October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 745 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Wednesday, October 6, 1993 8:00 p.m. Date: 93/10/06 head: Committee of Supply [Mr. Tannas in the Chair] MR. CHAIRMAN: I would ask the committee to come to order. Please take a seat. For the benefit of those people who are in the gallery, we'd let you know that this is Committee of Supply. Committee is the less formal part of the Legislative Assembly. Members are allowed to remove their jackets, to have juice or coffee in the House. They're able to sit in other places and even move across the floor and meet people and to whisper.

For those who wish to talk, we'd invite them to go in the lounge. As long as we maintain a quorum of 20 here, we'll be all right. head: Main Estimates 1993-94 Community Development MR. CHAIRMAN: I would call upon the hon. minister to say a few words, and then we will go with our speaking list. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Gary, Gary. MR. MAR: I'm grateful for the outpouring of sentiment, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good evening.

Of course, all members here will recall that my estimates are on pages 53 through 63 of the 1993-94 Government Estimates book and further information in the supplementary information, element details book on pages 15 and 16. At the outset I'd like to begin our discussion of budget tonight by answering some of those questions which were posed and asked of me on September 16 during my first round of estimates. First of all, to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore, on vote 2, Community Services. Y ou had a number of questions about the budget numbers for the community services program.

I'll state that we've very carefully analyzed our programs and services in coming to the budget decisions which were made. There are two broad themes in this budget. The first was the determination of the community recreational/cultural grant program and the transfer of the provincial association grants and some provincial recreation sports grants to lottery funding. The other was the rationalization of budgets due to the amalgamation of departments. Virtually all of the cuts that the hon. member referred to fall into these categories.

With regards to the Alberta Foundation for the Arts board, the board seeks the input of expert juries on all discretionary grant programs. After careful review of the grant application submitted for foundation funding, juries provide recommendations concern- ing which applicants should receive funds, in what amount, and, if necessary, under what conditions. It is this board's responsibil- ity under the Alberta Foundation for the Arts Act to review and, if they occur, approve these recommendations. In practice the board virtually always endorses the decisions of the jury.

However, it does have the right to override a jury's decision. For example, if the board becomes aware of new information concerning an applicant that was unavailable at the time of jurying, if certain policy or budgetary concerns arise following the jury, or if the board was aware of a concern broader than the specific program reviewed by the jury, the board may exercise its right to override these recommendations. The board's composition represents many facets of the arts, cultural industries, and library communities which it serves.

Regarding 2.1.1, Program Support, the $180,000 cut is a result of the amalgamation of departments and consequent restructuring of Alberta Community Development. This cut represents Community Services' prorated portion of the elimination of one assistant deputy minister's office in the department. I do not foresee any direct loss of service to Albertans as a result of this cut. We're simply operating more efficiently. Regarding 2.1.2, western economic partnership agreement, we are cutting our administrative costs of managing the cultural industry's portion of the western economic partnership agree- ments.

This does not affect the dollar commitments that have been made by both the federal and provincial governments. The cut of $12,000 was made up largely as a result of the elimination of the overtime budget in this area. For background information the Canada/Alberta partnership agreement on the cultural industries was signed April 22, 1992. Each government agreed to contribute $3.5 million for a total of $7 million over four years, the expiration of which is March 31, 1996. Investment would be made in the four cultural industries of book publishing, film video, sound recording, and periodical publishing.

To answer the hon. member's questions about cuts, the government of Canada announced in March 1993 a 10 percent cut to all the western economic diversification partnership agreements, and the cultural industries agreement was included in that reduction. Those cuts took effect April 1, 1993, and are extended beyond 1994-95 until the termination of all agreements. The government of Alberta has indicated that the federal cut of 10 percent would be matched by a 10 percent reduction from the province to all the agreements including the cultural industries agreement.

The reduction in funding will be applied equally over the next three years to all four sectors of cultural industries: film video, book publishing, sound recording, and periodical publish- ing. These cuts are being applied only to those funds which remained uncommitted as of April 1, 1993. The total committed contributions from the cultural industries agreement until 1996 and therefore not included in the reduction are $4,354,972. Of this total, $2,185,000 was committed in 1992-93 for payment in 1993- 94. No new commitments have been made from the agreement for fiscal 1993-94.

On 2.1.3, Arts Services, the majority of the budgetary reduction was reflected in the transfer of the funding for the six summer arts awareness schools to the Alberta Foundation for the Arts, and I do not see any loss of services from this program area. The rest of the cut was in some staff realignments due to amalgamation and restructuring, administrative savings, and some reductions in travel budgets. For 2.1.4, Regional Offices, the increase to capital investments is as a result of the rationalization of regional office budgets upon the amalgamation of the cultural and recreational regional offices.

Y ou'll note that there is no overall increase to capital investment in the Community Services program. With 2.1.5, Recreation and Support Services, the majority of this cut reflects the changing management status of the Blue Lake Centre. I spoke to this issue in this House during my budget speech, noted on page 321 of the September 16 Hansard. Besides these cuts to the Blue Lake Centre, additional savings were made at Percy Page Centre by transferring expenditures to the centre's revolving fund. Other savings in this program were found in the manpower budgets.

On 2.1.6, Libraries, some savings were found through divisional reallocation of resources. Y ou will note that there was no cut to the Library Operating Grants in line 2.2.4. I am awaiting at this

746 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 time the results of the library Grants Review Task Force before I make any further decisions in this program area. Talking book collections have been decentralized. The books are now closer to their end users. They were distributed on the basis of the number of users of these books at any particular library. Also, exchanges of talking books among libraries and through the regional library systems is being facilitated by department staff. I do not see a reduction in service in this area of library operations.

For 2.2.7, Provincial Recreation/Sport Grants, the more than $300,000 cut here reflects the transfer programs to the Alberta Sport Council and the Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation. These programs were not cut. Regarding 1.0.2, Deputy Minister's Office, the 1992-93 comparative figures include the amounts for the deputy ministers of culture and multiculturalism and seniors. In amalgamating and streamlining the administration, $222,751 was approved for running a single deputy minister's office.

For l.0.3, Finance and Administration, there is a $15,000 increase in capital which is required to upgrade the computer network server unit to accommodate volume increases. The estimates for Finance and Administration include the costs for the following: financial services and management, human resources, financial planning, systems and information services, and award program. These were separate elements in 1990. Perhaps you are comparing Finance and Administration with only one of those elements.

Financial services and management is only one of the support services components which went into the makeup of this department. Finance and Administration is facing significant volume increases without any budget increases. 8:10 Communication is important to my department. The vendors who provide us with goods and services must be paid on time, systems must be maintained, our human resources must be handled with sensitivity and care. I w ill review the above areas with a view to making them more cost-effective without jeopardiz- ing the centralized services which are provided from these areas.

For 1.0.1, Minister's Office, I can assure you that $290,000 is a very streamlined budget for running a minister's office. The 1993-94 budget reflects the reduction of the minister's salary. Former Minister's Office shows the 1992-93 estimates for the minister of seniors. Seniors was of course a separate portfolio at the beginning of the 1992-93 fiscal year. Regarding 1.0.4, Communications, the volume in this area has increased. The $150,000 being quoted was the Communications budget for the former department of culture and multiculturalism.

Support services are now extended to other com ponents which make up Community Development. [Mr. Clegg in the Chair] Now, in regards to the questions asked by the hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert of 4.0.4 and 4.0.5, Women's Secretariat and Advisory C ouncil on Women's Issues. The women's secretariat provides advice and consultation to the minister and other government departments and agencies with regards to women's issues and works with similar bodies in other provinces on national issues. It also provides grants to assist women's organizations with education and other informational activities.

The Alberta Advisory Council on Women's Issues is primarily an information gathering and dissemination body which works with women and their organizations. Through consultation with them, it gathers advice on issues which it transmits through the minister to government. The budget reflects the costs of those two roles. The women's secretariat was reduced in order to allow the advisory council to maintain its budget at the current level and continue its valuable information gathering role.

The operating budget of the Alberta Advisory Council on Women's Issues has not been reduced from last year's level of $338,000. The apparent reduction of $5,000 is due to restating the 1992-93 comparable budget. The $5,000 was part of program support. In regards to the questions asked by the hon. Member for Calgary-Bow regarding funding for 3.0.10, Glenbow Museum, an operating grant of $3.2 million for 1993-94 is certainly sufficient for the Glenbow Museum this year.

That amount represents a 5 percent reduction over last year, approximately half the reduction felt by many other provincial heritage facilities this year. Details on the amount of future grants, their duration, and the regulatory payment will have to be negotiated with Alberta Lotteries as part of a lotteries licence renewal next year. The process for lotteries funding is changing and will come before the Legislature in the future.

I am hopeful, however, that next spring we can obtain a three-year licence for the Glenbow Museum as well as other cultural and recreational recipients to allow these groups continued stability. In regards to the questions asked by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo of 4.0.3, Human Rights Commission, and boards of inquiry, although five people from the Alberta Human Rights Commission took voluntary severance at the end of March, funding was retained.

Three of the positions have been staffed on a temporary basis to ensure that the caseload of the commission can be handled, and a new executive director was supplied by the department. No resources have been taken away from this commission. The 1992-93 administrative costs are as follows: commissioner's activity, $80,951; equity promotion education, $163,424; dispute resolution for two offices, $874,925; adminis- tration, $374,170; boards of inquiry and legal counsel, $102,529; for a total of $1,596,000. As indicated, the amount spent on boards of inquiry and legal support in 1992-93 was $102,529.

This includes the salary of legal counsel retained to advise the commission. This government's policy is not to have special warrants. Boards of inquiry costs will be covered within the commission's budget if possible and then from within the depart- ment if this is not possible. In regards to the questions asked by the hon.

Member for Lethbridge-West regarding 2.1.2, Western Economic Diversifica- tion Partnership Agreement, the Canada/Alberta partnership agreement on cultural industries was signed on April 22, 1992, as one of the eight under the umbrella of the Western Economic Diversification Partnership Agreement. The cultural industries agreement totaled $7 million over four years, $3.5 million to be contributed by the province and a further $3.5 million from the federal government, terminating on March 31, 1996.

Again, support is provided to companies active in book publish- ing, film/video production and distribution, sound recording, and periodical publishing. The three activities which are eligible for assistance are, first, company development; second, marketing and distribution; third, professional development. Companies must provide three- to five-year business plans, must be Alberta owned and operated, must show how their activities will contribute to the economic improvement of provincial industries in general, and finally must show a reasonable expectation of profit.

Support is provided in the form of contributions to the companies, which in turn must make their own contributions to the activities funded. Contracts are signed between the agreement and the successful clients, and the companies are monitored on a quarterly basis to ensure that the terms of the contracts are being fulfilled. We are

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 747 already seeing improvement in the level of production, sales, employment, and viability of the companies which are supported. To this date, 29 applications from all four industries have been approved for funding. In March 1993 the federal government announced a 10 percent cut to all partnership agreements beginning in fiscal year 1993-94, and the provincial government announced that it would match that reduction. To the questions asked by the hon.

Member for Wainwright on 4.0.2, 4.0.3, capital expenditures, the $25,000 for the Citizenship and Heritage Secretariat is to upgrade computer equipment in this office. The $87,000 for the Human Rights Commission is to upgrade the computer programs so that the staff are better able to track complaints, monitor time lines, and access management information about these complaints. It will also allow for networking of the three offices of the commission and the main office of the department. In answer to the questions asked by the hon.

Member for Medicine Hat regarding 2.1.3, Arts Services, this is the budget code for the arts and cultural industries branch. This branch serves artists and arts organizations in the visual, performing, and literary arts and in the cultural industries: film making, book and magazine publishing, and sound recording. It also provides programs and information to the general public.

The arts and cultural industries branch is focused on building a dynamic and viable arts and cultural industries community through partnerships, consultation, and direct financial support primarily through the Alberta Foundation for the Arts and the Canada/Alberta agree- ment on cultural industries. Admission charges to provincial heritage facilities. Admission charges, other service fees, and a variety of cost recovery projects at our provincial museums, interpretive centres, and historic sites are kept in the historic resources regulated fund.

This fund was established when the charge system was introduced in 1991 as a means to allow generated revenues to remain with the facilities that created them, encouraging entrepreneurial activity by staff and rewarding the hosting communities themselves with better upkeep of their local attractions. In 1993-94 approximately $2.1 million is expected to be generated by these facilities, and that money will go to offset operational costs. It is our intention to build these revenues much further and lessen the demand for general revenue support.

It is essential that there is a practical incentive for staff to be aggressive in developing revenue at these sites and, by using the system, to let facility enhancements act as rewards. In terms of budget format, the main evidence of an increasing regulated fund will be a marked decrease in normal operating budget requests for each of the next few years. Our aim is to save money for taxpayers. Regarding 2.2.5, Community Recreational/Cultural Grants program, this represents about 80 percent of the cut to the Community Services program.

There have been gradual reduc- tions in funding over the years, from approximately $50 million in 1985 to under $16 million last year. Municipalities were kept informed of the reductions and the scheduled termination of this program. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my comments at this time, and I invite members to ask questions that have not been addressed at this point. 8:20 MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore. MR. ZWOZDESKY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the hon. minister for providing some of the answers to the many questions that were asked.

I wonder if I could just pick up on a few of those, because I think there were a few areas, Mr. Minister, where I was looking for a little more clarification and a little more pointed answers, if you don't mind. I'd like to start with the business of the Alberta Foundation for the Arts board and the various juries. I think the point I was trying to make is that in an effort to be cost-effective – I was hoping to have you address the issue of not duplicating services.

I know that we rely on expert juries, expert panels of people who represent the various arts disciplines to in fact do the reviewing and to in fact make the recommendations. I'm sure there are some small expenses, perhaps large expenses associated with doing that, but given that we definitely need their expertise at the jury level, I wonder if you would consider somehow bringing some of those people, those highly qualified individuals onto some of your boards so the boards would be more reflective of the portfolio they are serving.

That would get us out of this whole gray area of perhaps some people being appointed purely for patronage purposes, which I'm sure you'll admit, occasionally, if not frequently, has happened in the past. I'm trying to prevent it from perhaps happening in the future. These kinds of boards do provide that arm's-length type of feedback, if you will, and evaluation. I think it's important that we try and preserve their integrity. I saw this, Mr. Minister, as being one area where you might be able to do that and at the same time help save some of the costs associated there.

The other point I just wanted to make in a general sense is that I was hoping to get a little bit of detail. Perhaps you could take that as an undertaking, Mr. Minister, to all the questions that you answered from my standpoint, that I had asked. I was hoping that there might be some percentage breakdowns and some percentage splits. I was particularly interested in the movement of lottery-based dollars into the department at th e expense or, if you will, at the saving of taxpayer-based dollars.

While people who are getting financial support in whichever area, from whatever source are appreciative of it, I think the point I tried to flag for you is that there is some kind of stigma attached with some of the recipients receiving lottery-based dollars. Because of the fact that lottery- based dollars are subject to many different vagaries and we don't know how predictable they are in the future, there is an element of gambling or conscientiousness that goes with the receipt of those dollars.

Many people don't like receiving money that is, if you will, laundered, albeit through a public process of buying tickets to support certain events. So I was hoping that you might present for us some clarification of the difference or the percent- age breakdown between tax dollars that are in the department versus lottery. That's the simple question there. The other thing I was hoping you would have commented on – and I think you still will have an opportunity. In a broad sense I was trying to understand what gave the department and in particular yourself, Mr.

Minister, the notion to go ahead with the cuts in the specific areas that you chose. I was hoping that there might have been some information you would be prepared to share with us now or at some point in the near future that would give some credence, if you will, as to why you chopped budget A versus budget B. For example, you cut the seniors' directorate, and I'm sure there was some reason for doing that. All I'm saying is: why? Was it a cost-saving thing, or was it no longer neces- sary?

I know that yesterday in the House you said something about treating all the councils and boards and committees with some degree of fairness. I guess what I'm just looking for here is some rationale for those types of cuts versus others. What I'm really

748 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 looking for there, as are many Albertans, is what the consultative process in those cuts may have been. I don't think it comes as any surprise to anybody in the House tonight that we have undergone a rather difficult period with regard to the implementation of the health care cuts or the social services cuts and the forthcoming education cuts because of the lack of planning that has become so apparent in those areas. I would shudder to think that the same may be happening in our own area, Mr. Minister, the area that you and I are looking after.

I would hope very much that you could produce something or maybe the staff in the department could produce some kind of reasoning as to why they did the cuts they did and exactly the details of some of that consultative process that was done. I know there are frequently committees set up to investigate those kinds of things, and there are a lot of people in my own riding that would like to be consulted on some of those, if they can. Perhaps they can provide some input to you.

I'm sure that you have some infrastructure system available, as does the Member for Calgary- Cross looking after the Multiculturalism Commission. The other thing I was interested in knowing was with regard to the staff reductions you made. I think you indicated that there were something like 84 positions that had been – I hesitate to use the word “cut” because I'm not sure that's the right term. Eighty-four positions were eliminated. There's a cost saving that I think you were very proud of in your in itial speech on this matter.

I was hoping that we might get the details of what that scenario kind of looks like in terms of which ones were voluntary, which ones were through attrition, which ones were movements out of the department, and so on. I understand how shiftings happen. I guess just for our own sake I'd like to see what the breakdown there really was, if you wouldn't mind providing it. I'm sure your staff has it handy. The other general comment I would just make is with regard to this libraries issue. I'm not sure that this has been yet as clearly understood as I'm sure the minister will make it, Mr. Chairman.

I think what we're looking for in the library funding area, specifically with regard to the Chinook Arch, is an explanation of how that organization is going to be funded for its operating necessities given that there are eight other library systems that, I think, are going to have to suffer a reduction in their operating budgets in order to accommodate the Chinook Arch coming onto full stream. I don't think that's a wise move. We're going to be facing all kinds of education cuts, I'm sure, coming up here shortly. Here we have an opportunity to leave what they call the free universities of the mind alone.

Give them a couple of hundred thousand out of the lottery budget, take it from within your own budget, but please don't penalize the other eight libraries. I think you'll find that that will pay tremendous advantages right across Alberta, not just in one or two areas. That was the point that I was trying to make. I wasn't trying to get nasty with it, Mr. Minister.

I was simply trying to point out that in a portfolio of $57 million, plus another $30 million or whatever from lotteries – I can't recall the exact number – I think there must exist a little bit of room within those frameworks to help a new group like the Chinook Arch, who have worked so hard to bring that library on stream. I know they're grateful for the $250,000 capital grant to do the renovations and everything.

Now, surely to heavens we don't have to penalize the other eight to give Chinook that little bit of operating money that they need, at least in the first year or two, to get them started, to get them on their feet. The other libraries, as you know very well because they're phoning you and me, are really in some peril over this. I think they're being put at unnecessary risk. So I would kindly ask you to undertake that as well. Now, I just want to continue on where we left off a couple of weeks ago.

I suppose at the outset I would just say that with no real subprogram breakdowns available in the budgets, it becomes extremely difficult, Mr. Chairman, to try and understand what the real agenda in some of these areas might be. I'm just not clear on so many of the things because of the lack of information. So today I'd like to begin with program 3, which is on page 15 of 1993-94 Government Estimates: Supplementary Information, Element Details. Program 3 specifically deals with Cultural Facilities and Historical Resources.

I see here that there's an overall Program Support that is cut by some $140,000 and that very likely these cuts are to nongovernment historical resources, although it's not all that clear from the scant information given here. I guess what I'd like to flag for the members opposite and particularly for the minister is that these usually affect small groups, potentially groups like the Lac La Biche mission, as an example.

Therefore, the impact on them as a small group is likely to be quite substantial. 8:30 I wonder, as a direct question: would the minister please examine the impact of such cuts on these smaller, quasi-private organizations who are doing the best they can with the small, limited resources they have to try and maintain Alberta's historical heritage in their particular area? Can he give these smaller groups some ray of hope that might encourage them to continue to do the very valuable work they do?

These groups, after all, are run largely by volunteers, and unless the government shows them some support, and I would say soon, then I wonder how much longer we can continue expecting that very important backbone of Alberta's heritage to continue to survive. I'm speaking specifically of the need for volunteers. They, too, need some encouragement. With no supportive action from the government, you will surely cause the eventual demise of something that is very, very important to Alberta, and that's our own historical heritage; it's our legacy that we pass on.

So I ask the hon. minister to please not place this area in such imminent peril. Similarly, in line 3.0.2, here we're getting into the area of the various museums. I note that our own Provincial Museum, which is responsible, Mr. Chairman, for everything from history programs to ethnology and archaeology, is also responsible for collecting, documenting, preserving, researching, and interpreting all kinds of material evidence of Alberta's human and natural history. All of us here surely have been there.

I've been there a number of times to a number of tremendously wide and varied exhibits, and I have seen numerous school groups go through this particular museum as with others. I see a cut of some $370,000, almost $400,000, here, and I wonder where these cuts specifically are going to hurt. Is it going to be to the traveling exhibits we would see coming in? Are we no longer going to be able to afford as many, Mr. Minister? Is it for educational tours? Is it for pure curatorial things?

Is it for maintenance, is it for upkeep, or is it just a carte blanche cut and they are going to be trying to wrestle with where and how to implement the cuts? I would ask you to please provide some detail there. Similarly, with the Tyrrell museum I have a real concern, Mr. Minister. There's again a cut of approximately $340,000 from quick figuring. This is surely a flagship of all museums right across North America. It has been tremendously well recognized as an international site, a scientific museum dedicated to collec- tion, conservation, research, displaying, and

interpretation of palaeontological history, specifically with reference to Alberta's rich fossil heritage, Mr. Chairman. We all saw that there was a fair bit of interest in the dinos aur show, for example, that just

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 749 came through Edmonton. Here again, I'm w ondering: where exactly is the minister planning to see those cuts made? We were in an era of major tourism being touted for Alberta, and I'm hoping we aren't losing that edge we were working so hard to gain. We've invested a lot of money in developing that tourism infrastructure, and unless we have quality places maintained, I'm not sure exactly how much longer we can count on the viability of tourism and tourism dollars to help support our already flagging economy.

Similarly, with Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump, I see here $100,000 being cut. Having visited this pl ace myself just last summer, Mr. Chairman, I spoke with a lot of the staff working there, who were doing a very good job trying to keep up with things as they were. I saw several projects already on hold, some of them of a renovation nature, others of an excavation nature, some obviously attempting to capsulize and put into nice display cases the very important part of Alberta's heritage from that area that was centred entirely around our North American Indians several centuries ago.

There were chats at that time of some networking of additional walking trails and other kinds of educational programs where you could actually watch archaeolo- gists dig, take

part in excavations, and so on. I'm just not sure what's affected there, so I would hope that we could get a little bit of clarification on that point as well. The Reynolds-Alberta Museum is cut by approximately $75,000. I would assume this has something to do with mainte- nance of the equipment that has come there. The agricultural, industrial, and transportation heritage of Alberta is featured in this collection, which was just recently opened, Mr. Chairman. It's not a tremendously large cut, but to a smaller operation I'm sure they're kind of feeling the pinch there.

Has something just been put on hold there, Mr. Minister, or are we just not ready? Was the unveiling a bit premature? Can they exist with this cut or not? I'm not sure what the implications might be. I would apply the same kind of questioning to the Remington-Alberta museum, again just some details. Finally, in that vein, the Ukra inian Cultural Heritage Village was cut by approximately $40,000. This particular village attracts thousands of tourists every year. I know that just a couple of years ago, Mr. Chairman, they introduced a user fee, if you will, for entrance to the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village.

It was met with some negativity. I'm wondering if the minister could undertake to provide us with some information that would tell us whether this was the right move. How is it working? What are the attendance numbers like? At the same time, what kinds of revenues have been gained or lost from that move in an attempt to balance? I know that that village provides a very, very valuable insight into something which we as an opposition and as a government celebrated here officially just a couple of weeks ago with the unveiling of the Ukrainian centennial m onument. I know the minister is supportive of that.

Here we have a number of things that take place, again of an educational nature, things that would make young children proud of their ancestors, as they would with the Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump down south. There are walking tours. There are demonstrations of arts and crafts. I'm just wondering whether or not there have been significant drawbacks here to the tremendous progress that had been made in moving new buildings into that area; old buildings, actually, but new to the site. Is there a halting being done to the restoration of some of these old buildings? Have we lost employees?

Have the operating hours been cut? Where does this slack get taken up, this $40,000? At the same time, Mr. Minister, I wonder if you could clarify for us the progress on the discussions surrounding the amphi- theatre that had been talked about a year or two ago for building out at the site. I know there's a tremendously effective arm that helps from a volunteer perspective, the friends of the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village. I think they were prepared to under- take some fund-raising perhaps in that regard. I'm not sure, but I wonder if you could clarify that for us soon. Where do we stand on it?

Is the government intending to proceed with that amphitheatre or not? The rationale behind whichever decision it is that you have made would be appreciated. I also want to talk just briefly about some of the comments made by the hon. Member for Calgary-Cross with regard to the Multiculturalism Commission. I noted in her comments, Mr. Chairman, that she had indicated that they are now looking for a shift away from cultural retention, and I'm wondering what motivates this shift away from it. Is there something wrong with people in Alberta retaining thei r culture?

Is there something embarrassing to the government about people doing that? What prompts this sudden shift from something that we had been so proudly guarding and maintaining for so many years? What is the real agenda there? The other point I was interested in noting is that the Multiculturalism Commission I believe still has about 10 members on it or used to have 10 members.

I'm wondering what commit- ment the minister can give us to ensure that that commission, which was just expanded to 10 from five or six a year or two ago, will stay at that level, or does she have plans to cut it back or perhaps do away with it completely? I'm just not sure where that stands, and I think there are some concerns in the community in that regard. Perhaps she could clarify that, or maybe the minister would. 8:40 Also in that vein, I notice, Mr. Chairman, that there's a fourth annual symposium of senior executives being hosted by the Multiculturalism Commission. I think that's a good idea.

I just wonder at what cost that's being done and what the real benefits of it would be. It's coming up in November, and perhaps she could provide us with some information of the who, what, where, when, and why of that symposium. Finally, I would just close by asking the Member for Calgary- Cross about the Alberta Multiculturalism Commission's final year of its three-year action plan, which concludes this year. What have Albertans told you about the effectiveness of this plan that you have been on, and will you share those results with us? Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

The hon. member for Vegreville-Viking. MR. STELMACH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a number of questions for the minister. I had the opportunity of visiting the Ukrainian village site on Friday and toured the facility, and I was quite impressed. I've visited the village a number of times but was not aware of the fact that the village itself houses, in a fair amount of area there, a special building for restoration of artifacts and storage of these artifacts. I toured the cold room, had a look at all the goods that are stored there, some of the costumes. I'm quite impressed actually.

I wasn't aware of all the work we do. I was told that all these artifacts that are donated are restored at the village; that's the central pl ace. So it's quite interesting. Obviously there are many talented people there that can really

750 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 take some of these goods and restore them pretty well to their original whatever it is. Mr. Minister, in the Vegreville-Viking riding we're privileged, quite frankly, to have a number of museums and historic sites. The newest, of course, is the Basilian Fathers Museum in Mundare, which has attracted a large number of visitors. By generating the tourism trade, it brings additional dollars to rural communities, especially Mundare. We've had planned tours, actually, from the States and a number of people visiting. My information was that it's quite a unique museum.

In reviewing the program estimates 3.0.1 to 3.0.10, there's a reduction in spending at these facilities. Can you, Mr. Minister, ensure that these museums and historic sites will continue to perform their function as part of Alberta's social and economic fabric? Given the fact that there is such a large number of museums in the riding, it is an important question, and we await your answer. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert. MRS. SOETAERT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I got a reply to my last set of questions, but it was a kind of a vague, nice little letter, so I'm hoping for more specifics, please, with these very specific questions, if that's possible. First, with regard to the Women's Secretariat, would the government please release the annual report of the secretariat? Could we see that? Would the minister consider publishing an update on the work performed by the secretariat? We're particularly interested in what projects are currently being undertaken by the secretariat. We're wondering if any of these cuts in funding have resulted in staff layoffs.

Has the office of the secretariat been merged with the seniors' secretariat? If not, what is the intention? What is the current staff load of the secretariat? Now a few specific questions about the women's advisory council. Catherine Arthur's appointment is almost up. Will she be offered another contract of longer than three months? The advisory council is down to a very small staff. How does the minister propose the council will be spending its $300,000 budget? What is the status of the government's review of boards and commissions, and how will this review affect the council?

I'm interested in why the council is moving to the Standard Life building. I fear that the council is going to be merged with the secretariat, that they'll be assimilated. I want to know when the board vacancies are going to be filled, and I guess I'm curious as to why they haven't been filled yet. They've been empty for over a year, and your position has been in place for four months. That's why I'm presenting an amendment to our Bill, because my concern is that this is going to be shoved on the back burner instead of addressed. I'm interested in what projects the council will be involved in this year.

I really would appreciate no platitudes. I'd like some concrete answers, if that's possible. I have a few more questions about libraries. We would really like a copy of the task force report of September 30. Is that possible? In full, not the watered-down, out to the public – I'd like the full task force report. Y ou know, when we talk about going to the people of Alberta on issues, nothing on this library issue was ever brought to light. This was a very quick process right over the summer, and of course summer is bad for people.

They're gone on holidays and out of their communities, and suddenly by September 30 this information's brought to light and decisions have to be made. People I think were caught off guard by it. In fact, I know they felt quite off guard by it. I'm concerned about the regional library systems. In fact, one of them is in my constituency. It's located in my constituency in Spruce Grove. It seems that with funding the Chinook Arch library, it penalized the rest of them. The Y ellowhead one serves, I think, the second largest amount of people. I fear that everyone is being sacrificed.

I'm not saying Chinook shouldn't have it, but we need extra money because that was evened out to balance Chinook, and I don't think that's right. When the task force was asked to prepare this for us, they asked about keeping the status quo. They were told there was no mandate at the time of the report to talk about status quo or merging some areas. Possibly some areas could be merged; I don't know if that's something the minister is looking at. Hopefully you will consider this report that was subm itted on September 30, and I would certainly like to see that.

Those are my questions, which I would truly like addressed. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, hon. member. The hon. Member for Red Deer-South. 8:50 MR. DOERKSEN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to open my comments with a brief analogy which highlights the importance of what I'm going to say tonight. That is, when you come into a budget crunch in your personal finances, the first things to go are your discretionary expenses. Now, you've got to look after your home; you've got to look after your food; you've got to make sure there are some clothes on the backs of your kids.

Discretionary expenses like piano lessons, skating lessons, hockey, and pictures have to go. In this day and age when we are addressing the problem of the deficit in serious terms, we have to look at our discretionary expenses. There are a number of discretionary expenses right throughout the whole government estimate book, but seeing as how we're dealing with your department tonight, I do want to talk about some of those which I consider to be discretionary, and then I wish to address each one of them. Most of them come under program 4, which is Individual Rights and Citizenship Services.

The first one on there is the Citizenship and Heritage Secretariat. I'm not sure exactly what that does, so if you could provide an explanation to me – and you may have in your previous

preamble – that would be appreciated. The second one on there is the Human Rights Commission. As noted in question period several days ago by the Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, 98 percent of the cases coming to that commission were labour related. I know that we have a Labour Relations Board which could probably look after the majority of that, so I would think the Human Rights Commission is one we should look at in terms of determining whether in fact this is a priority that we should be spending our money on. Is it or is it not a discretionary expense?

Then I'm looking at the next ones down, the Women's Secretar- iat and the Advisory Council on Women's Issues. I'm going to combine those two because I think they're in many ways a similar kind of organization. Since my question in question period to do with the Advisory Council on Women's Issues, I have had a large outpouring of support and have not received one phone call, one letter suggesting that I was off base in my comments. MRS. SOETAERT: That's easy to say. MR. DOERKSEN: That's just my experience; okay? I'm relaying it. That's what I came across.

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 751 Some of the funding that goes out from these groups, and I'm not sure where – I think this comes out of the Women's Secretar- iat, but I'm not sure. I notice a '91-92 provincial grant to the Alberta Status of Women Action Committee of about $5,000. I think that's another committee that lobbies government on issues of importance to them. There's a grant here for $61,000 to the Alberta Teachers' Association. Why they would get a grant from there is beyond me. I'm just going to list some of them.

University of Alberta department of chemistry for a 73rd Cana- dian chemical conference: a very small grant there; it's not big dollars. I've got to question what that's doing there. Alberta Healthcare Association, Royal Alexandra hospital: there was a wellness for women conference; there's a small grant there. The Canadian Bar Association, which should be able to afford their own conferences, was given a small grant for the Alberta working group of the task force on gender equality. There's tons of them here. As you can see, I'm flipping through the pages.

There's one here to the Edmonton board of health for $60,000 for a health promotion and education video. The point I'm trying to raise with these, Mr. Minister, is that I believe these are discretionary expenses. I don't think in the fiscal environment we're in that we can really afford these, so I'm raising that as a question. Then there's Advice on Seniors' Issues there for $735,000 again. I believe that they advise the government in terms of how we should be approaching issues to do with seniors and funding.

I think certainly if they are concerned, they're well able to raise the funds to provide their own voice. I don't think we need to fund that particular group. Again, the emphasis is on how we have to look at our discretionary expenses. Another question I would have for you on these, Mr. Minister. I know we have talked in this House about sunset clauses, and I believe there are sunset clauses in most of these. I'm not sure what they all are and when they fall into place. So if I could get an answer in terms of the sunset clauses on each of those, it would be helpful.

Then I'd also ponder or question if there is any way that we can move those dates forward. The reason I'm saying that is that if they can't stand the test of providing a worthwhile service at this point in time, let's not let them carry on for the next two or three years until the sunset clause comes up. Let's examine it now. If it stands the test, fine; let's fund it. If it doesn't stand the test, then let's get rid of it. I also want to lend my support in terms of the funding to libraries. I believe libraries are an excellent investment, and I would certainly encourage continued funding of those programs.

I think the libraries are a useful place for people of all social backgrounds and economic status to be able to access good quality books, to be able to go and relax, sit down with a good book and read. I think it's very important that we maintain the funding to libraries. Then I want to direct some specific questions to the budget. There's one here, Community Recreational/Cultural Grants, for $15 million that just disappeared. I'm not saying I'm opposed to that; I'm just curious as to how they are going to get by. Are they getting funding elsewhere?

Has it been moved to a different element, or have we decreased some funding? Under program 3 we're looking at the museums. These are great tourist attractions. They're important for Alberta's attrac- tion of outside visitors, but I'm wondering whether we can't increase the revenue side on those, because they are world-class, high quality attractions. We have to look at all elements of our budget. I would suggest that if we can raise the revenue side, we can then also decrease the amount that we have to then subsidize those operations. Mr.

Minister, again I think my main critical point there is on the discretionary expenses, the duplication of services that I think happen elsewhere. If we can consolidate the departments where some of this stuff is looked after, we will do ourselves a big service. Thank you very much. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, hon. member. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Belmont. MR. Y ANKOWSKY: On October 4 of this year the hon. Minister of Health announced to this Assembly details of a $122 million reduction in health care spending.

On one hand, the minister deserves some commendation for zeal in attempting to take some fat out of the system. However, on the other hand, the hon. minister deserves castigation for the vicious attempt to savage some of the most vulnerable yet most valuable members of our society.

I refer to the senior citizens of Alberta, to the people who built this great society in which we are privileged to live, to the people to whom the hon. members opposite are determined to ask for a handout to finance the moneys owing to the profligate spending and loans policies they and their predecessors foisted upon Albertans in recent years. Mr. Chairman, Alberta seniors are a diverse group with diverse ideas and concerns, and there are diverse solutions to their difficulties and their needs. 9:00 Mr. Chairman, consider for a moment the status of long-term care facilities for seniors.

This is a tragedy already, and the government is proposing to augment that tragedy by ro ughly halving the number of long-term care beds planned. Y et waiting lists are already growing immensely. One major Edmonton facility in its recent newsletter stated that its present waiting list has 142 people on it. Combined with cutbacks to the allowable 94 percent maximum occupancy, this translates to a waiting period of six years.

Considering that we already have seniors facing a waiting period from six months to two years, one can only assume that this government hopes seniors will die before it has to take care of them. This attitude cannot be allowed to persist. I am aware, Mr. Chairman, of a particularly sad case, that of a father of a prominent Edmonton journalist. Said father is in dire need of acute care but is unable to be placed, partly because many acute care beds are being taken up by seniors who need long-term auxiliary or nursing home care but who have been parked in acute care wards until perhaps years down the road.

They will come to the top of the list and if they are still alive finally will be moved to the facility more appropriate to their needs. The gentleman in question, should he live long enough to get admitted to any hospital, will perhaps join that growing throng of seniors languish- ing in expensive acute care beds while awaiting space in a facility which would provide a more economical and more humanely sensitive approach to their care and needs. Mr. Chairman, we all know about the crisis in health care funding, but the solution is not, as it were, the Klein cut, clean or not.

Rather it particularly involves the reallocation of existing resources to where they are most needed rather than where more politically expedient. For example, many of our rural hospitals are ineffective as major acute care facilities, often for reasons not the fault of the dedicated people who administer and run them. Would it not make sense, particularly in view of the aging nature of our rural population, to convert some of these facilities to long- term care for seniors? This would not only make more efficient

752 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 use of said facilities but will also have the advantage of allowing seniors in their declining years to remain close to their families. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the government for stating the following: it is important that all existing space in the system be utilized fully before we undertake any more new construction. We on this side of the Assembly as well as all Albertans can only hope that subsequent actions by the government will be as eloquent as those words. In conclusion, Mr.

Chairman, I would like to remind this Assembly of our previous comments about day fac ilities for seniors. This is a way of not only reducing costs for a long-term institutional-based system but also of providing a more attractive alternative for our revered senior citizens. This involves more flexible thinking, and I hope the members opposite are willing to do that. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, hon. member. The hon. Member for Calgary-Egmont. MR. HERARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I don't know if I've had the opportunity to congratulate the Member for Calgary-Nose Creek for his appointment to one of the most controversial, I think, ministries in the government, but I have a second reason if I've already done it. That's b ecause he has parents that live in Calgary-Egmont. I only have a couple of questions. Over the past couple of years we've seen the opening of two new museums in Alberta: in Wetaskiwin the Reynolds-Alberta Museum and in Cardston the Remington-Alberta Carriage Centre.

I understand that there are a number of other communities who are wanting to spur tourism in this province, and given that we're in difficult budgetary times, I wonder if the minister could share with us his future plans for museum development in Alberta. The second question I have, Mr. Minister, is that – first, I'm fundamentally against the funding of any lobby groups of any type, period.

Under program 4 I would really appreciate it if the minister could perhaps make me feel a little better about these particular categories by telling me that they aren't essentially lobby groups but that they do other good things. I'd really like to see more justification for the existence of some of these categories, including, I might add, and at the peril of getting the seniors mad at me, I'd like to know on 4.0.6 what that particular group provides for the province. Those are all my questions. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, hon. member. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. MRS.

HEWES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, want to congratulate the minister for undertaking this most interesting and eclectic department. I think it would be a real challenge for anyone, and I wish him well in it. Mr. Chairman, I've been interested in the change of name in this department. Perhaps the minister could comment further on this, regarding the name change and the change therefore in emphasis of what the department will be busying itself with. I deplore the reduction in the emphasis on arts and culture. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, hon. member. Would you be a little quieter?

It's very difficult for somebody to speak. Please just talk quietly. Thank you. Hon. member. MRS. HEWES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was saying that I deplore the de-emphasis of arts and culture in this department, because I believe we have been well served. I see arts as a major industry in our province, as a definition of what we are as a society. I believe the artists among us – visual artists, performing artists – need encouragement as employers and they certainly fulfill an immense role there, Mr. Minister. I've always believed the artists and poets of our lives lead us, that they are ahead of us.

They are the harbingers. They are the people that are able to predict. They have the prescience; they are able to help us see where we are going as a society. I believe they need to be encouraged by us. Unfortunately, when times are tough and when we get in recessions, things are more difficult for them, and I think it's incumbent on government to show their support and to encourage those people who lead us in our world. Similarly, Mr. Chairman, I'm concerned about the de-emphasis of multiculturalism.

I supported the idea when Premier Getty developed the legislation and changed the department to bring multiculturalism into the forefront. I have felt that we have not yet even begun to realize the immense strength that is available to us in our multicultural nature. What is it the Member for Edmonton-Avonmore calls the big Ds? What are the four big Ds? MR. ZWOZDESKY: The four Ds: dance, dress, diet, and dialect. MRS. HEWES: Dance, dress, diet, and dialect: the four Ds. Not just that, Mr. Chairman, Mr.

Minister, but the tremendous difference that they make to us in enriching the texture of our lives, whether we're in family life, the kind of values they bring in business and in industry, the kind of help they could be to us in trade and industry in our province when we welcome new Canadians here. I think we have not yet begun, and I hope that the minister will not de-emphasize the nature of multiculturalism in our province. 9:10 On the other hand, I just want to ask the minister a few questions about this new title: Community Development. This is a field of practice that I have long been involved in.

I've often thought of it as a field of practice that's still looking for a theory. It's a field of practice that isn't well understood, in my view. I note in program 2 the budget that is assigned to Community Development. It would help me, Mr. Chairman, if the minister would describe for the House: does the change in name mean that we are now moving more strongly into that realm and into that field of practice? What kind of training do people have who are in the department who are working in that field? What kinds of demands are put upon them? Who can apply for assistance in mobilizing in their commun ities?

Could another government department apply? For instance, when your ministry wanted to do the seniors' consultations, would the community development

section of the department be the one to whom you would apply to do it? If I lived in a small town in Alberta and we had some concerns about developing a new industry, could I apply to your department and get the help to mobilize my community to do that? I don't believe the public in general, Mr.

Chairman, understand why that name was changed and whether that means that there is in fact a change in emphasis and if we have people in that department who have the skills and training that are very, very rare in my opinion – very rare around the world and certainly in Canada and Alberta – to do this very specific function. Perhaps the minister could help us by describing that. This is a very generic question, and the minister may have the answer. It used to be, Mr.

Chairman – and perhaps you'll remember this as well – that when we had our budgets presented to us, there was always a list of the pieces of legislation that were

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 753 relevant to the mandate of that department. That's missing in all of our budget documents. I'm not sure why it's been left out, but that's always been very helpful, that you could refer to that list of legislation and say, “Oh, yes, this ministry is responsible for all of these bits of legislation,” often some quite surprising ones. So I would like to see that included in the future, Mr. Minister. Just on vote 2, Libraries. Y es, I want to thank the minister for continuing the same level of support.

My own view is that during a recession, when people have less income and often more time and more need for study and training, libraries become infinitely more important than during boom times, and I think it is particularly important for the government to maintain a level of support, if not increase it, and increase access to libraries. I've been concerned about the city of Edmonton adding a fee, because I think however small that may seem and however easy, I believe that will keep some people who most desperately need library services away. Mr. Chairman, a few comments about vote 4.

Other members have spoken about the women's advisory council. Members in this House will probably recall that I had a great deal of difficulty when we created the legislation for the women's advisory council because I believed then and I still do that it would be more appropriate if this advisory council reported directly to the Legislature and not just through the minister. In spite of that, I have been immensely impressed by the work that they have done. I think they have served all Albertans very well over the years. They have written some excellent documents. They've done some very good research.

They've made some sensible, practical, rational recommendations to this government. I'm relieved to hear that the minister intends to maintain support to the advisory council, and I would hope that we can look forward to that. I would ask the minister how it works when that advisory council, Mr. Chairman, makes recommendations through the ministry regarding certain other activities of the government. More recently that advisory c ouncil made an excellent series of recommendations about supports for independence and the difficulties that program had for women.

I'd like to know how the Community Development ministry then relates to that advisory council to push their recommendations in other departments that are involved. I'm not sure that anyone understands why those recommendations are not acted upon, Mr. Minister. The Human Rights Commission I have supported from the outset and would hope that the various musings on the government side of the House do not indicate that there is any absence of support in the ministry for that. I think this is a measure of our society that we need to maintain.

I would like to know, however – when the new chairman of the commission was appointed, it was my understanding at the very outset that his primary function at the time was to do a review, and I don't know what has happened to that. I understood the minister to say only a couple of days ago that a mandate was being developed. Now, I would have thought that that review was well under way if not at completion by this time. Perhaps the review has been discontin- ued and the commission sent on about its business. If so, I'd be grateful to know. Mr. Chairman, just one final comment about the seniors' secretariat.

My colleague has already spoken about seniors. I'd like some reassurance from the minister that the seniors' secretar- iat in fact will be consulted when there are events and pieces of legislation that impinge upon seniors' needs. It seems to me that that would be the first place that one would ask what the conse- quences would be, and in my view they have been studiously ignored over many years. I would hope the minister would want to correct that and very quickly . I think, as with the Human Rights Commission and the women's advisory council, that secretariat can serve us very well and should be made use of.

Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, hon. member. The hon. member for Calgary-Mountain View. MR. HLADY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I'd like to start by thanking the minister for allowing me to work with the interim board at the Alberta Sport Council and Alberta recreation, parks, and wildlife in putting the two programs together. I think this is one important step in combining overlaps of different services that we are now offering in Alberta.

I think there is a potential for us to work and make these services much more effective and efficient by putting the two together and delivering better service than we have in the past. I think there's lots that we can be doing there. One of my concerns is that we do have some overlaps in these areas. We have our wildlife as well as the recreation and the high-level sports. I think that with the three different areas as well as parks and wildlife, we have some very defined areas. Should they or shouldn't they be there? I think those are some questions we might see ourselves getting into.

The delivery of the services, I'm sure, will be brought into question as the interim board meets and we talk about that to find out what the most effective way is of delivering these services. I know there are lots of concepts out there right now. They're spending time looking at getting the services back to the private sector while we still have control over making sure the services are delivered effec- tively, at the same time not delivering them ourselves. So I think these are some things that we can do right inside the foundations, combining them with recreation, parks, and wildlife.

My question for the minister this evening is: could the minister explain why the absolute level of Urban Parks Operating Grants and Municipal Recreation/Tourism Area Operating Grants has not been reduced yet? I think there are other areas that we need to think about, and this might be one of them. Thank you very much. 9:20 MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Edmonton- Norwood. MR. BENIUK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I firmly believe in the concept of multiculture, and I will rise here today to try to defend it. I realize multiculture is not the most popular topic.

The minister is responsible for multiculture; therefore, I will have this opportunity to try to defend it. We take many things for granted. We take things for granted like the parliamentary system, the legal system, due process of law. Things that we take for granted also include the multicul- tural reality of this province. Multiculture is many cultures. A culture includes the language, the food, the customs, the history, and many other aspects of a person's existence.

To convey the importance of multiculture, I would like to relate a personal experience outside this province so I can then use it to relate to the reality of Alberta. During the Soviet era there was a massive attempt to create a Soviet man, a Soviet woman. Individual countries under the Soviet rule had their history, their language, their culture suppressed. Ukraine was one of them. When Ukraine was becoming independent – and I spent five months in Ukraine – a commitment was made that committed the Ukrainian government to help and ensure that every language and every culture on its soil would flourish.

Twenty-five percent of

754 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 Ukraine's population is non Ukrainian. It includes Russians, Jews, Poles, Hungarians, Germans, Tartars. There are over 100 different nationalities on Ukraine's territory. They were guaran- teed that their language, their culture would flourish, that they would be able to deal with the government in their language in areas where their population had concentrations. It was one of the reasons that, when you look at eastern Europe, Ukraine b ecame independent peacefully. In Moldavia bl ood flows.

In Georgia blood flows, and in the former Yugoslavia blood flows b ecause that concept was ignored. Here in Alberta we have a multicultural society. In this province every language should be encouraged to flourish, for we are entering a global market and language is very, very important. The hon. member who is the Minister of Family and Social Services was in my riding. He spoke at the opening of the Native Friendship Centre. He spoke in Cree. One of the reasons: when you speak in the language of your forefathers, words have special meaning that is missed when you translate into another language.

We must encourage all our people from every ethnic group to preserve their historic language. One of the greatest tragedies of any European nation has been what happened in Ireland. They had one of the great literary languages. The language is not there now. All of Europe, all of the world suffers because of that loss. We must preserve, we must encourage linguistic learning through the school system, and it should be encouraged through the minister responsible for multiculture and the Multiculturalism Commission.

There are many benefits in economic terms for trade if a person knows the language of another country. There are many opportu- nities where our people can go and deal, whether it's now in eastern Europe or in Asia, if you know the language of the country. When we deny and turn against the concept of multiculture, we are hurting ourselves and our future generations.

There is not one person in this room who can stand up and say they have no cultural ties to the land of their forefathers and foremothers, and that is wonderful, because it opens up economic opportunities, cultural opportunities, which will benefit this province. No individual can ever reach fulfillment of himself or herself without having input from their historic past. Actually, I must admit that this silence is sort of throwing me off. Like, when people were talking in the past, it was more . . . [interjections] Y es. Y ou know, this silence is, to put it mildly, deafening. AN HON. MEMBER: So is your speech.

MR. BENIUK: I'm not too sure how to take that. [interjections] I thank you for your comment that you're not very impressed with being pro multiculture. I will say this to you: if you want to know the price that a country pays if you do not support the reality that every man and every woman and every child has a right to their historic past, to their knowledge, to their language, go into any country where there is violence and you will find there is a suppression of that right. The suppression of multiculture takes many forms.

Lack of encouragement by a government for people to learn and preserve their culture is one way of suppression. As the hon. member smiles as he leaves, I say also that in his riding there are many people . . . [interjections] I apologize for saying he leaves, but I didn't mention his name. Point of Order Referring to the Absence of a Member DR. WEST: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: A point of order. DR. WEST: There is a time-honoured tradition in this Assembly that you don't talk about one's position in this Assembly, whether they're absent or they're present. MR.

BENIUK: Y ou weren't absent, sir. Y ou were present. DR. WEST: The hon. member just made the direct reference to my exit from this Assembly. MR. BENIUK: I did not name you. MR. TRYNCHY: Y es, you did. MR. BENIUK: No, I didn't. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order. MR. TRYNCHY: Y ou said he was leaving. DR. WEST: Mr. Chairman, if you'll check the Blues, that's exactly what has been said here. MR. TRYNCHY: He was leaving. MR. BENIUK: I retract the statement. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Excuse me. Thank you, hon. minister. Go ahead, but what the hon. minister said is certainly right. Y ou can't make reference . . . MR.

BENIUK: Okay, I retract the statement. He was not leaving. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Okay. Go ahead. MR. BENIUK: He is still here. Debate Continued MR. BENIUK: Switching slightly, I would like to point out to the hon. minister, who is also responsible for the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village, that he would be impressed with the fact that in Kiev there is also a village preserving Ukraine's past. I found it interesting. Two different solitudes: the Ukrainian group here encouraged the government to proceed with this plan, and over there on a much larger scale a village was also pre- served.

If the minister is ever in Kiev, I would highly recom- mend he take a look at it. It is extremely impressive. I will rise later to continue. I must tell you that the silence is throwing me off, and I fully admit it. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: It's just that I'm such a good chairman; I'm keeping order. That's the only reason that it's so quiet. The hon. Member for Calgary-Fish Creek. 9:30 MRS. FORSYTH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a few brief comments to the Minister of Community Develop- ment. The two comments that I would like to make are on Women's Secretariat and Advisory Council on Women's Issues.

As a woman I'd like to say that I've been in business a long time and I question at this point in time the utilization of this particular

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 755 program. I think it was effective and good at the time, but I'm concerned about the pendulum and where it's swinging at this point in time. I'd like to see the pendulum of the clock get into the middle. I question their mandate. I'm not opposed to a council, but I'd like it to be utilized for everybody, not particu- larly women or men, just as an information centre, if it could be called that. The other thing I would like to mention. Like my colleague from Red Deer, I've had numerous calls questioning the secretar- iat and the council.

In today's fiscal reality, doing the cuts that we're doing, how can we rationalize spending the $1 million? I would just like to leave these thoughts with the minister. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Edmonton- Meadowlark. MS LEIBOVICI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've heard a few things tonight that are disturbing, to say the least. One of those issues deals with discretionary spending and what is discretionary spending. It's interesting to note that those most in need of protection sometimes are the first to be the ones that are consid- ered to be discretionary in our society.

When I look at the mandate of the Community Development ministry, it says that you're responsible, Mr. Minister, for the development and support of cultural and recreational pro- grams and services; the restoration and conservation of historical resources . . . I'm sure you know this off by heart. . . . the review and coordination of government policies and programs affecting senior citizens and women. I found that particular clause to be particularly interesting in terms of the way it's phrased. It talks about “the review,” so to my mind that indicates that you are looking at the continuation of those two areas.

It talks about a “coordination of government policies and programs” affecting two particular sectors of our society that the Member for Red Deer-South and the hon. member who spoke just before myself seem to think are discretionary. I would like to enter that I think some things perhaps are discretionary, and the individuals, Beatrice and Skimmer, who were in receipt of these particular dollars have said so. Both of them have indicated that those dollars that were given to them were discretionary, as they didn't really need those dollars.

Again, I would like to say that I think there are some flaws in the argument that has been put forward by the members opposite me in the last hour and a half. I would like to talk a little bit, if I may, with regards to the Human Rights Commission. I'd like to bring a different perspec- tive to this Assembly, as someone who has been employed as an equal opportunity officer for the city of Edmonton for a period of two years. That was when I was also working as a labour relations officer within the Department of Labour at the city of Edmonton.

So I listen with intere st to the suggestions that have been made that perhaps the Human Rights Commission more rightly falls within the Department of Labour. I would like to explain that that would be a move which would be detrimental to any impact that the Human Rights Commission could potentially have, as well as to the ability for the individuals who are working in that commission to in fact carry on the duties of their job. Now, the duties of their job not only deal with workplace related issues but also deal with issues of accessibility to housing. Y ou're nodding, so you are well aware of that.

I think what you are doing is restricting the mandate of the Human Rights Commission, and perhaps that is what the members opposite who are putting forth that suggestion in reality do wish to occur. [Mr. Tannas in the Chair] I think the other part of that is in terms of the review that I'm not sure is or is not happening. It seems that there was an initial promise to hold the roundtable discussions. This review was announced shortly after the election, yet there's still no announce- ment as to who's on the panel, if there's a panel, are there written submissions.

Really it begs the question as to whether this is just an excuse to eventually dissolve the commission, as to whether this is one more of the musings that we've heard over and over again from this government both before and after the election, or whether it is just an avenue or a method by which this government wishes to put forward the idea of the dissolution of the Human Rights Commission and will eventually do it with or without the review. So I think this is very crucial to the publics who are interested in this commission and its existence. When I look in terms of your response, Mr.

Minister, as to the dollars that are being afforded to the Human Rights Commission in the area of education, I think there are areas that require more accountability in terms of these dollars. There is a question that I would like to see answered in terms of a statement that you made in Hansard of September 16 that says that much of the costs of the education function of the Human Rights Commission are picked up by the groups: the schools, the employ- ers, and the community groups that request such public education services. Are the dollars for that coming out of the schools?

Are they coming out of the community groups? Does that mean that potentially charities are paying for this education? Are they coming from the employer groups, or are they coming from the Human Rights Commission? So I would like clarification on that statement. There has been a lot of talk in the past by a former minister, a member of this government, about the dissolution of the Human Rights Commission.

Again, I would just like to reiterate that for the security of those individuals who require the services of the commission, it is important for this minister to make it clear as to what is going to be happening again in terms of the review process. I think you, Mr. Minister, have been quite clear in terms of your support, and I give you credit for that.

I, however, am getting the distinct feeling sitting on this side of the Legislative Assembly that you do not have the full support of your caucus, and I'm sure that is something that is internal that will hopefully be worked out to the betterment of the role of the commission. In terms of the women's advisory council, as you may well have noticed, I too am a woman, and I think there are . . . AN HON. MEMBER: The hon. members agree with you. MS LEIBOVICI: Put on their glasses? The council has played a role.

It's a role that, unfortunately, I think the members of the government do not well appreciate, because one of the mandates of this council is to criticize and it's to bring forward recommendations that you are not, by the sounds of it, in accordance with, such as pay equity and bringing forward recommendations on that. I would think perhaps that is one of the reasons that it is being considered as a discretionary body, because again if you don't like what you hear, then the easiest way to deal with that is to get rid of it. Quite honestly, I think that's the wrong approach.

I think the better approach would be to look at what the situations are and why those decisions are being brought

756 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 up and those recommendations are being brought forward, and then perhaps you can address what the bases of the issues are. So again I would like to say that this council is not a frill but is serving a purpose for more than 50 percent of society. 9:40 Again, I had problems when I looked at the Government Estimates document in terms of Individual Rights and Citizenship Services.

Coming from a community – we used to call it organization background, and these days it's called community development background – I found it difficult to reconcile where seniors and women were in terms of this program. Do the government legislation policies and activities that respond to the needs of the senior citizens and women fall under individual rights? Is that a citizenship service? Does that mean that women and seniors are not considered citizens? Women won that battle in 1914 – didn't we? – to become persons and recognized as individuals within this society.

So I would like to know the thinking that went behind the placement of senior citizens and women. Perhaps that goes back to the thinking that went behind the development of the Community Development department. To my mind it doesn't sound like community development. It sounds more like a promotion of cultural and recreational programs, more of looking at things like the Ukrainian Village, and somehow looking at how we deal with senior citizens and women and because the government wasn't quite sure what to do with those two categories, it was stuck into this particular area within government.

I'd like to move on, if I can, to another area totally which deals with tourism and the historical corridors. They are the camps of Big Bear and – pardon my pronunciation – Unipauheos. Y ou're nodding your head, so it was good. MR. MAR: Close. MS CALAHASEN: Oh God, you swore. MS LEIBOVICI: Did I? Sorry. Y ou'll have to give me a lesson.

I'd just like to read in terms of a recommendation that's put forward for the development of the master plan which will address the potential of incorporating Frog Lake into a historical corridor which would include Fort Pitt, Frenchman's Butte, Fort Vermil- ion, Fort George, Buckingham House, Moose Portage, Lac d'Orignal, the Beaver River route, Portage La Biche, the Lac La Biche mission, and Athabasca Landing.

I'd like for the minister to perhaps comment on that recommendation in terms of the master plan and in terms of the long-term goals of the Frog Lake band to develop an educational facility which incorporates the documents, photographs, and materials into a native cultural research centre as well as a comprehensive interpretive centre. In

summary, Mr. Minister, I think you have your work cut out for you. In effect, one of the ways perhaps to best deal with the area of human rights and the women's advisory council is to attempt to depoliticize those two groups, to perhaps go along with the recommendations that appointments be made in a nonpolitical manner, as well as to look at having direct reporting capabilities of those groups to the Legislative Assembly.

Again I speak from my personal experience as the equal opportunity officer with the city of Edmonton, where I was in a hierarchy where I would report to the director of personnel who in turn reported to a general manager who in turn reported to the city manager who in turn would report to the mayor. What I found in terms of doing investigations that were sensitive in nature was that I would have to bypass all those authorities to deal directly with the mayor and with council. It was only at those levels that the effectiveness of that position was most recognized.

So I would urge the minister to look at the possibility of allowing for that to occur within this Legislative Assembly as well. If we want these bodies to be effective and not be considered frills by some of the members who are not aware of what these particular groups can do, then the ability to be nonpolitical, to have the recommenda- tions looked at in the best light is best able to be done through reporting to the Legislative Assembly. I thank you for your attention. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Community Development. MR. MAR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I wish to thank all of the members on both sides of the House for their comments, which I found to be cogent and persuasive and based on clear principles that are easily understood. I'd like to thank the Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark for making her comments on what her views are on what is discre- tionary and what is not discretionary. I'm appreciative of those comments. I'm also appreciative of her comments in regard to the importance of the Human Rights Commission. To the hon. Member for Calgary-Fish Creek.

I am appreciative of her comments, which, again, I find to be cogent, persuasive, and based on clear principles. I am of the same view as her that a pendulum is an appropriate analogy for the manner in which we look at rights in all sorts of areas. In the Human Rights Commis- sion, in rights regarding women, in programs regarding seniors there is a pendulum. We must be aware of the direction in which the pendulum swings. I did not find the comments of the hon. Member for Edmonton- Norwood to be cogent, persuasive, or based on any clear principles. The Member for Calgary-Mountain View.

I'd like to address his comments regarding municipal recreation and tourism operating grants. In the case of these grants, eligibility for operating assistance is based on a percent of capital expenditure. Like the library grants, these budgets have been frozen. For the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. I am very persuaded by her well-placed comments.

Just in brief – and I'm not certain if this is a complete list – the legislation which affects this department includes the Historical Resources Act, the Libraries Act, the Women's Secretariat Act, the Individual's Rights Protection Act, the Seniors Advisory Council for Alberta Act, the Amusements Act, the Recreation Development Act, the Alberta gaming Act, the Glenbow-Alberta Institute Act, the Alberta Order of Excellence Act, the Government House Act, the Department of Culture and Multiculturalism Act, the Alberta Foundation for the Arts Act, the Alberta Sport Council Act, and the Alberta Recre- ation, Parks and Wildlife Foundation Act: a total of 15 pieces of legislation. [Mr.

Herard in the Chair] The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar was making reference to the $12 library fee that the city of Edmonton is considering charging. Municipalities are responsible for their library budgets and contribute significantly to their costs. The provincial grant that comes from the province only pays for a portion of their annual budget. In this case for the city of Edmonton it's 15 percent.

What has been indicated from my discussions with the board members from the Edmonton Public Library is that the $12 membership fee is being applied in a similar manner to what municipalities have done throughout the province and that, in fact,

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 757 this $12 fee is for new programs rather than reflecting any cuts in provincial budgets to existing programs; for example, the building of a new library in the west end of Edmonton as well as Sunday openings. 9:50 Also, the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar asked, I guess, a philosophical question on really the definition of community development that was being used by this minister. First and foremost, community development is a way of thinking, and it is a way of living.

Community development is people acting together to enhance elements from the community fabric in order to improve their overall quality of life. [Mr. Tannas in the Chair] Another question which that member asked was with respect to who can receive assistance from Community Development. Any group can ask for help.

With regard to the staff and the hon. member's question regarding the rare qualities that are required to have such a department, in my view we have some of the very, very best people available in the business, and we're in the process of retraining and refocusing our staff to focus on commu- nity development issues in particular. The Member for Calgary-Egmont made some very thoughtful and persuasive and well-spoken comments regarding the Multiculturalism Commission and the Human Rights Commission and the Seniors Advisory Council and what exactly the functions of these organizations are.

I'm happy to undertake to provide to him as well as to all other members in this House more detailed answers that will be satisfactory to him and I think to other members of this House. In regards to the nature of the answers which I provided at the outset of my submission tonight, in regards to the comments made by the hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert, I would like to point out to that member that in addition to the relatively

summary comments I made at the outset of the evening – that is not the complete set of answers that I will be providing – in fact there will be more specific answers provided to the member in writing. It is my further undertaking to provide written answers to other members of the House both to questions which were asked on the first day of estimates as well as on this day of estimates. The hon. Member for Red Deer-South made some very clear points, and I take those points into consideration.

Again I make the same general comment that I make to most of the members that have asked questions tonight, that the questions and points that he made were cogent and persuasive and based on very clear principles. In regard to the question asked by the hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert on the library task force report, which was a question that was also asked by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore, my office has responded to requests from the Liberal caucus, and I assure them that when I have that report available, I will make it available to them. Accordingly, both the hon.

Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert and the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore will have that report provided to them. I wish to express to the hon. Member for Vegreville-Viking my appreciation for the homework he's done with respect to the good work that is done at the Ukrainian village, and I know that the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore would agree that there's great work being done at that facility. Indeed, all Albertans can justifiably be proud of the facilities that Community Development operates. In regards to the hon.

Member for Vegreville's questions regarding the reduction in spending on these facilities detailed on page 15, like other parts of my ministry, I've asked my program managers to do more with less. I have faith in their ability to provide quality services at these facilities through a combination of good management and aggressive marketing of each facility, which maximizes the earned revenues that are reinvested in their operation and in their maintenance. I believe that the hon.

Member for Red Deer-South also made the comment that we should be placing a great deal more emphasis on the ability of these facilities, flagship facilities, to produce more revenue. I am very mindful and very strongly persuaded by that comment. I wish to thank the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore, who has clearly gone through this material in a great deal of detail. I thank him for his intelligence in going through this. There are a number of questions that he has raised, and like my undertaking given to the Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St.

Albert, I will also undertake to provide more detailed written answers to his questions and to her questions, both questions that were asked the first day of estimates as well as this the second day. In regards to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore's questions regarding a shift in the emphasis of multiculturalism from one of cultural retention to one of education, I would point out that this has not been a sudden shift but something that has happened in accordance with the multiculturalism action plan at its outset in 1990. I'd be happy to ask the hon.

Member for Calgary- Cross to respond to that issue at this time. MRS. FRITZ: I'd like to thank the minister for the opportunity to respond to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Avonmore in regards to cultural retention. When I began to think about the member's remarks, it reminded me that John Diefenbaker had compared Canada to a garden. I think this analogy can as well be used to Alberta, and that is a garden into which has been trans- planted the hardiest and brightest flowers from many lands, each retaining in its new environment the best of the qualities for which it was loved and prized in its native land.

Now, a shift away from cultural retention – that was the question – simply means the sharing of cultures with others. We need to utilize our diversity, I think, with success. Somehow, and not without challenge and adversity, we've made Alberta the most desirable province to live in. We risk losing this enviable position, I think, if we cannot continue to capitalize on our diversity. I think we need to do a better job of living side by side, accepting, respecting, and valuing our differences so that we can use them as building blocks instead of barriers. I think that you would agree with that.

There are many who think that equality means sameness. It seems to me that there are positive aspects in our differences, and I think that our future success as a province depends on harnessing the richness of our cultural diversity, not simply retaining it within one's own community but sharing it with all Albertans. That's what a shift in cultural retention means. I think this concept brings a balance and underlines the importance and commitment of the minister's fostering of multiculturalism in Alberta. I think there's a new consciousness that people do not want to compromise their uniqueness.

I think they understand there's a great value in building on differences as well as continuing to affirm our similarities. Now, you know that the Multiculturalism Commission has worked hard to form partnerships with many citizens in the communities of education, business, and health care, and their leadership in this area, I

758 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993 believe, was respected and appreciated, as the minister's commit- ment to the Multiculturalism Commission and its programs. Once again I thank the minister for allowing me the opportunity to clarify what a shift in cultural retention really does mean. Thank you. 10:00 MR. ZWOZDESKY: Just a couple of closing comments, if I might, and I'd beg the indulgence of the other side. I thank the minister for his undertakings and also the Member for Calgary- Cross for making that explanation.

There's a danger in removing cultural retention from the cultural heritage Act, which is a little bit more to the point. A shift from cultural retention over to education, a shift in emphasis is something that's not necessarily even been pointed out that way before, but I appreciate the explanation anyway. I wanted to just comment quickly on a couple areas.

First of all, I know that back on October 5, yesterday, the Calgary-Cross member had said something about the Department of Community Development currently looking at a new system of advertising and appointing members to all its boards and commissions, a system that will be open and acc ountable to all Albertans. I'm just curious to know, Mr. Chairman, what input the minister has sought in this regard, from whom, and what kind of a new system is forthcoming. Is he prepared to share those results? Were there any costs associated with it that would be of interest as well?

On another quick point I notice now we're responsible for urban parks under Community Development, as indicated on page 316 of Hansard of September 16 in response to the hon. Member for Wainwright's question. He also said that he was thanking the minister for some additional information on urban parks that had just been recently made available to him by the Minister of Community Development. I would ask the minister to please share that information with us as well. There is scant, little information about this new area that's been moved into our Community Development portfolio from tourism.

So I would ask you to please share that information with us, if you could. With regard to a couple of quick comments that are of a budgetary nature, Mr. Chairman, made by the members for Red Deer-South and Calgary-Egmont. Frankly, I'm quite disappointed to hear that they are questioning some kind of an expenditure in this all-important area under program 4. Wouldst we follow their advice, we would see the complete cancellation of four or five extremely critical areas that really are in need of more attention and more support for the kind of understanding and compassion and harmony that they promote.

Without that we are looking at a radically changed Alberta in the very near future. I would strongly ask that they reconsider their comments in this regard. I don't quite see these so-called special interest groups that way. When we're talking about the areas of culture, the areas of seniors, the areas of women's issues, the heritage secretariat, citizenship, and human rights, these are fundamental principles, hon. members, upon which Alberta and Canada were built. I think it's obligatory and incumbent upon us to protect those ideals. So please be very careful with the kinds of comments you make in that regard.

Y ou are attacking everybody, including some of your own supporters, I would think. I would urge, on the other hand, that members on both sides remember that we are moving toward a global village more and more, where communication, understanding, and acceptance of each other – regardless of race, colour, creed, sex, and so on – are the kinds of understandings we need to have if we're going to improve the quality of life of an Albertan and if indeed we're going to improve those things like tourism and marketing and exporting, where we have to have a knowledge base of customs and traditions of other cultures.

It's very valuable. We're teaching this stuff in our schools for a reason. We have invested money in this, hon. members, thousands of dollars to prepare our young people. If we can't make inroads with some of the members who perhaps ought not be here, at least we'll make room for those who want to be here and will take this stuff a little more seriously. Here are areas where we see things like racial discrimination still occurring. We have slurs against visible minorities. We have all kinds of need to help these people acclimatize to what our forefathers, those early ancestors, went through themselves.

Surely to God we're not going to repeat some of that same stupidity in the coming future for Alberta. Let's have a little understanding on this point. I get my back up on that a little bit, and I'd be prepared to debate this outside the House even further. Some of these issues have been put so far on the back burner that they even are starting to fall right off the stove. I would not like to see that happen. Y ou don't solve problems of misunderstanding by running away from them. Some of them requi re a little money, hon. minister of agriculture, and that's what we're talking about.

Some of your members are advocating the complete demise of the funding in this area, and I'm trying to advocate for it; okay? So I would ask you to please consider that. There are a number of other areas in the educational support network for opportunities that would help us with this, and I think education is indeed the key. I think the Member for Calgary- Cross and the minister of culture are bang on. I wish you every bit of luck, you two hon. members, with some of the rest of your caucus in securing the types of funding you're looking for there.

In closing, I would just summarize that Community Develop- ment ought to be just that; it ought not to be community disman- tling nor destruction nor demolition nor demising. Y ou're quite right: Alberta used to be the most desirable province to live in. We also used to be number 1 in education; today we're number 7. I hope we don't find that same lack of desirability in the future. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Little Bow. MR. McFARLAND: Thank you. I notice that Spruce Grove- Sturgeon-St. Albert wants to hear her side but not mine. Mr.

Chairman, I wouldn't have said anything had it not been for the remarks of Edmonton-Avonmore in relation to multiculturalism. I just wanted to share with the Assembly some of the feelings of the constituents whilst I was campaigning. Realizing that many, many of them came from many European and other countries to settle this province, I found it rather refreshing to hear people who had come to a better country from countries where they weren't so fortunate.

Hon. minister, one of my constituents, from Holland, who immigrated to Alberta in 1975 – and these were his words; they're not mine – said, “If the government wants to promote multiculturalism, I think they're wasting their money.” He believed that it's up to the family and up to the church. He said, “If we want to start a Dutch wooden shoes club, we can do it by ourselves, thank you very much, without your money.” I applauded him for that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Community Development. MR. MAR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think I've responded to the comments of everyone that has made comments this evening with the exception of the hon. member who just spoke. Just in a brief comment to his observation I believe that cultural retention

October 6, 1993 Alberta Hansard 759 is an old definition of how multiculturalism used to be viewed. I'm not persuaded that government should be spending money on cultural retention, because to suggest that does not give very much credit to the groups who wish to preserve their language and wish to preserve their traditions. They can certainly do it themselves. So I believe that multiculturalism does have a role in government in that we must educate people as to why it is that we must value the contributions of those people who come to this country, and we must educate people in the management of that diversity.

Multiculturalism is a fact in this jurisdiction. There are people that come from many, many places throughout the world, and I think we must learn to live together in a harmonious relationship. Accordingly, there is a role for government to play in multiculturalism. It may not be in the areas of cultural retention, but it must clearly rest in the areas of education. With that, Mr. Chairman, I would propose that this matter be put to a vote before members of this house. MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? All those in favour, please say aye. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye. MR. CHAIRMAN: Opposed, please say no.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. MR. CHAIRMAN: Carried, then, since no one is rising to speak.

The amounts are to be voted for the Department of Community Development. 10:10 Agreed to: Program 1 – Departmental Support Services Total Operating Expenditure $3,300,000 Total Capital Investment $53,000 Program 2 – Community Services Total Operating Expenditure $32,236,000 Total Capital Investment $62,000 Program 3 – Cultural Facilities and Historical Resources Total Operating Expenditure $16,648,000 Total Capital Investment $524,000 Program 4 – Individual Rights and Citizenship Services Total Operating Expenditure $4,456,000 Total Capital Investment $126,000

Summary Total Operating Expenditure $56,640,000 Total Capital Investment $765,000 Department Total $57,405,000 MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. MR. EV ANS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I move that the votes be reported. [Motion carried] MR. EV ANS: I move that the committee does now rise and report. [Motion carried] [Mr. Clegg in the Chair] MR. TANNAS: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has had under consideration certain resolutions, reports as follows, and requests leave to sit again.

Resolved that a sum not exceeding the following be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1994, for the Department of Community Development and the purposes indicated: Operating Expenditure of $56,640,000, Capital Investment of $765,000, for a total of $57,405,000. MR. ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Do you all agree with that report? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Opposed, if any? Carried. [At 10:15 p.m. the Assembly adjourned to Thursday at 1:30 p.m]

760 Alberta Hansard October 6, 1993