan is the venue for the majority of the events for the Olympics. One is in limbo — that is, the men's downhill — as to whether it will be at Lake Louise or Mount Allan. The site planning — the com mittee working with the Olympic committee is doing just that: planning for the eventual possibility of the men's downhill, along with the men's and ladies' giant slalom, the men's and ladies' slalom, and the ladies' events. MRS. KOPER: A supplementary to the minister.

In view of the fact that these plans he has just described are on the books, is there any time line for the start-up of this? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, from the standpoint of our com mittee, relative to putting the master plan in place, it's our hope to have that completed by March of this year. School Textbook MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my second set of questions to the Minister of Education. Will the minister advise if, during the process which led to acceptance of this book for use as a secondary textbook in Alberta high schools, any concern was expressed about its possible bias? MR. KING: Mr.

Speaker, not any that came to the attention of the Minister of Education. But as others have said, I suspect that in reviewing most of the books used in the province, someone somewhere expresses some concern about some bias that they apprehend in the book. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the minister. Appropriately named Ideologies and color coded to PC colors . . . [some applause] Go head, clap; there it is. Was the minister aware that this text was co-authored by a senior civil servant of the Alberta government? MR. KING: Mr.

Speaker, I think the hon. member is seeing the Progressive Conservative colors even where they are not. Perhaps he dreams about them. [laughter] The last time I checked, black and orange were the colors of the New Dem ocratic Party, not the Progressive Conservative Party. [inter jection] With those introductory comments, he hasn't allowed me to answer the question. I'll take the question as notice. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. It's not dreaming about PC colors; it's more appropriately nightmares that I have. [laughter and applause] I didn't know that having nightmares was such a positive thing.

I don't see any black on here. Would the minister confirm that his department is fully com mitted to avoiding the use of propaganda materials in our edu cational system? MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that class room teachers — and we rely a good deal on the judgment of the professionals in the school system — do, from time to time, use propaganda material in the classroom. They do it know ingly; they do it deliberately; they do it so that children, our students, can learn what it is that characterizes propaganda.

If the hon. member is making a representation that we should restrict the professional judgment of teachers in that regard, I'm pleased to take it as notice. I'm surprised to hear it coming from him. MR. MARTIN: Well, a very debatable point. If I may return, the minister knows full well that this is a secondary book approved by the Department of Education. That's precisely what I'm talking about. Will the minister then turn this textbook over to a fresh review, to determine the level of bias it contains, and re-exam ine other textbooks which may come to his attention as possibly being biased?

I'm talking specifically about approved Depart ment of Education textbooks; that's what I'm talking about. MR. KING: The hon. member may be unaware that in June of this year, I announced that all the prescribed and recom mended learning resources of Alberta Education were going to be reviewed. That's being done at the present time within the Department of Education. Further, it is understood that when that internal review has been completed, it will be audited by the Consultative Committee on Tolerance and Understanding.

In other words, the project the hon. member recommends to me has in fact been under way for three months. MR. MARTIN: One final supplementary. I'm asking the min ister specifically, will he turn this specific textbook over to a review? MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, it is unnecessary for me to turn that textbook over for review because that textbook, along with all other prescribed and recommended resources, is going to be the object of a two-level review, first by staff of the Department of Education — professional educators — and, secondly, by the Consultative Committee on Tolerance and Understanding. MR.

MARTIN: We'll see how they do it. Vehicle Registration Program MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Solicitor General is with regard to the new Alberta vehicle registration system. I wonder if the Solicitor General could indicate to the House the cost studies that have been done with regard to the mail-in and the mail-out of these forms, as to whether they're going to be excessive and of benefit to the program.

October 28, 1983 ALBERTA HANSARD 1523 MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, the costs of that particular program were of course part of the budget that was approved last spring for the department. Should the hon. member want some details of those costs, I'd be quite happy to supply them to him. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. Can the minister indicate whether the costs in terms of mailing are going to be equivalent to what they were under the former program or more excessive than the costs in the former program? MR. HARLE: Obviously, Mr.

Speaker, the costs would be more, because we are entering into a new program of staggered licence plates. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Could the minister indicate what effect this is having on many private agencies across the province that formerly received 7 per cent of the cost of the licensing,

whereas they will now receive nothing in most cases and very little in other cases? As well, could the minister indicate why there wasn't an indication in this pamphlet that persons applying for licences could apply through their local private agency? There's a minor reference to it, but not a deliberate reference to that process. MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, there is a reference in the brochure that individuals may, if they wish, apply through their local issuer, and in some cases it is of course a private issuer.

Where that is done and the individual citizen wishes to do what he has done in the past, the same commission rates apply as far as the private issuer is concerned. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. In terms of the implementation of this program, does the min ister foresee all private agencies being eliminated in that pro cess, so any licences that will be obtained by Albertans will be through a public agency only? Is that the final objective of the program? MR. HARLE: No, Mr. Speaker.

In fact, the role of the private issuers is being substantially improved by the implementation of the new computer program. There are discussions under way with regard to how to arrive at a more equitable fee structure which recognizes the fact that at the present time, certain trans actions which are handled by the private issuers do not carry with them a recompense, on the understanding that because they are receiving a commission on the major transaction, it implies that that covers some of the minor transactions they are presently covering, DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question.

Can the minister indicate what studies the department has done as to what effect the volume has had — the volume that is handled at the local level, now that the government is doing the cen tralized issuing of licence plates — on that small operator out in the small areas? How has his income been affected because we now have the centralized system? MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, we are watching that very closely. As I indicated, we're looking at a fee structure that will recom pense the private issuers, so all transactions they handle will receive some sort of fee.

We feel that each transaction is impor tant, as far as the whole registration and licensing system is involved. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. Is the minister in a position to indicate what has happened to the volume that has been served at the local level, now that the government is doing it from their headquarters here in Edmonton? Does the minister have any indication, ballpark figures? Has the volume gone up, gone down? What has happened? MR. HARLE: It's too early to say. It depends on how many people make use of the direct mail-in system.

But as I have indicated, the brochure does indicate that an individual may apply through their local licence issuer. As that program only started on October 1, it's too early to say how many are going to make use of the mail-in system or go to the private issuer. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Could the minister indicate whether those licences that expire as of October 31 this year, and the application form sent therein, will be serviced on time? Or is there a backlog in the department at the present time? MR. HARLE: I'm not too sure that I understand the question.

Suffice it to say there have been approximately 110,000 appli cations for the new plates and about 30,000 have been issued. As far as I'm aware, that program is working quite well. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, to the minister, for clarification. We're now in about the third year of the mail-in program. The question I'm addressing to the minister is, what effect has that had on these small, local agencies? We know the discussion the Member for Vegreville got into, where his issuing outlet was been wiped out, basically because there was no business.

What effect has the mail-in system had on that small, private entrepreneur? MR. HARLE: Obviously the mail-in system has had an impact. It has been accepted by the public, and the public have the opportunity of either using the mail or going to a private issuer. As I have indicated, the private issuers and their service have been improved and will be greatly improved as a result of the new computer program. MR. PAPROSKI: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to ask the Solicitor General, if he could assure this House that plates that are being forwarded to citizens in Alberta are not being sent under reg istered or double-registered mail. MR. HARLE: No they're not, Mr. Speaker. They're sent by ordinary first-class mail. Sanitary Landfills DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of the Environment has to do with the heritage savings trust program of filling garbage dumps throughout the province. We've spent a fair amount of money.

Could the minister indicate what mon itoring or inventory was done before we started filling in those small garbage dumps? What inventory as to the contents was done before we started covering them over? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I dealt quite extensively with that matter in the estimates of the trust fund last Monday. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, then could the minister indicate to the entire Assembly today what that inventory indicated? MR. BRADLEY: Mr.

Speaker, with regards to the Heritage Savings Trust Fund, capital projects division, the system which was in place with regard to sanitary landfills was basically that

1524 ALBERTA HANSARD October 28, 1983 we proceeded with reclamation of those garbage dumps on the basis of requests from municipalities. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, does the minister or his department have any indication as to what they thought we were covering over? Has that type of inventory been done? The question I'm concerned with. Mr. Speaker, is what the contents of those dumps were before we covered them over. MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I believe I dealt with that, as I said earlier, with regard to the discussions we had last Mon day. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, can the minister indicate what reg ulations the department is looking at to know, from now on, what we're going to be putting into those dumps? What mon itoring will there be to find out what is going into the dumps and to make sure no dangerous, hazardous materials are going in, so we don't have mini Love Canal situations? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, getting away from the question of reclamation itself, various landfills in the province are estab lished. They're licensed by the Department of Social Services and Community Health, and they are licensed in terms of what can be put into them.

That is ongoing. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that we are still waiting for a hazardous waste disposal site, what is being done to make sure we are not putting into these local garbage dumps materials that should be stored someplace until we get the hazardous waste disposal site in place? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, each sanitary landfill is licensed with regard to what in fact may be deposited in it, and there are certain substances which are not permitted to be deposited in it. DR. BUCK: A final supplementary.

Where are the materials being stored now, while we're waiting for the hazardous waste disposal site? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, various industries are dealing with those on a specific basis with regard to the industry involved. Child Care Report MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the Minister of Social Services and Community Health. What assessment has the minister made of the assertion on page 6 of the Cavanagh report, that a group of senior managers in the department were called in by the former minister to have their submission reviewed before it could be shown to the board of review?

Further, what assessment has been made of the charge: This action tends to confirm that employees did not feel as free to speak their minds as we had hoped. MR.SPEAKER: Order please. We have a repetition of the attempt to start a debate on observations made by someone somewhere. What assessment is made of a point of view of an opinion — really it's ques- tionable whether that's within the official duties of the minister. He certainly will have his opinions about those things. But I see no question of fact involved here, which is the sort of thing we should be dealing with in the question period. MR.

MARTIN: On a point of order. Mr. Speaker. What I'm trying to determine is from a report that was tabled in the House, in that this may have had an effect on some of the recom mendations they came to if people were afraid to speak their minds. That's what I'm trying to find out: an assessment of that from the minister. MR. SPEAKER: But an assessment is simply looking at some thing and forming an opinion on the basis of it. It doesn't necessarily involve any fact. MR. MARTIN: Let me direct a supplementary question to the Premier, then.

Can the Premier assure the House that the policy of this government in future will be that no such review will be undertaken of employee submissions to any public inquiry, board of review, or public hearing? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I'd certainly not make that assurance. That would be a matter of ministerial discretion, depending upon the circumstances. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Is the Premier say ing clearly that it would be all right for a minister to interfere in a public inquiry? Is that what the Premier is saying to us? MR. LOUGHEED: Well, Mr.

Speaker, if they are employees of his department and they're providing information that has been requested, certainly the minister will co-operate in pro viding the information requested. But if information is being volunteered, information of that nature should certainly be vet ted, in most cases, by the minister. There may be some excep tions to that. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the Premier. In the instance that we're talking about, the minister called the employees in. It wasn't the other way around; it wasn't a request. That's what I'm talking about.

Would the Premier assure the House that this type of practice would not continue in any further public inquiry? MR. LOUGHEED: I certainly wouldn't. Mr. Speaker. On the contrary, I would think that the ministers should very appro priately be considering submissions that are volunteered by their employees in matters of this nature, although there may be exceptions from time to time. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. I would ask the Premier this: what would be the point of having a public inquiry if there could be the possibility of political interference? MR.

LOUGHEED: There's a large difference between min isterial responsibility and political interference. It's a request. If particular information has been requested or particular people have been asked by a particular department to appear before a board of review or commission, they should do so. We should be fully co-operative in that regard. In this particular case, that was what happened. Economic Planning MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Pre mier.

He's in a rather effervescent mood this morning, so I thought it would be quite appropriate to ask him a question with regard to the economy of Alberta. I understand the Premier has appointed a two-man committee — and I believe that's public at the present time — in terms

October 28, 1983 ALBERTA HANSARD 1525 of the Minister of Advanced Education and the Minister of Housing. My question to the Premier is with regard to when that two-man committee will report to the Legislature. Or will the report be internal and held in confidence by the Premier until it's released at an appropriate time? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I believe the only explanation for receiving the question would be that perhaps the hon. Mem ber for Little Bow was unable to hear the debate on October 19, but the matter was then answered. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, I was certainly listening to the debate at that time, and also responding to the debate at that time and want to continue to do so. In my question to the Premier, I want to assure myself and Albertans that the matter of the economy is in good hands. Could the Premier then confirm again that these two members of cabinet will be report ing and will be the prime source of an economic strategy for the government that will be reported to the Legislature either this fall or in the spring session? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, I'll read from page 1369 of Hansard, October 19: We've completed the preliminary stage of this economic strategy reassessment. I'll stop there. That has to do with the document the hon. member was referring to, prepared by the ministers of Advanced Education and of Housing. Going on with what I said in the House on October 19: We now want to undertake extensive dialogue during the course of this winter with a multitude of groups involved and have their input as well.

The target will be a statement next spring of economic strategy that reflects the very significant changes that have occurred since 1974 in terms of the future of this province. I might just add that the particular documentation by way of input involves circulation of my remarks on October 19 but also the document which was filed yesterday by the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs and which we intend to have in very wide circulation through the province, request ing groups to give us their input over the course of the winter. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary to the Pre mier, maybe to make my question a little clearer too. Will the spring reporting be the result of the work of the Minister of Advanced Education and the Minister of Housing, or is there a broader cabinet committee that is working on the matter between now and the spring? That wasn't clear in the Premier's remarks. MR. LOUGHEED: Yes, I'd be happy to clarify that. It's the economic planning committee of cabinet, chaired by the Min ister of Housing.

They will be taking the preliminary work that I've mentioned, the input that will come from the groups as a result of the circulation in the province of the document Alberta in Canada, tabled yesterday by the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. The target, as I said, will be the spring. We may not be able to meet that target, but that's the target. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary.

In securing of information from the general public, is it the intention of the Premier to have the cabinet economic committee travel the province to hear briefs, to hear input, during the period of time between the fall session and the spring, or will it be up to various groups in the province to take the initiative to make presentations to the cabinet committee responsible for economic affairs? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, if there are various groups within the province that want to make a presentation, they'd make it to the economic affairs committee of the government caucus, chaired by the Member for Edmonton Whitemud. It would be our overriding view that the input would come from each of the 79 constituencies, and we would welcome input from the constituencies represented by the opposition. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Agriculture wishes to deal further with a question asked in a previous question period. Hog Processing MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On October 24 the Leader of the Opposition asked me a question with respect to two recommendations. One of the recommendations was from the 1977 Harries report on the government bringing in new proposals for remodelling the hog processing facilities located in Alberta. The second one was the Horner report, recommending the establishment of a Crown corporation called Alberta meats. Mr. Speaker, with respect to the 1977 Harries report, the report did conclude that improved processing facilities were needed; however, the report also found that low hog throughput contributed to increased processing costs.

The packers have made significant improvements over the years, but there is an overcapacity in Alberta. With reference to Dr. Horner's recommendation of a Crown corporation called Alberta meats, it's been the position of this government, and remains the position, to encourage and work with the private sector to promote and expand our domestic and export markets. The government did not support the federal Crown corporation Canagrex, as the hon. member is aware. Our role in Alberta will continue to be that of a facilitator and not a catalyst to open new domestic demand.

ORDERS OF THE DAY head: GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill 80 Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Special Appropriation Act, 1984-85 MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 80. This is a short Bill but an important one. It is timely, insofar as the very useful report of the heritage fund special select committee was tabled in the Assembly today by the hon. Mem ber for Barrhead, as chairman.

The percentage of transfer which is set forth in this proposed law was originally indicated in the announcement of September 1982, some 13 months ago, with respect to the economic resurgence program, and was reiterated in the March 1983 budget. So the purpose of this Act is to implement that 15 per cent transfer. It's important to note that the 15 per cent transfer to the heritage fund will represent moneys which are in effect spoken for.

Some have argued that in terms of the financing of the prov ince, the predicted deficit for 1983-84 could be avoided simply by diverting the 15 per cent of resource revenues going to the

1526 ALBERTA HANSARD October 28, 1983 heritage fund as a credit against the deficit. That, of course, is not correct arithmetic, because every dollar of the 15 per cent diversion in this year — it will probably be the same next year — is used and is committed through the heritage fund to sup port, for example, the completion of the Walter Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, for irrigation projects, for senior citizen lodges under the Alberta Housing Corporation programs, for completion of the Prince Rupert terminal, and the like. So those moneys are not available.

As members know, the transfer this year of 15 per cent of resource revenues to the heritage fund goes toward those programs which generally, I think, the people of the province endorse and want to continue. I commend the Bill to the Assembly. [Motion carried; Bill 80 read a second time] Bill 72 County Amendment Act, 1983 MR. STILES: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 72, the County Amendment Act, 1983. The Bill is relatively small. Four basic amendments are being accomplished by this Bill.

Essentially for clarification in the case of the matter of the county secretary, the title of the County Act at the moment reads "municipal secretary", and there are amendments to several sections to change that to read "county secretary" Secondly, the Bill will amend

section 6 of the Act, to allow the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make orders. We're expecting the changing of county boundaries. That would be in addition to the authority of the Local Authorities Board to do so. This is in recognition that the matter of changing county boundaries is as much a matter of policy as it is a matter of administration. The third point would be to change the Act to now recognize the Local Authorities Election Act provisions for the eligibility and election of school trustees, school representatives. The amendment to

section 23 will accomplish that. The final matter, and perhaps the most important one of all these amendments, will be to permit a city or municipality that is moving from town to city status to remain within the county school administration. As the County Act presently reads, it provides for villages, summer villages, and towns but does not include cities. This has come about as the town of Fort Sas katchewan has achieved sufficient size to be eligible for city status but has held back because they would like to remain within the county administration with respect to their school system.

The amendments to make that possible are included in this Bill. That essentially covers all the amendments, Mr. Speaker, and I commend the Bill to the Assembly. [Motion carried; Bill 72 read a second time] Bill 73 Department of Tourism and Small Business Amendment Act, 1983 MR. ADAIR: Mr.

Speaker, in rising to speak to second reading of Bill No. 73, the Department of Tourism and Small Business Amendment Act, 1983, the purpose of the amendment will be to allow the department and the government to guarantee other than just normal loans, arrangements like lease agreements and other obligations that would broaden the opportunity for the use of the guarantee process; and number two, to be consistent with the amendments that were approved last spring to the Department of Economic Development [Act]. [Motion carried; Bill 73 read a second time] Bill 74 Drayton Valley Townsite Repeal Act MRS. CRIPPS: Mr.

Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 74, the Drayton Valley Townsite Repeal Act. The original Act provided for planning and development control within the proposed Drayton Valley townsite area. In 1956 the New Towns Act was enacted, and Drayton Valley was incorporated as a town under that Act, at which time the provisions of the Drayton Valley Townsite Act no longer took effect.

I might add that Drayton Valley has grown from that time to a population of 5,000 and, while we're repealing the Act, Drayton Valley will still be strong and healthy. [Motion carried; Bill 74 read a second time] Bill 75 Government House Amendment Act, 1983 MR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to move second reading of Bill No. 75, the Government House Amendment Act, 1983. This Bill amends the Government House Act, to allow a corporation named the Government House Foundation to dis pose of, by selling, leasing, or exchanging, any artwork acquired by the foundation.

All members must be made aware, however, that the disposal of artworks is subject to any trust on which they are held. In other words, if any caveats were or are attached when artworks were or are purchased by the foun dation or obtained through donation, those caveats would be honored. Mr. Speaker, I want to underscore for all members as well that the disposal of any artwork must only be exercised with ministerial approval.

Any artwork attached to the Government House Foundation will be within the jurisdiction of the foun dation and will not require a labyrinth of bureaucrats to pass through whenever a sale is deemed desirable by the foundation. Again, I wish to stress that the final sale, lease, exchange, or disposition will occur only with ministerial approval. Hon. members should also know that any money received by the foundation from these transactions will be used by the foundation only for the acquisition of other artworks by the foundation. Lastly, Mr.

Speaker, this Bill will bring legislation in line with legislation governing other such foundations as the Alberta Art Foundation, the Alberta Foundation for Performing Arts, and the Alberta Cultural Heritage Foundation. All these foundations have had these provisions for many years. Mr. Speaker, I commend this Bill to the Assembly. [Motion carried; Bill 75 read a second time] Bill 76 Agricultural Pests Amendment Act, 1983 MRS. CRIPPS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to move second reading of the Agricultural Pests Amendment Act, 1983.

While the amendment is fairly simple and straightforward, as it allows the minister to appoint officers where necessary, I would like to highlight for a minute the purpose of the Agri cultural Pests Amendment Bill in total, because I think it's so

October 28, 1983 ALBERTA HANSARD 1527 important to the residents of the province of Alberta. In the first place, the Bill covers these pests: the Norway rat, bacterial ring rot, grasshopper, warblefly, Dutch elm disease, and fireb- light, and nuisances such as coyotes, magpies, and skunks. Mr. Speaker, I was really pleased to be able to introduce this Bill, because one of my constituents, Lou Hendrigan, who is now very deservedly in the Alberta Agriculture Hall of Fame, was one of the forerunners of warble control in the province of Alberta.

In 1967 the division that he and I live in, in the county of Wetaskiwin, put in compulsory warble control. In 1968 the ratepayers of the county of Wetaskiwin requested that the county establish a compulsory warble control program county-wide, which they did. They were the first county in the province of Alberta to have such a program. It's due to the efforts of Mr. Hendrigan that that happened. And I think it's due to that initiation and foresight that the province of Alberta has a warble control program. One of the pests included in the Bill, Mr. Speaker, is warbles.

I'm highlighting this because the saving to Alberta farmers is tremendous. The cost of warbles to the farmer is $35 a head, and the cost in the packing house is $35 to $40. By this program, the farmers in Alberta benefit to the tune of $2 million, and the packers benefit another $2 million. So this program is sub stantially important to the agricultural community in Alberta. The other major point that I want to highlight in the Bill is the rat control portion of that program. Members may not know it, but there are approximately a million rats in Saskatchewan. Each rat is assumed to cause $20 worth of damage.

That's $20 million worth of damage to the agricultural industry in Sas katchewan from rats. Through an expenditure of approximately $300,000 per year, Alberta has been able to maintain this prov ince rat-free. Maybe you will remember a flurry of activity when some rats were found northeast of Edmonton, I think. They arrived in combines from other provinces. I think this Bill is very, very important to the agricultural sector of the province of Alberta, and I wanted to point out that that is the purpose of this amendment. [Motion carried; Bill 76 read a second time] Bill 77 Farm Home Improvements Repeal Act MR.

DROBOT: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 77, the Farm Home Improvements Repeal Act. It is presently covered by the Agricultural Development Act and is redundant. I urge members to repeal this Act. [Motion carried; Bill 77 read a second time] Bill 82 Provincial General Hospitals Amendment Act, 1983 MR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to move second reading of Bill No. 82, the Provincial General Hospitals Amendment Act, 1983.

As all members will notice, this Bill contains only one amendment, to change the name of the Glenrose Provincial General hospital in Edmonton to the Glenrose rehabilitation hospital. This name change is appropriate to the role and func tion of this hospital, which has been located in Edmonton since 1963. This hospital was established in 1963 by the provincial government, with the purchase of the old Royal Alexandra hospital. Its immediate purpose at that particular time was to relieve the active treatment bed shortage of the mid-60s by taking in patients requiring convalescent care.

The longer term goal was to establish the hospital as a centre for the care and treatment of patients requiring physical medicine and rehabil itation. Mr. Speaker, this goal has been achieved as the appro priate staff were recruited and developed. I am proud to state that the Glenrose has been a leader in Canada for many years and continues to lead other provinces in the area of rehabili tation medicine. There have been numerous positive and innovative changes since the early '60s. I would like to mention just a few that have given Edmonton and all Albertans this number one hos pital. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. I have some difficulty with this Bill — and I had it also with regard to a previous one — with regard to the matter of relevance. We're changing the name of a hospital and using that debate as a vehicle for a sort of survey of hospital matters generally. It is almost a subsection of a throne speech debate. It seems to me that what we should be having is debate that's relevant to the merits or lack of merit of changing the name of this hospital. MR. PAPROSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that ruling.

My attempt was just to bring a brief history of the Glenrose hospital to 1983; however, I will cut my remarks much shorter. Mr. Speaker, the board of directors of the Glenrose Pro vincial General hospital have indicated very clearly to me that they are extremely pleased with a recent proposal, signed in April 1983 by the Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care, that will build a brand-new rehabilitation unit at the present Glenrose site. The general parameters have been agreed to by the min ister.

It looks like an extensive new program will be developing, and I ask for support on second reading. [Motion carried; Bill 82 read a second time] Bill 84 Vencap Equities Alberta Act MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to move second reading of Bill No. 84, Vencap Equities Alberta Act. If I could be permitted a short historic build-up to the issue, Mr. Speaker, our judgment was that in the 1970s there were an enormous number of . . . MR. SPEAKER: I hesitate to interrupt the hon. minister, but it's a new Act; it's a new subject. It seems to me it has to be dealt with fully. It's not just an incidental amendment to

an Act already in existence. MR. PLANCHE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The impression was that in the 1970s, with the dramatic increase in activity in Alberta, many opportunities presented themselves to people with talent. But unfortunately, talent wasn't enough to fulfil the vacuums in many of these oppor tunities. A combination of creative financing and talent seemed to be the key. As a result, a great many people within Canada from outside Alberta, and indeed from outside Canada, filled these opportunities.

Western Canada, but Alberta in particular, has long been handicapped, in my judgment, by having mainly a branch bank ing network as a source of funds. They didn't have a compet itive financing source from foundations, from third- or fourth- generation wealth. Most of the venture capital that was available came from people who had been involved in land speculation

1528 ALBERTA HANSARD October 28, 1983 and oil and gas activity. They tended intuitively to respond to those areas when they were looking for places to invest in, in an equity way. In addition to that, we've never had a defence presence in western Canada, from which interesting spinoffs could come. Defence spending centres, along with universities, have been sort of the keystone of forefront technology advance ment in the United States. Our judgment is that if we're going to get involved in fore front technology and develop it to its maximum potential within Alberta, there are really four key ingredients.

One is attitudinal, between our universities and our business sector. The second is to develop an information bank, whereby we know who is involved in high-technology activity and creative activity throughout the province, so those who come and want to become joint venture partners or want technology transfer can identify and find them. The third is a communications network, whereby our many people in smaller, advanced technology industry can have an opportunity for upgrading in terms of worldwide state-of-the-art activity in their particular sector.

And in our judgment, the fourth key ingredient is creative financing. This was an attempt to fill that fourth void in the necessary four bench marks to activity in high technology. One of the interesting things about the government being involved as a funder, in terms of a creditor of this concept, is that our judgment is that venture capital needs intuitive activity much more than regulatory activity. Well, in smaller loans it's true that facilities like the Alberta Opportunity Company can provide funds in terms of loan guarantees or straight loans. They are nevertheless regulatory.

Venture capital in larger quantities of money requires a great deal of intuition and is better facilitated when it is at arm's length from government activity. When it was structured, Vencap Equities' prime mandate was to joint venture with other venture capitalists, so that it could get to the smaller and narrower sectors where venture capital prevails at present.

The final concept that was presented to the public earlier this year had input and direction from many of Alberta's leading businessmen, and we are fortunate enough that they have elected to stay on as directors, at least until the first public general meeting. Mr. Speaker, I think the prospectus identifies very well what Vencap is about. If I may, I would like to read three or four salient points. It specifies the principal objectives. The first one is: to operate profitably and to promote the growth of the Company's assets particularly in the longer term, in the best interests of all shareholders.

It's important that the company, under the direction of these active businessmen, is able to walk the line between their responsibility to the shareholders and the aspirations of all Albertans, to see this great province develop and to see a maximum ability for Albertans to participate in that develop ment. The second objective is: to encourage and assist in the creation, development and expansion of businesses based in Alberta, or controlled or managed by residents of Alberta . . . The third is: to develop, diversify, expand and strengthen the industrial and service base of Alberta . . .

And the fourth is: to encourage and enable residents of Alberta to invest and to participate directly in the economic development and potential of Alberta. The second key feature of this prospectus is that investments will generally involve a commitment of not less than $500,000. Mr. Speaker, that has been a subject of some considerable comment. The fact of the matter is that many of the concepts Vencap will consider require some considerable costs to qualify and quantify the merits of the concepts.

It would be important that the loan be of a magnitude that those costs could be recovered without an undue, onerous load on the company that's applying for the financing. I don't think that's written in stone, in terms of the $500,000. Some comments that the direc tors have made to me indicated that if the company obviously has a voracious need for funds over time, smaller initial invest ments would be made. In any event, they would be made with the obvious consideration of the costs of establishing the value of the concept to be considered.

Vencap, by the caveat on the debenture agreement from the government, does not have the capacity, without approval from this government, to involve itself in conventional oil or gas exploration, the real estate development business, the business of a mutual fund, water diversion projects, nuclear energy development, or the business normally carried on by banks. So the mandate they have necessarily restricts them to activity in creative financing outside those areas, which is important to us.

Finally, the company and the government agreed early that no shares would be held in excess of 1 per cent, beneficially or actually, by any shareholder. The prospectus reads: The Company has been advised by its counsel that the limitation on voting and dividend rights and the mandatory divestiture of Common Shares in excess of the 1% limit may be unenforceable in the absence of legislation con firming the validity of such provisions. The government of the Province . . . has advised the Company of its inten tion to introduce such legislation. Bill 84 is that legislation, Mr. Speaker.

What it does is establish primacy of the stated articles of incorporation, rather than the Business Corporations Act as it exists. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I recommend the Bill to the Assembly. [Motion carried; Bill 84 read a second time] Bill 92 Environment Statutes Amendment Act, 1983 MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 92, the Environment Statutes Amendment Act, 1983. Basically, this Bill amends both the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.

The reason for this Bill arises from a legal opinion which the department received with regard to the release of pollution monitoring by corporations in the province. To this point in time, the policy of the department has been that the public should have access to information with regard to emissions by industrial operations in the province. The legal opinion we received indicated that the monitoring results were the property of companies and, as such, could not be released.

This Bill, therefore, will clarify the departmental policies and will formalize procedures by which emission monitoring, under both the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, will be released to the public. I think it's very important that it be clear in legislation that the public has a right to the results of industrial monitoring. The department currently receives over 5,000 reports from industry, which are required under the licences issued under the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act. So we are currently receiving that number of reports from companies.

I might note that the department and myself, in consultation with the public and industry, will be holding meet ings to ensure that information which is presented and released

October 28, 1983 ALBERTA HANSARD 1529 to the public meets the basic public requirements in terms of information and, at the same time, will not infringe upon the proprietary interests of corporations. With that, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to commend to the House the passage of this Bill at second reading. [Motion carried; Bill 92 read a second time] Bill 96 Mobile Home Sites Tenancies Amendment Act, 1983 MRS. EMBURY: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill 96, the Mobile Home Sites Tenancies Amendment Act, 1983. This is the sister Bill to Bill 97.

The amendments to sections 43 and 56 retain the rate of 12 per cent until January 1, 1984. After that date, the rate will be established by regulation. I commend this Bill to the Legislature. [Motion carried; Bill 96 read a second time] Bill 97 Landlord and Tenant Amendment Act, 1983 MRS. EMBURY: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill 97, the Landlord and Tenant Amendment Act, I983.

In speaking to second reading of Bill 97, I wish to commend the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs for listening and taking the necessary action to respond so quickly to the concerns of constituents throughout the province. I note that unfortunately the Member for Red Deer is unable to be in his place at this time. I wish to commend him also for his co operation in speaking with me and discussing the contents of this Bill. As members will recall, I introduced a private member's Bill in the spring of 1983.

An Act to Amend the Landlord and Tenant Act,

Section 38, which is the

section of this Bill that is amended, refers to the actual percentage rate. Originally it was set at 6 per cent and subsequently amended, as of July 1, 1982, to 12 per cent. With the sudden fluctuation in the econ omy, we saw a downturn, where interest rates have now gone below 12 per cent. It seems a reasonable solution to remove the clause which states the actual percentage and establish the rate by regulation. This will be effective January 1, 1984. I commend this Bill to the Legislature. [Motion carried; Bill 97 read a second time] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, those 12 Bills are all the Bills available for second reading today. On Monday, it's pro posed to proceed with second reading of Bill 81, Bill 89, and Bill 93. If there is time, some consideration could be given to second reading of Bill 91, although that was only introduced today. It's not proposed that the Assembly sit on Monday evening. Mr. Speaker, I move that we call it one o'clock. MR. SPEAKER: Do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. [At 11:11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 5, the House adjourned to Monday at 2:30 p.m.]

1530 ALBERTA HANSARD October 28, 1983

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19831028
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L20 S1 19831028 1000 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	b95ba6962aff6236bdffc7ae9faf0c46bb46406c

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