Alberta Hansard — 17 March 1994, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 23, Session 2)

19940317

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 699 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, March 17, 1994 1:30 p.m. Date: 94/03/17 [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: Prayers MR. SPEAKER: Let us pray. O Lord, we give thanks for the bounty of our province: our land, our resources, and our people. We pledge ourselves to act as good stewards on behalf of all Albertans. Amen. head: Presenting Petitions MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-North West. MR. BRUSEKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I again have yet another petition to table today regarding the education restructur- ing and educational cutbacks.

This petition is signed by 194 persons, most of whom are in northwest Calgary, and by north- west Calgary I mean the quadrant but also a good number from my own constituency. head: Reading and Receiving Petitions MR. HENRY: Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the petition I presented on March 9 in this Legislature opposing the restructur- ing of education now be read and received. CLERK: We, the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta not to implement the plan to restructure the educational system in Alberta, as proposed by the Minister of Education.

We also request the Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to ensure that every Albe rtan will have the opportunity for input and involvement in future plans to restructure the educational system in Alberta. head: Tabling Returns and Reports MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table responses to motions for returns 156 and 159 and Written Question 167. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Cross. MRS. FRITZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm tabling 60 cards entitled A Second Opinion from residents living in the Calgary- Cross constituency.

They state that, "The current acute care study and its recommendations do not fairly reflect Calgary's need for a downtown hospital" and to please consider their opinion "before deciding the fate of the Bow Valley Centre of the Calgary General Hospital" as they believe the facility should stay open. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. MR. SAPERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I'm tabling copies of 28 letters from radiologists practising in northern Alberta who are very concerned about the government's plans for screening mammography. head: Introduction of Guests MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-East. MR. AMERY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly Mr. Robert Cameron. Robert is a constituent of mine, and he is a very active person in the community. Robert is seated in the members' gallery. I would ask him to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon- St. Albert. MRS. SOETAERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly a marvelous group of students from Millgrove school in Spruce Grove.

They are accompanied by their teachers Ke lli Holden, Debbie Schellenberger, and Pat O'Callaghan – now, isn't that an appropriate name for today? – and a parent helper Shirley Mierlo. So I'd ask you to please rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Norwood. MR. BENIUK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Located in my riding of Edmonton-Norwood is one of the world's famous technical institutions: NAIT. It is my pleasure to introduce to you and through you John Miller, the president of the NAIT Academic Staff Association. He is accompanied by his colleague Don McMann.

I would ask that they both rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. head: Oral Question Period Teacher Layoffs MR. DECORE: Mr. Speaker, despite the willingness of Alberta Teachers' Association mediators to put a 5 percent rollback to Edmonton public school t eachers next week, the public school board in Edmonton has given hundreds of teachers their walking papers today. Including voluntary retirements, over 600 teachers – that's over 12 percent of the teachers in the public system – won't be there next year to teach our children.

The Premier promised that he would take care of our children's education, but instead the government is creating a huge body count of teachers. Mr. Minister, explain how losing hundreds of teachers in our Edmonton public school system will improve the quality of education in that system. MR. JONSON: I assume, Mr. Speaker, that the question is directed to me. MR. DECORE: Unless the Premier is back. MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, first of all, in terms of the overall funding of education, yes, certainly education had to be part of the overall effort to reduce the deficit and balance the budget.

However, a clear priority was given to education in terms of it being the least amount that was reduced from any budget over the four-year period at 12.4 percent. It's also important I think to note that when you consider that the amount being provided at the local level has not been reduced – it has been set or frozen at its current level – we're looking in the system across this province at about 8.5 percent reduction overall.

700 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 Now, speaking of the particular situation that the hon. leader raises. As I understand it, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the negotiations going on, the 5 percent reduction has not been agreed to, and therefore it is regrettable that there are these notices of layoffs. With the 5 percent reduction, the other plans and directions that we're taking in education with respect to increased efficiencies, the 8.5 percent reduction overall in this province over that period I feel is not unreasonable. MR. DECORE: Mr.

Minister, even with 5 percent cuts there will be more than 300 teachers removed out of the Edmonton public school system. Is that your idea of good education for students in Edmonton? MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, I'm not quite sure where the hon. leader gets his figures, but I do maintain that this government has shown a clear priority overall to education funding in this province. There are means to reach efficiencies, and we've taken directions in our business plan to do so.

If there is a 5 percent compensation package, this to a large degree mitigates the need for layoffs, and those are the directions that we're pursuing. MR. DECORE: Mr. Minister, how is quality education going to be provided to Albertans when the body count on t eachers in Alberta is now about 2,000 teachers? MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, in terms of our strong direction in maintaining the quality of education in this province, we do have to look at efficiencies in the system. We do have to cut down on the cost of governance and the cost of administration. We do hope for a 5 percent rollback in the compensation package.

We do have to define our priorities in terms of focusing on the most important parts of the education system, and that is directing the resources to the classroom level. I think that can be accom- plished, and we can maintain the best possible quality of education for students in this province. 1:40 Alberta Research Council MR. DECORE: Mr. Speaker, between 1986 and 1991 the Research Council performed contract research work for a California biotechnology firm known as Biosys Inc.

We've learned that the Research Council granted Biosys Inc. huge backdoor subsidies in the form of massive reductions in the rates they charged Biosys. Fermenters, for example, that normally cost Alberta businesses $2,400 a day would cost Biosys only $188 a day. In 1991 the subsidy just for that year for Biosys was $1 million. To the minister responsible for the Research Council. Will the minister tell us why there are two sets of rules: a set of rules for an American company and very different rules for Alberta companies? MRS. MIROSH: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't believe there are two sets of rules.

There's spin-off technology and combined partnership with a number of companies. There are business plans that are laid out that are individual for each deal that ARC makes. I don't believe that there are any special deals made in this situation. MR. DECORE: Well, that's the point. There is no spin-off technology. Madam Minister, tell us why when ARC was giving these huge subsidies to this American company the council wasn't more businesslike in demanding either a plant or some sort of share in profits. Nothing happened. MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the council is very businesslike.

They approach th ese deals in a very businesslike manner. There are business plans that are laid out before these deals are made. I believe that there's a policy and a procedure that the council follows and will continue to do that. MR. DECORE: Madam Minister, it sounds like you don't know anything about Biosys Inc. I'd like you to tell Albertans exactly the specific benefits that Albertans got from Biosys Inc. in their dealings with the Research Council. What are those specifics? MRS. MIROSH: Mr.

Speaker, the benefits that ARC has and that the province has are wealth creation and jobs, and this is what we are working on and will continue to do. MR. SPEAKER: Third main question. The hon. Member for Calgary-North West. MR. BRUSEKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Past government investigations such as the one that was launched into the Principal Group failure were preceded by bonfires and shredding machines being pressed into service. The Liberal Opposition has learned that prior to the investigation into the biotech division of ARC, a similar practice was employed.

My question is to the minister responsible for the Alberta Research Council. Does the minister have now already in her possession all of the pertinent documents, including backup disks of internal electronic mail communiqués, so investigators and Albertans will get the whole story? MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite can go to ARC, any member opposite can go to ARC and have a look at anything they want. The books are open. The people are there to show anything. Some of them have been there and have given us praise about what ARC is doing.

I welcome them to go back, and we'd be happy to show them whatever they like. MR. BRUSEKER: I guess that means, no, she doesn't have the disks. My supplementary question deals with the document tabled yesterday. Can the minister tell the House whether there are any incidents, documented or not, reported or not, other than the three listed in this very brief report tabled yesterday? MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, the report that was tabled is dealing with the process in case there are any occurrences with regards to injuries or organisms that are let loose. Whatever happens there is well documented.

There's a procedure in place, a policy in place, and I believe that ARC follows those procedures and policies. Any other information that the opposition would require, I'd be happy to get for them. MR. BRUSEKER: Mr. Speaker, Albertans are not interested in what this minister believes. They want answers. Y esterday she said she that was satisfied. Today she believes. So I'd like to know what regulations or documents this minister saw or dis- cussed that led her to believe that conflict of interest procedures were satisfactorily outlined. Will she provide me with a copy of those documents? I'd like a copy.

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 701 MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, there is an investigation currently under way, and it could move into litigation and a court proce- dure. Until that occurs, I cannot release any internal documenta- tion with regards to the conflict of interest. Anything that we have on other policies and procedures with regards to safety of the public, we'd be happy to release. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-East. Kindergarten Programs MR. AMERY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Education.

Two days ago the Calgary public board of education decided to charge $600 to parents who wish to enroll their kids in a 400-hour ECS program. This decision will have a devastating effect on kids and pa rents alike in my constituency, and it will create a two-tiered system: one for the rich and one for the poor. Would the minister interfere immediately and order the board to rescind this unfair decision? MR. JONSON: Mr.

Speaker, I think it's important to note that we are providing adequate funding for 200 hours of early childhood services instruction, f unding which is designed to provide the meeting of the following goals: to contribute to the development of a positive self-image for children, to enhance the physical development of young children, to enhance the emo- tional, social, and moral development of young children. That funding is in place for those 200 hours, and we deem that to be an approach which provides preparation for school.

With respect to the hon. member's question, the $60 per month charge that, as I understand it, is proposed by the Calgary public board is within their prerogative to set, and therefore, Mr. Speaker, I would not have any plans to interfere in that particular decision on their part. However, I would point out that we do provide the funding for the 200 hours of instruction in ECS. MR. SPEAKER: Supplemental question. MR. AMERY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the same minister: since Alberta is the only province in the country without a mandatory ECS program, would the minister consider mandating this very important program so tuition fees will not be permitted and a two-tiered system will be avoided? MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to note that when early childhood services were established in this province, an important point that was made by the advocates of that program at the time was that they wanted it to be flexible and outside of the regular school system in terms of its goals and in terms of its operation.

That is something that has been carried forward to this day, and I expect that will continue. At this point in time, that is the position of the government. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental? The hon. Member for Sherwood Park. Alberta Research Council (continued) MR. COLLINGWOOD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sadly the chair of the Alberta Research Council continues to whitewash unethical research practices in the biotechnology division of the Alberta Research Council.

In the communiqué tabled in the Legislature yesterday, the chair failed to tell Albertans that this particular division does not employ a full-time, qualified biologi- cal safety officer and hasn't for a number of years. Since the Canadian biotechnol ogy i ndustry has adopted U.S. guidelines which require this position, running genetic experiments without a biosafety officer is as unethical as releasing genetically altered organisms.

My question to the minister responsible for the ARC: if you do not have a full-time, qualified biosafety officer as international guidelines require, how can the ARC say to Alber- tans, "Trust us"? MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, there is a safety officer hired by ARC. MR. COLLINGWOOD: Mr. Speaker, that is totally inaccurate. My second question to the minister: are the dollars the reason that the ARC is prepared to risk the health of its employees by doing without a biosafety officer? MRS. MIROSH: Absolutely not. Mr. Speaker, the safety of the people who work at ARC and our public are our number one concern. 1:50 MR.

SPEAKER: Final supplemental. MR. COLLINGWOOD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is clear that this situation is out of control and the minister is in charge. My question is this: what decisive action, if any, will you take to outwardly condemn these totally unethical practices? MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, I've had the opportunity to review the practices, and I am certain that the practices have been followed, that the procedure has been followed. I'm satisfied that all is normal. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Pincher Creek-Macleod. Timber Harvesting MR. COUTTS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

My question today is to the Minister of Environmental Protection. Given the high level of not only public interest but industry concern and indeed concern demonstrated right here in this Assembly as it applies to the issue of timber harvesting on private land, is the minister aware of recent initiatives by the municipal district of Pincher Creek to manage this activity on land within their jurisdiction? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Environmental Protection. MR. EV ANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, in point of fact, the initiative that's been taken by the municipal district of Pincher Creek is a real success story in this province, and I hope it's going to be copied by a number of other municipalities in the future. What they have done is change their land use bylaw, which they have the authority to do certainly, by incorporating a set of timber harvesting practices into that bylaw.

Now, they did that by involving a number of stakeholders, including forestry companies in British Columbia and Alberta and the United States, environmental organizations down in the Crowsnest Pass and the Pincher Creek area, local municipal officials, and our staff in Environmental Protection as well. They've put this into effect. It is now the norm for practices on private lands in terms of forestry harvesting in the MD of Pincher Creek.

There have been harvesting practices undertaken pursuant to these guidelines, and the results are very, very satisfactory, exactly what we're trying to promote at the provincial level on our Crown land.

702 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 MR. SPEAKER: Supplemental question. MR. COUTTS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. How does this initiative by the municipal district of Pincher Creek impact the actions being taken by Alberta Environmental Protection to address the issue of private-land logging in Alberta? MR. EV ANS: Well, the issue of logging off private lands in this province has become more and more focused as the prices of sawlogs go up, Mr. Speaker, particularly given that in British Columbia there just isn't enough sawlog fibre available for all of the companies that are operating.

What is happening down in Pincher Creek is really complemen- tary to what we are trying to do in Environmental Protection. We are trying to encourage a private woodlot system in this province, making sure that individual property owners are aware of the benefits of sustainable and environmentally sensitive harvesting practices. We are going to continue, of course, making checks at all of our border points to ensure that the logs that are being exported out of our province are indeed from private landowners and not from our Crown lands.

The voluntary process that our forest industry in Alberta through forest care has taken on, again being very, very accountable and environmentally sensitive on private lands, is again a complement to what is happening down in the MD of Pincher Creek. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental. MR. COUTTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can other municipali- ties, then, and authorities in Alberta take action under their own land use bylaws to regulate timber harvesting on private land? MR.

EV ANS: I don't think there's any doubt that the Planning Act of Alberta gives municipalities the authority to make changes to their land use bylaws when we are talking about change of use or more intensive use of land. So indeed there is an opportunity for other municipalities in this province to be just as progressive as the MD of Pincher Creek, and I hope that some of those locally elected officials will be watching question period and will take some interest in what's happening down in Pincher Creek. Alberta Research Council (continued) MR. GERMAIN: Mr.

Speaker, Albertans pay a lot of money for government supervision of the Alberta Research Council: the minister, $19,000 extra; the Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, $14,000 extra. They have a paid president. They have a paid board of directors. My question to the minister in charge of the Alberta Research Council: will she recommend to her cabinet colleagues that she consolidate the role of chairman and minister in charge into only one paid position? MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, I think all those people are worth their money. MR. GERMAIN: Mr.

Speaker, even I'm at a loss for words. [interjection] I thank him for reminding me. Then to the Provincial Treasurer: as a cost-saving essential step, will he recommend to his colleagues that they consolidate these two figurehead positions? MR. DINNING: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the one thing I can advise the Assembly – and I know my colleague the Deputy Premier would want me to advise the Assembly of this – is that the Premier's Council on Science and Technology is going through exactly this kind of a co-ordination exercise and that we in this government believe that government supported research should be focused on ensuring that we get the best value for our money and that it is focused on getting a good maximum return for Alberta industry so that they can invest using that new technology that has been developed through our research.

I think that there will be good news down the road in telling Albertans about a different, a better approach to co-ordinating our research in this province so that we get good value for the taxpayers' dollar. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental. MR. GERMAIN: Thank you. To the minister in charge: isn't it in fact the case that you've already taken over as spokesman for the Alberta Research Council, superseding the Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat? MRS. MIROSH: Mr. Speaker, we work well together.

I believe I have to remind the member opposite that we plan on creating a hundred million dollars worth of wealth in this province, and it takes qualified people to do that. We will continue to create jobs and create wealth. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Highwood. Family and Community Support Services MR. TANNAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question today is for the Minister of Family and Social Services. A well-known and respected member of this Assembly has described the Family and Community Support Services Act as the most progressive piece of social legislation in North America, a view in which I concur.

However, the past few months have seen announcements of a 5 percent reduction, a change of funding departments, and a new reduction amounting to a threshold of about 14 percent. Can the Minister of Family and Social Services explain why we now have a $2.8 million new grant for FCSS? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Family and Social Services. MR. CARDINAL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I wanted to make sure that the transition from my department to Municipal Affairs under unconditional grants was smooth. That is the reason that we made these changes.

There were a number of factors that came into play during the process of the final transfer, including population growth in some municipalities and of course underusage by some municipalities. Some of the municipalities of course would have been faced with more than the 5 percent that was planned in the three-year plan, where we would reduce 5 percent each year for three years. In fact, the city of Calgary and the city of Edmonton were closer to 14 percent, and it was never the intention of this minister to do that.

By giving the municipalities this onetime grant, we will ensure that municipalities will be closer to the 5 percent we had planned, because they have developed their budgets based on what we have promised them. That is why we've done that. I've always indicated that we will carefully review the social programs that assist the high-needs areas of our province. In this particular case this is what's happened. In fact, this year alone I've transferred closer to $100 million into the high-needs area, and I will continue to do that.

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 703 2:00 MR. TANNAS: Mr. Speaker, my supplemental question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Can the minister assure me that this event or any other circumstance will not in any way preclude communities from accessing federal f unding under the Canada assistance plan? DR. WEST: Mr. Speaker, we have looked at this program and acknowledged that it's going into an unconditional pool but that some communities and municipalities would like a more definitive direction.

So as of April 1, 1994, the funding for FCSS will be identified as a component of that unconditional grant, but municipalities have two options. Option one. The municipality can collect the grant component unconditionally and use the money to support FCSS projects or other priorities of the municipalities. The municipality must advise Alberta Municipal Affairs how the funds are spent, but it will not be necessary to meet the current FCSS program require- ments for cost sharing, financial reporting, et cetera. Option two.

The municipality can sign a family and community support services agreement with Alberta Municipal Affairs for the '94-95 budget year. In this case the FCSS component becomes conditional, and all existing FCSS requirements must be met. However, the municipality will not receive additional provincial dollars for the FCSS program. Therefore, this option will be of particular interest to municipalities contributing more than the required 20 percent FCSS share and who want to recover federal dollars for the additional contribution under the Canada assistance plan. Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to table this also with the House so it's a matter of record. MR. TANNAS: Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence I'd like to ask my final supplemental of the Minister of Family and Social Services. To the minister: what set of circumstances or consulta- tions led to this welcome change? MR. CARDINAL: Mr. Speaker, as you're aware, the FCSS programs were always designed and priorized at the local level. The budgets were set at local levels, the municipalities. That will continue.

In relation directly to the question, as a former municipal councillor of close to 10 years who served about the same amount of time on an FCSS board, I do maintain a very close contact with those people that are interested in it. I did receive a number of phone calls advising me of the potential problems. We will continue doing that consulting with groups like that. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Northern Alberta Institute of Technology DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Tory turmoil continues at NAIT and now is surfacing at Lethbridge Community College.

This time the minister's chair at NAIT has taken away the vote on budget and staffing matters from two duly appointed staff representatives. These two governors and the people they represent are outraged. I'd like to file if I could four copies of documentation related to this misgovernance. Will the Minister of Advanced Education clarify: is the chair at NAIT following a new government policy, or is this the usual patronage bullying where individuals act without authority? MR. ADY: Mr. Speaker, I of course am not present at board meetings at the institutions.

The board chairmen have responsibil- ity to administer their affairs in conjunction with the administra- tion there. They have the ability within their jurisdiction to strike subcommittees, to study various options that are before the board, and I'm assuming that this may have taken place in this circum- stance. MR. SPEAKER: Supplemental question. DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When will the minister respond to the concerns of these staff members as requested in their letter of February 17? MR. ADY: Mr.

Speaker, I have received the letter the hon. member refers to, and I will be responding to it in the next short time. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental. DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the letter outline how duly elected governors can have input into the governance of those institutions? MR. ADY: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure of what the hon. member is getting to when we're talking about duly elected members by the board of governors unless he means those who are appointed by the faculty being elected by their peers. I have to assume that's his reference.

Certainly the board of governors are required to act within the bounds of the ins titutes Act, and I anticipate that they'll move forward to do that. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Cross. Family Violence MRS. FRITZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics has just released information on wife assault which restates the disturbing picture of the extent of violence against women. In Calgary 25 percent of the women accessing emergency shelters are native.

Recognizing the urgency and special needs of native women in crisis situations, representatives of this community have worked hard to raise money for a native women's shelter. Will the Minister of Family and Social Services comment on how the operating money to this important facility will be allocated? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Family and Social Services. MR. CARDINAL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government of Alberta of course recognizes its responsibilities and has in the past acted in many ways to assist in dealing with this unfortunate problem.

In Family and Social Services the office for the prevention of family violence dedicates close to 93 percent of the $7 million to fund various programs including 17 shelters, six rural family violence prevention centres, and one second-stage centre. In this particular case, even with the reductions in the budget this particular area was untouched. MR. SPEAKER: Supplemental question. MRS. FRITZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We know that women in immediate danger, who have left their homes in fear, have some place to go for shelter, but I don't believe that this solution is enough.

It simply puts a band-aid on the symptom, and it doesn't address the cause.

704 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 MRS. SOETAERT: Question. MRS. FRITZ: There is a question, Colleen. How, Mr. Minister, will you address the cause? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister. MR. CARDINAL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, we all know prevention begins with education. In Alberta we have set up the office of the prevention of family violence to take a leading role in basically working towards breaking the cycle that's out there. This office of course researches, consults, works with community groups, and also leads workshops to deal with that particular issue.

The office of the prevention of family violence is unique in Canada, and I believe Alberta is the model for this particular type of program. But there are also other avenues now I believe that groups out there are looking at, and those are programs under Brighter Futures. I look forward to working with our federal colleagues along with community groups in that particular area to continue providing the needed dollars for these high-needs areas. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental. MRS. FRITZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Government alone cannot stop violence against women. MR. SPEAKER: No

preambles. MRS. FRITZ: My supplementary is to the minister responsible for women's issues. What are you doing, Mr. Minister, to encourage communities and individuals to become involved in stopping violence against women that's highlighted in this new study? MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, every woman has the right to feel safe in her home and on the street. This government has and will continue to place a high priority on the elimination of violence. We all have a role as individuals, including the members who sit in this Legislature, to address the issue.

As communities and as government we have responsibilities to ensure that we do not tolerate this kind of violence. 2:10 Last week I announced the appointment of Marilyn Fleger as the chairperson of the Alberta Advisory Council on Women's Issues. For the past ten years Ms Fleger has worked in the area of violence against women, and most recently she served as the provincial co-ordinator of the Alberta Council of Women's Shelters. Mr.

Speaker, to discuss the magnitude of this problem and what the community efforts have b een, certainly both the city of Calgary and the city of Edmonton have established standing committees to deal with the issue of violence against women. The ADT alarm program for woman at risk of assault is available in the cities of Calgary, Edmonton, and recently in Sherwood Park. The Body Shop Canada, the YWCA, and the Canadian Women's Foundation are partners in a nationwide campaign that began this month.

So certainly government has recognized the responsibil- ity, and certainly the responsibility has also been taken up by individuals and corporations within the community to address this issue. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Kerby Centre MR. DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Kerby Centre in the city of Calgary involves some 750 volunteers, and those volunteers have raised privately more than $600,000 to run 120 programs for seniors in Calgary and southern Alberta. As a consequence of reductions in funding to the city of Calgary, the future of the Kerby Centre is now in question.

I put this question to the hon. Minister of Community Development: why is the government abandoning seniors in the city of Calgary and southern Alberta in this fashion? MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, the government of Alberta has done a great deal to assist seniors in the province of Alberta, and there's no doubt about the fact that the Kerby Centre does outstanding work within the city of Calgary.

The funding for the Kerby Centre does not come from my department, but we have provided assistance for senior's organizations throughout the province of Alberta, particularly in regard s to the consultation process that we're going through right now. We have had consultations with the seniors at the Kerby Centre and at many, many other places throughout the province of Alberta to find out from seniors how best we can serve their needs. MR. SPEAKER: Supplemental question. MR. DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder what steps this minister as the minister responsible for seniors generally will take to address the immediate concerns of the executive of the Kerby Centre. MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, the members of the executive from the Kerby Centre have not addressed those concerns with me, and I would invite them to do so. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental? MR. DICKSON: No. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Unionized Labour MR. HLADY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The next step of this government, as I've mentioned before in this House, is to get this economy going.

One of the major parts is that international investors are concerned about investing in Alberta in regards to the labour situation and unions. To the Minister of Labour: is the rate of unionization in Alberta a deterrent to businesses or investors coming to this province? MR. DA Y: I've never heard that it is, Mr. Speaker. There are approximately a million paid workers in Alberta. Just using rough figures, about 25 percent of those, about 250,000, would be unionized. Of that 250,000 about 70 percent of those would be public sector and about 20-some percent would be private sector.

If anybody thinks I've missed the math there, there's about 10 percent that are under federal legislation. So that rate compared to other Canadian provinces, if it's not the lowest rate of unioniza- tion, is one of the lowest rates of unionization in the country. MR. HLADY: My first supplemental: are there clear steps a business owner can take to determine whether that business can operate union free?

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 705 MR. DA Y: We have very clear labour legislation guidelines here in the province, and any of the officials either from the Depart- ment of Labour or economic development and trade will be more than happy to discuss with possible investors what our labour legislation is, what it entails. As a matter of fact, we'd be happy to do that because it's a very g ood record and one which is of interest to investors. MR. HLADY: Most of the international money would be looking at large investments, some on a smaller scale.

On large industrial sites can the quality of work be measured to determine whether non-unionized workers are provided the same quality of work as unionized workers? MR. DA Y: When we're talking about large industrialized sites, there are a lot of provisions in place that aren't even necessarily tied into a collective agreement. The safety provisions alone and the work conditions that are laid out, be it unionized or non- unionized, are roughly comparable, and I think you'd find those conditions to be roughly the same. Certainly the safety standards and the health standards would definitely be equal. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. Work Force Adjustment Programs MS LEIBOVICI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Older people who are losing their jobs have less chance of re-employment. Long- term unemployment and social assistance are the future for many of these older workers. This government has made a commitment to work force adjustment strategies but is abandoning older workers. It's even refused to participate in the federal program for older workers adjustment. My questions are to the Minister of Labour. What specific provincial programs are available for older workers? MR. DA Y: Mr.

Speaker, we value all workers in Alberta, and we have never come to a conclusion or would even suggest in a paternalistic or patronizing kind of way that somebody's age is going to be a factor in determining their work ability. That's why we make our programs available to all Alberta workers. As a matter of fact, the member opposite mentioned a particular program offered by the federal government, and it was her party that was pushing us to cave in on an agreement that we had never even bought into. We had said it was B.C.'s responsibility and the federal government's responsibility.

As it ended up, we were in fact proven to be right, and the province of British Columbia and the federal government have honoured their involvement in that particular program, as we had said all along was the correct way for it to be done. MS LEIBOVICI: To set the record straight, we were asking that this government engage in the program for older workers adjustment for other workers. As the first answer from the minister was inadequate, my second question is: has the minister allocated specific funds for the retraining and/or redeployment of older workers in this province? MR.

DA Y: Well, I don't know if I could draw pictures for the member to make it more understandable. I said: we value all workers; we do not discriminate based on age. We are absolutely convinced – and we see it happen – that people can be retrained and they are willing to learn. That's one thing about Alberta workers, especially older workers: they are willing to learn. They don't want to be put on passive programs, passive programs like the Liberals wanted us to buy into, which assume that some people can no longer be effective because they're a little older than others. We don't operate that way.

MS LEIBOVICI: It's unfortunate that this government's policies have forced older workers to eat up their life's savings and go on social assistance. Let's get the picture straight. When are you at least going to get your act together and join the POW A program? MR. DA Y: Well, Mr. Speaker, whenever you're losing an argument, raise your voice, get shrill, and try and deflect from the reality of it. I can tell you very clearly that when their federal cousin Mr. Chrétien was here not too many days ago, he said that as the government reduces spending, workers are put onto the UI rolls.

In fact, as he was saying that, the UI statistics were there; they were available. The UI stats were going down; unemploy- ment was going down. I think our policies are proving to be right. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Provincial Credit Rating MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's always interesting to take a moment in this House and speak about a rare resource, and that's taxpayers' money. Following up on the Provincial Treasurer's trip last week to New Y ork, can the minister inform us if the rating agencies have indeed come back with any concrete information that could help our weekend?

MR. DINNING: Well, Mr. Speaker, I can report to the Assem- bly. As I came into the Assembly this afternoon, I r eceived notice from Moody's rating agency, and I will file with the Assembly copies of the wire copy of the report. Moody's has confirmed Alberta's double A credit rating, and it says – I can see the glum faces of my colleagues across the way. They've confirmed the rating, and it reflects the fact that the province has a sustained commitment to eliminate its budgetary imbalance . . .

The existence of a business plan outlining multi-year and detailed spending targets for the government sector adds comfort to the feasibility of the plan. And finally they say: The progress anticipated on the budgetary front should produce a sizable curtailment in new borrowing requirements and, therefore, lay the foundation for an improvement in the overall debt profile of the province over the medium term. So, Mr.

Speaker, you can see and members of the Assembly can see that an agency watching us from afar, judging our actions has confidence in this government's, in this province's ability to get its financial house in order. 2:20 MR. CHADI: Hey, Murray, ask him if they discussed the possibility of increasing taxes. MR. SPEAKER: Order. Order. Supplemental question. MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, you always get interruptions when you talk about taxpayers' money, b ecause that's what we're interested in. In detail, Mr. Speaker, how will this advice from Moody's affect the province's borrowing requirements for this year? MR.

DINNING: Well, Mr. Speaker, it's interesting that the hon. member would ask that question, because it's outlined on pages 58

706 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 and 59 of the budgetary plan. We have spelled out there, for the first time, a description of our outstanding debt as well as our borrowing requirements and the borrowing activity of '93-94. As this chart shows, our borrowing requirements for our cash requirements for 1994-95 will be in the order of about $1.9 billion as well as maturities and redemptions of external term debt of some $1.3 billion. That's a total borrowing requirement of about $3.2 billion.

If Albertans could think of that in terms of maintaining this credit rating and thinking of it in terms of one-tenth of 1 percent. Say that we are able to enjoy a better borrowing rate of some one- tenth of 1 percent. That's a sum of nearly $3.2 million every year, say for 10 years, nearly $30 million to $35 m illion in savings to the Alberta taxpayer, Mr. Speaker. Responsible fiscal management by this government means that others will have confidence in us so that we borrow at a lower borrowing rate. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental. MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to know how the bond rating agencies reacted to the very first presentation of a three-year business plan tabled by a government, as opposed to only annual plans tabled by other governments. MR. DINNING: Mr. Speaker, in fact, a number of them said that they had never seen a plan that was as conclusive, as comprehensive, and as detailed as the one that we provided. I'd remind the hon. members again that what Moody's has said today is: The existence of a business plan outlining multi-year and detailed spending targets for the government sector adds comfort to the feasibility of the [government's] plan.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Social Assistance Policy MR. SEKULIC: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today's FCSS announcement indicates that the Minister of Family and Social Services has finally initiated positive change. He's correcting some of his earlier mistakes. Now hopefully he can assist unemployed Alberta clients access some of those 1 10,000 jobs that the Premier promised them. My questions are to the Minister of Family and Social Services. Mr.

Minister, why does your department, in co-operation with the Department of Advanced Ed and Career Development, continue training clients for a disappear- ing job market when every study on the future labour force, including your own, indicates that low skill jobs will all but disappear by the year 2000? MR. CARDINAL: Mr. Speaker, one good alternative – that's the Liberal alternative – was to leave them on welfare. The welfare reforms have a plan.

Specifically in training programs and short-term job creation programs, because of the successful rate of the reforms, we've redirected close to a hundred million dollars, Mr. Speaker. A portion of that, of course, is to finance over 8,000 former welfare clients now attending school. Albertans realize that we are serious when we are trying to help a lot of our former clients get back into training and back into the work force. In fact, the dollars provided now are 30 percent higher than the rates that were provided last year if you are on social assistance. MR. SPEAKER: Supplemental question. MR.

SEKULIC: Thank you. Can the minister tell the Assembly: what is the magic behind these six-month temporary employment programs, or is this period just long enough to up-load costs to the federal UIC program and still the same taxpayer? There are no savings there. MR. CARDINAL: There is no magic, Mr. Speaker. Ideally we would like to see all Albertans have a job in private industry. That is our number one goal.

In northern Alberta, for an example, we have waited 40 years for all the jobs to be there, and there are pockets of areas that may never have full employment, so we do have to develop innovative alternatives to assist these people, to fill that gap. That is why some temporary employment programs are created: to fill that transitional period. If a six-month time line is a problem, then this minister is willing to look at that very carefully. MR. SPEAKER: Final supplemental. MR. SEKULIC: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Can the minister tell Albertans and this Assembly where his initiatives have placed 60,000 Albertans who have been kicked off assistance? To date he has publicly accounted for less than 20,000. There are 40,000 unaccounted for. MR. CARDINAL: Mr. Speaker, we do have, for an example, a monthly turnover in caseload of close to 10,000. Therefore it would be almost impossible to put a tracer on everyone that opens a file and closes a file. Number one, that is not what the clients want. Once the files are closed, the client does not want us to continue following them. That is one point.

The other point is that we are optimistic that a lot of the clients that have moved off our welfare rates are now employed. I have proof across northern Alberta, for an example, talking to small businesses that have hired former welfare clients. Because of the positive changes we've made, the clients are happy, small business is happy, and there's a saving for the taxpayers. head: Members' Statements MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Innisfail-Sylvan Lake. Senior Citizens' Programs MR. SEVERTSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Seniors across Alberta have played a strong leadership role in charting Alberta's history.

It is their pioneering spirit and hard work that has made Alberta the best place in the world to live. Despite the many hardships they faced, they rose to the challenge and created a better future for all Albertans: for themselves and especially for their children and grandchildren. Recently many seniors are saying that they want to rise once again to the challenge of the day: fiscal restraint. Some people say that it's human nature to always want more, not less. However, it is also human nature to want to take care of the next generation.

I hear many seniors saying that they accept that changes must happen because they know the results will be a more prosperous legacy for their children and grandchil- dren. The introduction of income testing for health care premiums for seniors has received a lot of attention. We l ook at that in the broad picture, and we see that this is a fair decision. Income testing is an excellent way of ensuring that those who cannot afford to pay are still covered by health care, while those who can, do. Overall, the changes mean that more than half of Alberta's seniors will not pay Alberta health care premiums.

A less-known fact is that approximately 35 percent of the lower income seniors will receive greater cash benefits than under the old existing plan.

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 707 Seniors know that the status quo can no longer continue for many of them. They have told me that they're happy to finally see a government that is not going to pass on the problem to the next generation. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Consumer Protection MR. WICKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to talk a bit today about consumer affairs, and I would hope that the minister responsible for consumer affairs has the opportunity to read Hansard.

I raised in question period the other day a reference to con- sumer affairs and lack of protection even in debt. I was getting specifically at a case that was aired on CFRN TV, where a person consulting with a director of a funeral home was arranging services and was told that because the person who was going to be cremated was 160 pounds, a larger urn would be needed and that if the deal wasn't signed right away, prices went up by midnight. There are many abuses there. There are many abuses, obvi- ously, in the car lot business, some aspects of it. We've seen that on CFRN TV.

The previous one was on CBC TV. 2:30 We've seen in the past a minister that was here prior that was very, very conscientious about the need for protection for consumers and did many, many worthwhile things. I think every member in this House had a great deal of respect for that former minister responsible for portfolio affairs. The member now responsible tends to have a whole different type of philosophy, a philosophy that is basically "buy er beware," with absolutely no protection at all. I think, Mr. Speaker, that is wrong.

I think people in Alberta deserve some protection from those that will take advantage of others, and there are those like that out there that will do that. I would hope that this minister, upon the direction of his colleagues, will ensure that proper protection is afforded to consumers, the type of protection that they deserve and need. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Medicine Hat. Private Seedling Operations MR. RENNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to bring to the attention of the House a success story from southern Alberta.

Four years ago three growers in the Medicine Hat area entered into a program developed by Alberta Environmental Protection to grow seedlings for reforestation. Demand for seedlings in the province had increased, and rather than expand the public nurseries, it was decided that we should work to promote private enterprise. The program involved the tendering and issuing of development contracts to encourage new and existing greenhouses to enter into the business of supplying seedlings for the forestry industry.

The government also acted as a facilitator in this process by providing an experienced grower from the province's Pine Ridge nursery to advise these new operations in all aspects of the seedling growing business. Since the inception of this pr ogram the seedling operations in the Medicine Hat area have performed remarkably well. Last year they produced 3 and a half million seedlings to be planted in Alberta, and this year production has increased to 9 million seedlings. Of these, 80 percent ha ve been sold directly to the forestry industry, and only 20 percent have been sold to the government of Alberta.

There are a number of factors that make these businesses so successful. To begin with, they are experienced growers using quality constructed greenhouses, and they are open to alternative products and opportunities. They are also aided to a certain extent by the relatively low gas prices in southern Alberta. Most importantly, though, they benefit from the climate of southern Alberta, capitalizing on another Alberta advantage. Seedlings grown in southern Alberta are acclimatized to the conditions of the province and are easily hardened off before they are trans- planted.

This makes the transition from greenhouse to natural environment much easier than for the seedlings imported from other provinces. This program is an example of how the government can foster the growth of small business in this province and the success of Albertans who are willing to show initiative. With the help of the department of the environment, these seedling growers have found a niche in the market. We provided the opportunity; they put the hard work in and made it successful. head: Projected Government Business MR. MITCHELL: Mr.

Speaker, we want to know what's happening next week, and we'd like to know right now. MR. EV ANS: Well, I would have been fairly slow to my feet, Mr. Speaker, but I've been admonished, so I'm up. We're very pleased to identify projected government business for next week. Starting on Monday, March 21, in the afternoon, Government Bills and Orders for second reading is projected to be Bills 5 and 14, and then Committee of the Whole on Bills 2 and 4. In the evening, the Committee of Supply, the Department of Economic Development and Tourism. Mr.

Speaker, if time permits, we'd be hopefully moving along with Committee of the Whole and/or some other third readings. Quite frankly, that same process may continue as the week goes on. I should mention as well for that evening that we would intend to go to third reading on Bill 10. On Tuesday, March 22, whatever second readings are still outstanding at that point, Committee of the Whole as per the Order Paper, and in the evening, Committee of Supply, the Department of Energy, followed by the Committee of the Whole again as per the Order Paper.

Wednesday in the evening, the Committee of Supply, the Department of Labour, and continuing with the Committee of the Whole as per the Order Paper. Then on Thursday I understand that we will be moving to the Department of Transportation and Utilities. I certainly hope that the hon. member opposite, the House leader for the Liberal Party, is satisfied with the speed with which I've given that brief report. Speaker's Ruling Question Period Practices MR.

SPEAKER: The Chair would like to take this opportunity to pay a compliment to the Assembly today, because the Chair feels that great improvement has been made over the last couple of weeks. Today hon. members will be happy to know that there was only one member left, who was a latecomer to express interest in question period, who did not get accommodated. So the Chair is very appreciative of this, and it just shows what can be done if all hon. members put their minds to it.

708 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 Speaker's Ruling Anticipation MR. SPEAKER: The Chair did notice that the hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung sort of indicated that he might have a point of order. In anticipation of the hon. Opposition House Leader's point of order the Chair would poi nt out that the question asked by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity started off by asking the Provincial Treasurer for a report on the results of his trip to New Y ork City.

The Chair did not think that was in breach of the rule against anticipation, but unfortunately sometimes the answers to questions can then lead to some complaints in the Assembly. The Chair assumes that that's what the hon. . . . [interjections] Oh, it isn't. Well, in any event, he shouldn't have done that. The Chair had better stop speaking and recognize the hon. Opposition House Leader for his point of order. Point of Order Ministerial Statements in Question Period MR. MITCHELL: It wasn't really my point of order, but now that you mention it, it was a great one, Mr. Speaker.

I rose on a point of order under 409(12) of Beauchesne and it relates to – well, first of all, I'd like to say that I, too, am pleased with the progress that was made through the questioners' list today. However, there is always room for improvement, and I think today there was evidence of room for more improvement. Under Standing Order 7(1), which relates to Orders of the Day, it is very clearly specified that ministers have a place prior to question period to make all the ministerial statements that their hearts would desire.

Today, instead, we saw three occasions in question period where private members of the Conservative caucus asked questions which appeared to set up what would more appropriately be a ministerial statement than an answer to a question. The minister responsible for seniors had a prepared statement. The minister responsible for Municipal Affairs had a prepared statement, which he literally read and then tabled in the House, and the Treasurer had a very interesting travelogue to lay out for us which would very, very well have lent itself to a ministerial statement.

What this kind of abuse of the rules of the House does is detract from question period, which is one of the most important features of holding a government accountable both by opposition members and by government private members. So we would simply ask, Mr. Speaker, that you be vigilant in watching that and that the ministers be vigilant in watching where they would more appro- priately present a ministerial statement than try to construe such a statement as an answer to an obviously contrived question. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Government House Leader. 2:40 MR. DA Y: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First, I congratulate you for being persistent with us and reining us in. We're finally heeding your good advice, and we're trying to encourage the members opposite to behave themselves more. So it's beginning to improve, and we appreciate that. Beauchesne is so clear in 414 and 416: no debate is allowed in terms of a type of question or an answer being out of order. These things are not items that an opposition member can stand and rise on. As a matter of fact, I'm sure, as you have indicated to us in the past, anybody who goes through the Hansard record will see that they make opposition statements as

preambles to their questions, and it's very tough for you to rule on it, so we don't shriek at that type of thing. I would expect that they also allow us time to give certain answers. We always subject ourselves to your ruling. I hope you would see that indeed this is not a point of order. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. MRS. HEWES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just to add to some of the comments made by my colleague the hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung.

I, too, as well as other members of this caucus noticed the preponderance of read messages from ministers today in the House, and that is not the first time it's happened. Mr. Speaker, the tradition of this House is that ministerial statements – and we welcome them – are made from time to time on important issues and that the statement is circulated to the Leader of the Opposition, which gives the Leader of the Opposi- tion an opportunity to make a statement in response. Very often these are statements simply reinforcing what the minister has said, but not always.

If the process that we saw today is allowed to continue, that, I believe, would be a breach of the intent of ministerial statements with a response from the opposition, because when a backbench member asks a member of the cabinet and it elicits a statement from the minister, then of course the Leader of the Opposition doesn't have an opportunity to respond at all. Mr. Speaker, I know you'll look carefully at this, because I believe that is not what is intended in ministerial statements, and I hope that will be corrected. MR.

SPEAKER: All the Chair would like to say is that the rules, as has been evidenced today, provide hon. members on both sides to get things off their chest with regard to procedures in the House. That's good that it's that way. The Chair would remind hon. members that we did make good headway today, but for a long time now we've left several members waiting, and there is still room for improvement. The Chair would only remind hon. members that brevity in both the questions and the answers is of great importance in Beauchesne 410 and in 417.

"Answers to questions should be as brief as possible . . . and should not provoke debate." That is the corollary of the

preambles being as informative and noninflammatory as possible that would then lead into a longer reply. As the Chair has pointed out before, it takes two to tango, and it will require the co-operation of all members to repeat what we've done today on Monday. On o ccasions past when I've congratulated the Assembly on a good performance, the following day I've almost rued that action. In any event, hope springs eternal, and we hope that you all have a good weekend and in particular the hon.

Member for Innisfail-Sylvan Lake who will be celebrating a rather significant birthday tomorrow. head: Orders of the Day head: Committee of Supply [Mr. Tannas in the Chair] MR. CHAIRMAN: Call the committee to order. head: Main Estimates 1994-95 Treasury MR. CHAIRMAN: To begin this afternoon's consideration of these estimates, we'd call upon the hon. Provincial Treasurer. [some applause]

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 709 AN HON. MEMBER: There's a little applause for you. MR. DINNING: Very little. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure for me to stand before the Assembly today for, I believe, the second time as the Provincial Treasurer to defend the estimates of the Department of the Treasury contained at page 281 of the government estimates book for '94-95, requesting the Assembly do grant authority for the expenditure of some $49,748,000 on a net basis for the year beginning April 1, 1994.

I'm particularly pleased to see the ranks of the opposition filled to the brimming level here to talk about the exciting things that are going on within the Department of the Treasury and some of the exciting initiatives that we as a department are taking. Mr.

Chairman, just to advise the committee of the nature of the activities of the Department of the Treasury, we are in the business of collecting revenue primarily through taxation, primarily in the business of corporate income tax, the fuel tax, the tobacco tax, hotel room tax, pari-mutuel tax, insurance corpora- tions tax, as well as the financial institutions tax.

We're also in the business of operating a number of tax credits and grants and rebates and deductions listed in the following way: the small business deduction, the royalty tax credit and installments, the Indian tax exemption, manufacturing and processing profits deduction, the royalty tax deduction tax cost, the Alberta farm fuel distribution allowance, and the utility companies income tax rebates.

In the financial operations side of the department we're also responsible for investment management of a rather significant portfolio, as well as managing th e liability side of the govern- ment's portfolio, as well as the banking and cash management side, the risk management insurance, and of course the compre- hensive operations of our comptroller's office. 2:50 As well, Mr.

Chairman, on the budget side we're responsible for the operations of the budget bureau, which provides advice and counsel to the Treasurer and to all members of Treasury Board and, indeed, the Executive Council on the expenditure of funds as are laid out in the various estimates books that I filed in the Assembly on the 24th; as well as the tax and fiscal policy and the financial planning analysis of the department, that are essential in budget preparation, in quarterly reporting and accounting; as well as our borrowing and investment responsibilities across the province.

As well, we're involved in the pensions administration side, responsible for the administration, under the direction of newly appointed, more independent pension boards, of the public service pension plan, the local authorities pension plan, the public service management pension plan, the universities academic pension plan, the special forces pension plan, and the provincial judges and masters in chambers pension plan. Until this year we've been responsible for the Alberta farm fuel distribution allowance program, which is now coming under the responsibility of the minister responsible for agriculture.

As well, we're involved with the farm credit stability program, the small business term assistance program, and of course the Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation. As well, the department is responsible for the regulation of credit unions and trust and loan corporations.

As well, we're responsible, of course, for the management of the debt responsibilities and the debt servicing costs associated with the government's previous overspending, such that this year some little over $1.4 billion will be devoted to paying the interest on the accumulated deficits, or the debt, or as Albertans would call it, the mortgage that has been accrued over the last number of years. [Mr. Clegg in the Chair] Two other areas, Mr.

Chairman, that I would comment on include the Alberta Treasury Branches, which are not before this Assembly today seeking supply from the committee because the Treasury Branches operate as an arm's-length institution to the government and ask for and require no taxpayer funding. It hasn't since 1938, and in our view as a government it will not require that taxpayer funding. It r eceived only some $200,000 from the taxpayers of the province when it was established in 1938.

Finally, I also serve as the minister responsible for the Alberta Securities Commission and their activities in regulating the securities markets of the province. Mr. Chairman, that explains the responsibilities and activities of the department in a nutshell and justifies the request for some $49,748,000, which is a considerable reduction, almost $6 million, from the last year estimated forecast expenditure of some $55,549,000. Briefly, Mr.

Chairman, in my duties and responsibilities as the Treasurer, not only in the Department of the Treasury but in preparing the annual budget and preparing the four-year fiscal plan with my colleagues in Treasury Board, cabinet, and within the government caucus – I know they are deeply interested in the activities of the department, and that's why I've got their attention totally, and they are gripped with anticipation for all the pearls that may drop. One of the responsibilities I had in the last few days was to meet with investors, with inve stment institutions, and with the rating agencies in New Y ork City.

These people are influential in investors around the world making decisions about whether they will invest in Canadian securities and in Canadian deben- tures, and I can report to the Assembly that there was consider- able interest on the part of these institutions in the activities of the province and in the four-year plan that we spelled out as well as the three-year business plan.

I know this is not the place to debate, perhaps, those sorts of things given that we're simply talking about the Treasury Department, but I think it only fair to advise the Assembly that in our objective to achieve a confirma- tion of a positive credit rating of double A with both Standard and Poor's and Moody's, I can report to the committee, as I did earlier in the Assembly, that the Moody's rating agency has advised through the Dow-Jones service, the copy that I have before me today, that Moody's has confirmed the double-A2 rating for the [province's] outstanding long term debt following the completion of a review which began last month with the release of the [February 24] budget.

Moody's, in confirming our rating, said that it reflected a number of credit considerations including the province's sustained commitment to eliminate its budgetary imbalance, as demonstrated by the results of year one of its four- year . . . plan, and the new round of expenditure cuts in the 1994 budget. They also commented on the existence of a business plan outlining multi-year and detailed spending targets for the government sector [and that it] adds comfort to the feasibility of the plan. I would be remiss, Mr.

Chairman, if I didn't at this juncture heap praise and thanks to all of my colleagues who helped in the preparation of these business plans across government. It was an effort that was unparalleled, unequal to anything that this govern- ment or frankly any other government in this country has done in the last number of years: the involvement of caucus members, of consultants from outside, of businesspeople giving us their advice, and the involvement of hundreds of senior officials of the provincial government and the various government departments to

710 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 stretch their minds, to think ahead to the future, and come back to the core business of what this government really should be all about. I want to thank my colleagues here in the Assembly. I want to say a special word of thanks to the MLA for Calgary- Varsity for the work that he did in helping us to pull together the business plans in a consistent format and to synthesize the government's business down into its five core businesses. I do appreciate the hard work and time put into the exercise by the MLA for Calgary-Varsity. Just going on, Mr.

Chairman, Moody's also spoke of "political realities in Alberta" and that they "have often inhibited the introduction of tax measures as an option to improve the prov- ince's financial performance." They point out that "the current deficit elimination plan does not contemplate any tax increases." They're convinced. We have some work to do with the Liberals, but the rating agencies are convinced. They do acknowledge, as Premier Klein acknowledged hours, literally hours, in advance of the June 15 election, that if support to the expenditure reduction initiatives was needed in order to secure a balanced budget . . .

Moody's believes that some form of tax increases could . . . well take precedent over any delay in the elimination of the deficit. That is what the Premier said 10 days before the election and two days before the election on June 15, 1993. It made the headlines in the newspapers. It was in the Calgary Sun. It was in the Edmonton Sun . It was spoken of. The facts were laid out honestly and on the table. I should remind the committee today that the only party in this Chamber speaking of raising taxes is: which party? It is not the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party.

It is the Alberta Liberal Party led by Laurence Decore and his dashing gang of deficit wimp-outs and of wannabe taxers. Mr. Chairman, I perish the thought that the responsibilities for Her Majesty's government would fall into the hands of these people who speak only of raising taxes and especially imposing a sales tax. That would be a sad day for the people of Alberta. Mr.

Chairman, I would also note that the Moody's rating agency spoke of: The progress anticipated on the budgetary front should produce a sizable curtailment in new borrowing requirements and, therefore, lay the foundation for an improvement in the overall debt profile of the province over the medium term. Mr.

Chairman, I believe that these people and others in the days and weeks to come have seen and those others will see that we have taken the responsible steps to get our financial house in order and that the Treasury Department in a humble fashion has made a significant contribution to the achievement of that task. 3:00 I know that under the leadership of Premier Klein, my col- leagues in the Department of the Treasury and I are proud to serve. A number of them are in the members' gallery today, and I want to pay a special tribute to Mr. Al O'Brien and Mr.

Allister McPherson, both serving as deputy provincial treasurers, and a tremendous team of professionals that work with us to accomplish this task. I also benefit from an office of the Provincial Trea- surer, the minister's office, with some incredibly talented people under the leadership of Paul Taylor. I know that members of this Assembly have benefited from his wisdom, sometimes sharp, incisive tongue, and clear wit and candour. Mr.

Chairman, I would be happy, having opened the debate about the details of the estimates, to hear comments from my learned professorial colleague from Edmonton-Whitemud and some of his sidekicks and certainly would welcome of course any of the rapt attention of my colleagues on this side of the House. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, hon. Provincial Treasurer. I'm sure the hon. Member for Edmonton-Whitemud is ready to praise you. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Whitemud. DR. PERCY: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairman.

Well, I'm glad that the Provincial Treasurer was so wide-ranging in his comments, because obviously since they were acceptable to the Chair, it allows us, then, the vehicle to pursue a wide range of interests related to business plans and the like, because they formed a significant portion of the Treasurer's remarks. However, before I go into that, just as I attempted to correct the record about overexpenditures in previous years in the Department of Education's budget, the minister's budget, I just would like to fully quote the ratings news report from Moody's.

They did note that: Moody's believes that some form of tax increases could very well take precedent over any delay in the elimination of the deficit. It's very clear, Mr. Deputy Chairman. They're concerned about slash-and-burn cuts. They're concerned about an effort that has just aggressively downsized the status quo without putting performance targets in place, without putting incentives in place to allow a more efficient delivery of government services. So I read this, and I think that they're alarmed, and they're concerned that this government may be for ced to turn to taxes.

They're concerned that this government, because of the ad hoc, across-the- board, lacking in priority method of expenditure reduction, may be forced to turn to taxes far sooner than if they had applied a method that employed priorization of programs, a value-for- money audit approach, and the elimination of a lot of additional waste in expenditures, some of which we'll be coming to. It is also interesting, Mr. Deputy Chairman, that the hon. Provincial Treasurer neglected to mention the fact that Moody's is really eagerly awaiting some announcement on the heritage savings trust fund review.

We've all been awaiting that with rapt attention. Where is it? When will it be announced? What's its mandate? What's its scope? We're waiting, because the hon. Provincial Treasurer has assured us that there's been an expendi- ture allocation made for it. So we hope to see it announced soon. Certainly Moody's is waiting, and it sounds like the probationary double A that they gave us is contingent on some additional information about the assets and disposition of the heritage savings trust fund.

With those introductory comments, before I go into detail, let me table with the House something that the Provincial Treasurer might find really interesting reading. It's the strategic plan for the 1992-1998 period for the state of Texas with the appropriations Bill for Treasury for the state of Texas. I'd like to table that. It's really interesting reading. It's kept me up a number of nights, I might add, Mr. Deputy Chairman. What is interesting is this. The government should be praised for moving towards setting out business plans. In fact, the document that they provide provides, in a sense, the structure.

I would think you can sort of visualize yourself, when you look at this structure, as being like a forensic anthropologist. Y ou have a skull in front of you, and somehow you have to visualize what it would look like in real life. So you've got to put the clay on, and you've got to put the eyes in, the hair on to see what it actually looks like, because all you have here is a skeleton without any of that detail: the colours, the eyes, anything that makes it really look as though it's fully developed. So we congratulate the hon. Provincial Treasurer for having the skeleton, but, Mr.

Deputy Chairman, where's the meat? Where's the flesh? All

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 711 we've got is a bone, a skeleton. There are no performance measures given; there are no outcomes defined. If you look, for example, at what Texas does – and there are, unlike what the hon. Provincial Treasurer has suggested, a number of states that do this, and what's more important is that these states provide specific benchmarks and targets in the appropriations Bill. Texas does it.

If you look at table 3 – and I'll just give you a couple of quotes of what we mean – this is an appropriations Bill, and what it sets out are specific "output measures;" for example, the "number of investment transactions reconciled and balanced on [the] Treasury portfolio." They set out a "targeted performance" for 1994, the actual number they want to achieve, and they give you what they actually did achieve. They allow you to measure performance. They allow you to see: did the government spend its money wisely and actually achieve the target set out?

What we find in A Better Way is basically qualitative targets: good things, motherhood statements that nobody can quibble with. So this is the skeleton. It's the initial stage, but it certainly ought not to be the end of the line. I would really urge hon. members to look at this, because it sets out targets. I've only included the Treasury Department targets for Texas, because they're quantifiable in terms of what type of yield they want to achieve relative to the 10 highest-yielding funds.

They ask: what is the return on the portfolio we want under our control relative to those assets managed by the private sector? That is set out as a quantifiable target, a prediction. They put their money where their mouth is. So we'd like to see that as we move down this route to actually having far more quantitative output measures, performance measures, in place. Before I get into the details of the budget on a vote-by-vote basis, I would like to also address one more time, because it falls under Treasury, the issue of dedicated revenues and earmarking.

I've said this before and I will say it again: I think there is a real flypaper effect with dedicated revenues, and if a department raises revenues, knows it has a monopoly in providing those services, it has no competition. Fees can be raised through orders in council. What will happen is that departments will always expand to absorb the available tax base.

What we will see emerging through time is administrative bloat unless there are clear targets set out on a department-by-department basis about administrative overheads and clearly defined performance measures, because there will be departments – and I would hazard that Transportation and Utilities would be one of them, given that the budget there is approxi- mately $500 million and we'll be voting on the net estimates of $18 million. The potential's there for significant efficiency problems in the absence of well-defined performance measures. There is a flypaper effect in government.

When money comes into a department, it generally stays there. It's stuck. So I'd much prefer to see the money go to the Treasurer's hands and then allocated on a basis of priorities determined by the Legisla- tive Assembly. [interjection] I hate to say it, but I'd rather see that happen. Now, I'd like to turn to so me specific issues, Mr. Deputy Chairman – and we'll be coming back to these numbers again in another session, I'm sure – with regards to vote by vote. Program 1, departmental support services: the net operating expenditures for 1994-95 are $3,797,000.

This represents an increase of 5.3 percent, or $193,000, over last year's comparable forecast. This certainly is inconsistent with the overall direction being taken in the department in 1994-95, in which net operating expenditures are projected to decline by 10 percent. When I look at these numbers, I'm struck very much by something, which was so ludicrous, that I read in the paper today, where a local government official said: we need more managers to look after fewer people. [interjection] It was the fire chief. That is an incredible statement: that you need more managers to look after fewer people.

This was a local government. 3:10 MR. DINNING: Who said this? DR. PERCY: The fire chief. What do we see, Mr. Deputy Chairman, in Treasury? What do we see? We see a downsizing of the department in terms of its projections, a decline of 10 percent. Y et what do we see in program 1, departmental support services? We see the very administrative bloat that I warned you about. It's there now.

Certainly, then, I'd like the minister to explain why he decided to increase departmental support services by 5.3 percent in 1994-95 in light of the direction he has taken in the department as a whole and what he's recommended for the government in its entirety. If you live by the sword, you die by the sword. What are the benefits, results, outcomes, discernible perfor- mance measures that Albertans can expect that will justify this additional expenditure of $193,000 in 1994-95?

Can the minister explain why support services are only being reduced by 3.2 percent over the next three years, when the overall level of reduction within the department is 20.6 percent? This looks very much like the type of centralization and power grab that we're seeing in the education system, with all power coming into the dome. Now we see that all the power comes into the minister's office. What is the justification that the minister can provide to Albertans for reducing support services by only 3.2 percent over the next three years? These are the numbers in the budget and the projections.

What specific performance measures and targets have been developed by the minister to evaluate the effectiveness of service delivery by support services that would justify this level of expenditures over the next three years? Where is the meat in the business plans in the departme nt that has to set the example for government as a whole? Can the minister provide a breakdown of program 1 by subvote: the Provincial Treasurer's office, Deputy Provincial Treasurer's office, administrative support, communications, and standing policy committee on financial planning for the fiscal years 1995- 96 and '96-97?

Can the Treasurer explain why his own office is subject to only a 2.6 percent reduction in 1994-95 when his department is taking a 13.4 percent reduction overall? Again in terms of the issue of performance measures and business plans, which the Treasurer spoke to in his opening statements, can the Treasurer explain exactly what quality indicators have been established within his own office to measure performance in meeting the mandate?

Certainly New Zealand, which has turned out to be a m odel in some instances for this government, in its treasury corporate plan sets out quality indicators for ministerial servicing; for example, the speed with which replies to ministerial correspondence and parliamentary questions are met. Certainly parliamentary questions we have a feel for on this side of the House.

Notwithstanding the superb professionalism of the staff of the Provincial Treasurer's office and the dedication to duty of the Deputy Provincial Treasurer, can the minister explain why the Deputy Provincial Treasurer's office is being increased by 4.6 percent over the previous year's forecast? What additional duties are being taken by the Provincial Treasurer's office, and what are the expected outputs and outcomes which justify the additional expenditure? I'd like to jump ahead; I'll be co ming back to this later. I certainly have a specific question on the revenue side of the

712 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 budget I'd like to get in place right now. This would come in under program . . . MR. DINNING: Oh, God. DR. PERCY: Y eah, there's more. It would be program 2, revenue collection and rebates. I would like to know if the Provincial Treasurer would tell us what would have happened in this budget year in terms of revenue projections on personal income had we not gone to an accrual system, as we did in the third quarter provincial update.

To what extent, then, has the revenue forecast that we see here reflected accounting changes, the shift to accrual as opposed to what would have occurred under the previous regime? Just so we get a better handle on the impact of accrual accounting in that particular category. Can the Treasurer comment on what steps he will be taking to address the recommendations of the Alberta Tax Reform Commis- sion to phase out a variety of taxes? They point to the hotel room tax. Certainly the estimates include an item entry for the hotel room tax. We've had the recommendations of the Tax Reform Commission.

What are the moves with regard to their recommen- dations on the tax side? Has the Treasurer considered the recommendation to redirect a portion of the annual $25 million generated by the hotel room tax to the tourism industry to meet the target of $4.4 billion in tourist revenues generated by the year 2000 and the creation of an additional 17,800 jobs by the year 1997, as is set out in their own document Seizing Opportunity? The tourism industry has very specific ideas of what they'd like to see done with the hotel room tax revenues.

The government is aware of those recommendations, has received them through the Tax Reform Commission, has received them thr ough other submissions to standing policy committees. So we would like to see to what extent they're going to be addressed. Has the Treasurer considered a phaseout of the capital tax on financial institutions? It was interesting reading the Premier's presentation to the C.D. Howe Institute in Toronto where he said we had no capital tax. We do have a capital tax on financial institutions. We're one of the few provinces that do.

To the extent then that we want to induce capital into this province, removing that tax on financial institutions makes a lot of sense, or making a level playing field by ensuring that all financial institu- tions in the province pay the comparable tax rate. Right now there's tremendous heterogeneity. When you look at the Treasury Branches: no tax. We look at the chartered banks, the tax that they paid, then a separate tax for the credit unions, which is higher than either in Saskatchewan or British Columbia.

What is the Treasurer doing, then, to address those issues of a level playing field and to address the recommendations of the Alberta Tax Reform Commission as they pertain to these set of taxes? In vote 2.0.2, the operations and audit. Can the Treasurer indicate the reasons behind the reduction in this area? Is this simply the result of the decision to have the federal government resume collection of corporate taxes effective January 1, 1995? What benchmarks for evaluating effectiveness have been estab- lished in this area? What is the percent accuracy rate of the reported amount of original audits?

What is the estimated increase in the number of delinquent account closure rates per audit officer? What are the specific performance measures that the Provincial Treasurer is going to put in place in this particular program area? This is element detail that ought to be part of the business plans, but it's certainly not covered in the business plans and is relevant then to assessi ng the effectiveness with which Treasury will carry out its duties. I'd like to turn to th e issue of valuation adjustments, again an item that we always find of interest on this side of the House. MR. DALLA-LONGA: Artistic. DR.

PERCY: Y eah. Creative accounting. So I'm seeking a breakdown of valuation adjustments, obliga- tions on the guarantee indemnities, and other provisions. Can the Treasurer provide a breakdown by component of $120,800,000 in consolidated valuation adjustments and other provisions, as noted on page 43 of the 1994 Budget Address? Can the Treasurer provide a breakdown by component of the consolidated valuation adjustments and other provisions for the year 1995-96? It's $99 million. In 1996-97 it's $77 million, as noted on page 13 of the Budget Address.

Can the Treasurer provide information on the terms and conditions of the contracts between the government of Alberta and Burns Fry relative to the search for a private-sector buyer for MagCan? This was a question asked in the House that just floated by, and we have not yet had a response as to the terms and conditions, and it clearly forms part of the expenditures of the government. 3:20 Will the Treasurer confirm that $49 million outstanding on the guarantee provided to MagCan is contained within the $274,323,000 estimated liability for principal and accrued interest, as noted on page 62 of the Budget Address?

Can the Treasurer explain the status of the $700,000 loan guarantee provided to Nortech Surveys Inc., and can he explain why the outstanding balance on the bank loan facility appears on Nortech's own financial statements as $1 1 1,000 yet appears in the province's book as a $700,000 guarantee? Can the Treasurer comment on the status of discussions between the government and Ridley Grain relative to the annual capital expenditures program for the terminal and future taxation issues of concern to the members of the consortium? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Calgary- West. MR. DALLA-LONGA: Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. It is with pleasure that I rise to ask a few questions on this budget. The Treasurer in his opening comments talked about maintaining the credit rating, and I'm sure that he was very disappointed that it wasn't increased. After all, with all the hardship that he's causing this province, it's the least that could have happened. I recall the initial comments that he made when the budget was first released. He talked about us being halfway there in his four- year plan. Let's see; the election was on June 15. We're about nine months into your mandate, and we're halfway through.

I guess what he's saying then is that this budget he's come out with is already implemented and we're halfway through. Now, a comment that keeps coming up is this comment about no tax increases. I really like this one: no tax increases. I got the dictionary, Concise Oxford. What does it say about taxes? It says, "Tax . . . Contribution levied on persons, property, or business, for support of government." I guess if we look at what's happening with all these fees, we could say that that's a contribution levied for support of government. If we keep increasing these fees, maybe we won't need any taxes.

Now, there's a novel idea. I guess the thing that we keep losing sight of, or at least the members opposite lose sight of, is: how did we get ourselves into this mess? I recall back in 1988 reading excerpts from Hansard where the then hon. Treasurer laughed.

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 713 MR. DINNING: This one? MR. DALLA-LONGA: The then hon. Treasurer – 1988. The Treasurer must pay attention here. This is important. He laughed and said: there's no problem; we're going to hit – what was it? – $24 a barrel for oil, or something. Forty dollars? I can't remember. Anyway, the hon. Leader of the Opposition constantly questioned him: you've got three or four deficits in a row; you can't continue on like this. Then there was the infa- mous $33,000 surplus that we were going to have that turned into a $2.4 billion deficit. AN HON. MEMBER: How much? MR.

DALLA-LONGA: Two point four billion. AN HON. MEMBER: Let's hear it again, Dan. MR. DALLA-LONGA: Two point four and it's got a whole bunch of zeros behind it. [interjections] At least they're listen- ing; they're paying attention. Then there was the famous comment after the leadership convention that the Tories had. Do you remember who said: the deficit is manageable? It's manageable. Do you remember who said that? It was our hon. Premier. [interjection] Y es, it was our hon. Premier.

Now we find ourselves with a group across the way here that's so possessed with cutting that if somebody introduced the 10 commandments, they'd want to cut them down to eight. But to get them going, they had to have an example. They had to have something to go by. I don't have the real book. I've got just a copy here today; I forgot my book Unfinished Business by Sir Roger Douglas. They even had him in here, paid him some dollars, denied that they paid him. [interjection] It's probably through one of those. As a result of getting all that notoriety, now he's on the lecture circuit.

Y ou know, the members opposite come out with these phrases every once in a while like: don't blink. Y ou know, I thought: gee, that was kind of interesting. I don't know what it means, but: don't blink. So we go to the 10 commandments. There are 10 commandments in this book too: "10 Principles for Politically Successful Structural Reform." I won't go through all of them b ecause I know that the members opposite know what is in this book because they've each got their own copy. AN HON. MEMBER: They had to memorize it. MR. DALLA-LONGA: Y eah, and they go over them every day. "Speed is essential.

It is almost impossible to go too fast." Number 8: "Don't blink." I was just going to jump around here. Number 6: "Let the dog see the rabbit." Now, is that the electorate out there? Are they the dog? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, it's a nice speech you're giving. I really enjoy it, but let's get on to the votes. I mean, we're in estimates on the votes here, and you're . . . [interjections] Order. One member talked about something in Texas, and I don't know where you're at. Let's get to the votes here. MR. DALLA-LONGA: We're in the estimates. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: We cer tainly want to give some leeway, but I hope you're going to get into the votes. Can I say it that way? MR. DALLA-LONGA: Y ou just have to be patient. In my case I'm not saying it's impossible to go too fast. Anyway, I think that this Unfinished Business should now be appropriately called: the Tory manifesto. They seem to be copying it just like lemmings. [interjections] What we've got to do is we've got to look at your plan. What ours is we'll let you know when it's time. So, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to at your request go into a few things in the budget.

I'd like to focus in on program 4 – I know I've got some notes here somewhere – dealing with regulation of securities markets. AN HON. MEMBER: No plan, no notes. MR. DALLA-LONGA: And no debt. [interjections] I'm sure they stayed awake at night, burning the midnight oil, trying to figure out how to blame that deficit on us, and at 18 bucks a barrel – what used to be 18 bucks a barrel – they just couldn't come up with a way. 3:30 Mr. Chairman, I'd like to talk about regulation of securities markets.

In here we've got a reduction, in the brackets, called dedicated revenue, and I assume that that's where those fees are coming from. Could the Treasurer let us know what that dedicated revenue is for, where the revenues are going to come from, and provide us with a bit of a background? As a matter of fact, while I'm on it, with those 80-plus new fees or fee increases, would it be possible to give us sort of a little bit of a breakdown of how much all these are going to generate? MR. DINNING: It's right in there, Dan. MR. DALLA-LONGA: No, I don't think it is. MR. DINNING: Well, look. MR.

DALLA-LONGA: Well, then you can give it to me in your response after. Okay. My first question is: can the Treasurer indicate what benchmarks have been established for the performance measures for the satisfaction of Albertans with balance between market access and investor protection? In other words, what benchmarks have we got that Albertans out there are going to be happy with getting access to our stock market that we've got and the protec- tion that they're going to have? What is the government using as a benchmark?

What benchmark is the government using in saying that they are going to be successful in preventing the number of financial failures of Alberta dealers? Under the administration side – that's reference 4.0.3 – can the Treasurer explain the reason for the 21-plus percent increase in administration costs? Under reference 4.0.5, market standards, can the Treasurer explain the reason for the increase there of almost 7 percent? If I could stop for a moment at 4.0.7, I wonder if I might be able to give the Treasurer some good advice. It's free advice too. The franchise analysis

section here, the whole franchise area in this province is anything but an Alberta advantage. For a franchisor to set up in this province is a nightmare, and I think we're not getting all the business that we could in franchising. MR. DINNING: Start again. I'm sorry. MR. DALLA-LONGA: Read it in Hansard.

714 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 Y ou know, if we keep talking about this Alberta advantage, we should look for opportunities where we can change things, and this is one area that can be changed. It is the most difficult area in this country to get a franchise. I think we should look at what the other provinces are doing and bring it more in line. If anything, maybe we can even make it easier. Now, under 4.0.8, policy development, I wonder if the Treasurer could explain the reason for the increase there as well, almost 10 percent. So I guess – yeah, those are all my comments on program 4.

I'd like to move on now to the business plans, if I may. Y ou know, we talk about these business plans throughout this whole budget that came out and all the good things that are going to happen with these cutbacks. I'd like to quote from a quote made by Mike McCracken from Informetrica Limited. That's a reputable polling agency, not like that Y erxa outfit. He says that layoffs in the public sector could lop off one percentage point of the projections of Alberta's economic growth of 3.5 to 4.0 percent next year.

He goes on to say that it will keep the employment rate from declining or at least from declining as much as it would have, and this will result in further loss of consumer confidence and reduced discretionary spending and declining public support. That's what we're talking about in terms of the method with which this government goes about bringing out these budgets. We're not talking about tax increases. That's just where the members opposite are trying to fear monger. No, we're not talking about tax increases.

We're advocating a saner way of bringing these costs under control, the costs that, I might add, got out of control when the members opposite were in government. I'd like to talk about comments th at the Institute of Chartered Accountants had, another reputable organization, on this budget. I can't seem to find them. Anyway, we'll go on. I'll get to them later. The problem I have with these business plans – and I've had experience in doing a few business plans – is these things are supposed to be a road map.

What I see having happened with the business plans in this book and in particular the Treasury Department's business plan is a set of objectives, ideals, mother- hood statements but no real meat in there as to how these things are going to happen. Now, I don't know if that's just in keeping with the government's traditional ways of wanting to try to keep the opposition in the dark or trying to keep Albertans in the dark, but a business plan should give more specifics. I'm going to give you a couple of examples. Go to page 4. Okay?

We talk about – and it's talked about in other places in this book – under the government: The government's second fundamental commitment is to create an environment that will allow the private sector to create 1 10,000 new jobs for Albertans over the next four years. Where? Where is this going to happen? I think the government has pretty much given up on this 1 10,000 figure. Maybe it's 90,000 now, but where is it going to be? Twenty thousand in the oil and gas industry and so many thousand here? How is that going to happen? Is it going to be industry itself that creates these jobs?

Is it going to be the government? Or is it going to be all these laid off teachers that are going to be finding jobs someplace in the economy? But where? I mean, nobody expects that you're going to be a hundred percent accurate, but at least we're moving towards a plan. Albertans know. We're going in this direction; we're going in that direction. All we know is that there are 1 10,000 jobs out there. I like this fourth statement here: The fourth commitment of the government is to listen to the people it serves; to consult with them, and to be as open, compassionate and fair as possible.

I have doubts about that commitment. Now, I'd like to go on, under the Treasury, to goal 2: "Develop an efficient competitive tax/revenue structure." Well, what's going to happen with all these fees that we're collecting?

Is it the intention of this government – and this is a question that I'd like answered – to offset all these revenues that they raise against their costs so that they show that they've reduced their costs by increasing the fees? 3:40 One of the things that I was sorry to see – and I guess maybe I don't know what the cost was – was that we're going back to having the federal government collect the taxes. I know that there's probably a net cost savings, and that's good, but if we recall, the reason why we initially started collecting our own taxes was that we wanted to have made-in-Alberta fiscal policies.

Now, if we think that maybe we need to do something that's going to spur the economy on, I'm not going to advocate that we give them money. That's not our position, but I think we can have certain incentives built into our own tax system that will encourage investment in certain areas. Therefore, I think we lost something when we had the feds collect our taxes, because I'm not a big advocate of the efficiency of the federal government in its efficiencies. Under strategies under this second goal we talk about Using appropriate . . .

I emphasize the word "appropriate." . . . recommendations of the Alberta Tax Reform Commission, ensure the maintenance of a competitive tax system which encourages productivity, growth and wealth. Should the word "appropriate" really be selected? We're going to select what we want? Mr. Chairman, he's coming over here. I think he likes us so much, he wants to get closer. Stay tuned for

part 2. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, you're on even terms now. Y our time is up, so it's okay if he comes over. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Roper. AN HON. MEMBER: Give us something different, Sine. MR. CHADI: I'll try. Hang in there. We'll try and give you something a little bit different here but a little more entertaining, because what's happening here is that the facts are too difficult for the other side to comprehend, Mr. Chairman. I understand that. So I'll just try and take it a little easy on them today. I under- stand it's St. Patrick's Day, and on behalf of St.

Paddy what I'll do is I'll take it easy on you, out of respect only. I find it interesting that the Treasurer would stand up today and say that it was with pleasure that he "defend the estimates of the Department of Treasury." I would suspect that if somebody was going to defend something, it would mean that there was a chance that something could change, that the defence would be up to ensure that his side would prevail, that his side of the argument would come through. In this case, Mr.

Chairman, there really isn't an argument anymore, and that's what I'm going to talk about, the system within the es timates themselves, the estimates within Treasury, for example. When we talk about estimates and the amount of money that is required to run the department for a year, we have to also bear in mind that there is a thing called appropriation and an interim supply. It is with disgust that I should have to speak on the fact that the appropriation and the interim supply for this department and some of this department was approved in Committee of

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 715 Supply without the benefit of debate or much debate or without the benefit of even coming to this House and saying that on such and such a day we will discuss the appropriation with respect to Bills 9 and 10. We did have discussion with respect to Bill 8, and when we talk about the appropriation, I think we took Bill 8 into Committee of Supply, and we dealt with it there and it's probably passed. But it is not right, Mr. Chairman, not right at all that we should have to approve the funds required for these estimates that we're debating now.

It makes no sense whatsoever that the funds have been approved before the debate even starts. That's what bothers me, and this practice really ought not take place. I think we've got the cart before the horse, and that's wrong. I hope the government members will look at it seriously and consider it in the future practices of how we govern ourselves and run the affairs of this Assembly. With regard to the way the estimates are set out now, it is quite evident that we have a split, a departure from the past experience whereby, Mr.

Chairman, we used to see all the sums required within the programs all lumped together. We now see capital, and we see the operating expenses, et cetera, broken down. Y ou know, one must applaud the government for a good first step forward in doing that, but I think we have to go a step further than that and that is to use the Texas model or something similar to that, and we can adjust our system of estimates to something that the Texans have. My colleague the hon. Member for Edmonton-Whitemud tabled some copies of the Texas model, and I've got a copy in front of me.

One thing that I want to stress would be that the way they have it is a sensible approach to the estimates. It's a sensible approach because one who's debating the estimates can l ook at this objectively and say: "Is this correct? Is this the right amount of money that we think we can use in this department? Do we have to have this amount in this other department? What sort of outcomes are we looking for, what sort of benchmarks? Are there any?" The three-year business plan is a step again towards doing and achieving that goal, and I would hope that one day we could integrate the two.

But at the same time, we have to ensure that these things are mentioned so that we can try to work together to come to a decision for the betterment of the members of this Legislature so that it makes our job a lot easier and it makes it a lot easier for the people of the province of Alberta to understand it when they do look at the budget estimates. The Texas model clearly sets out a goal right in the estimates, Mr. Chairman. It sets out the objective, it sets out outcomes, it sets out strategies, and it sets out something that we've been saying for an awful long time: efficiencies.

I note that in the business plans that were tabled in the House at the time the budget was presented by the Provincial Treasurer the word "efficiencies" came up so often in those budget plans that I think because we've said it so often and so much, it's finally sunk home. It's there. The word "efficiency" is on the minds of everybody on all sides of the House now, and that's a great step forward. Mr. Chairman, again with respect to the opening remarks made by the Provincial Treasurer, I can't help but comment about the experience in New Y ork. That was, I would imagine, the first part of his trip.

Like my hon. colleague from Edmonton- Whitemud I'd like to talk a little b it as well with respect to the rating news, the Moody's news release. It says in the news release: Alberta's tax system continues to confer a distinct economic advantage to the province compared to other regions of Canada. That's a strong statement, a great statement.

I'm wondering if the sell job that the Provincial Treasurer did on the people with Moody's – and I've got to applaud him for that one, because it says here that political realities in Alberta have often inhibited the introduction of tax measures as an option to improve the province's financial performance. Well, gee, I'm sure he went in there and said: "Lookit, we've got the lowest tax rates in the country. This is where we're at. We're at 45 or 47 percent, whatever the case is. Look at all the rest of the provinces. We're doing an excellent job of holding down our taxes." In the same breath, Mr.

Chairman, I doubt very much if this Provincial Treasurer told them that things like health care are not included in those tax percentages. 3:50 So the tax system really isn't all that great after all, because when you look at how much money we spend in taxes, each person, each one of us that goes out and contributes to the $527 million that is expected in terms of revenues this year – it's not included.

But if you did include that $527 million in the already $3 billion or thereabouts in terms of how much we expect to collect in personal income taxes, that amounts to about a 15 percent – I think a 17 percent increase in personal income taxes. Now, every other province and jurisdiction, I think with the exception of one or two, includes it in their personal income taxes. This is not done, and it's not the practice in the province of Alberta, and therefore he deceived them. Because the taxes do not include health care costs and health care costs are separate, we are deceiving people like M oody's, and that's good.

I would imagine that, you know, we've held onto our double A rating because of the sell job that the Provincial Treasurer did, even though it might be misleading. [interjection] The hon. Minister of Health knows full well what I'm speaking about, even though she makes it s ound as though she doesn't. And maybe she doesn't understand what the collection of health premiums really is in this province. I'd be happy to enlighten her a little bit afterwards if she's interested, because it is taxes that we're talking about, and it's the collection of taxes, Mr. Chair- man, that are embedded within the estimates.

That's why I speak about them today. Oh, good. I need the Provincial Treasurer here because sometimes when he nods at me, he knows that I'm telling the truth. Then he knows that what he said in New Y ork was exactly correct, and when he shakes his head, then I know that he didn't say that. So if we'd all keep our eyes on the Provincial Trea- surer, we'd know what really happened in New Y ork. Mr. Chairman, the Moody's report goes on and says that "the current deficit elimination plan does not contemplate any tax increases," which is correct.

Of course, the Provincial Treasurer didn't talk about the fees that were embedded within this budget, and that's a considerable amount of money spread over three years, somewhere in the range of $300 million. Those are quite impressive increases in taxation, if you want to call them that, quite impressive increases in fees, if you want to call them fees.

It says: Nevertheless, if support to the expenditure reduction initiatives was needed in order to secure a balanced budget position by 1996-97, Moody's believes that some form of tax increases could very well take precedent over any delay in the elimination of the deficit. Well, I really want to know what was discussed at those meetings, and I'm wondering if the minister couldn't tell us and table a document or something along those lines, Mr. Chairman, of what took place at the meeting that he had with the different people that he met with in New Y ork.

I'd kind of like to know when he talked about the deficit elimination versus their statement here – I mean, their statement is quite clear. Moody's believes that some form of increase in taxes "could very well take precedent over any delay in the elimination of the deficit." So

716 Alberta Hansard March 17, 1994 they're kind of a little worried about whether or not this province could actually meet this deficit elimination. I suspect that when the Provincial Treasurer had shown them the budget documents and in particular if he showed them I think it's page 122 – yeah, it's page 122, Mr. Chairman – the Provin- cial Treasurer was out there saying that based on his estimates this is what it's going to be, he can balance the budget within three years, and this year alone he's going to do it, because the price of oil is going to be $16.50 U.S.

So Moody's is probably sitting back going: "Well, we kind of don't think that could happen, but that's okay. We know that it might not happen, but at least there's room for tax increases." I'm wondering if the Provincial Treasurer didn't say those exact words as well. I want to reiterate by saying that I would like to see copies or perhaps some sort of documentation from the Provincial Treasurer as to what took place in those meetings with the different bond rating companies in New Yo r k . Here's another strong statement made – and I'm trying to figure this one out – in the Moody's document, Mr. Chairman.

It says that the assets of the heritage savings trust fund remain an important source of support for the province's operating needs, as well as providing a considerable amount of flexibility in debt management. It goes on to say: Of importance to future credit quality evaluations by Moody's will be the outcome of the province's review of the heritage fund. So they're a little concerned about what's happening here.

I'm pretty certain that Moody's is probably sitting back saying, "This circular accounting that's taking place is making it all look good, in the balancing of all this bu dget, but is it really necessary?" The statement that Moody makes here – it says that it's all going to depend on "the outcome of the province's review of the heritage [trust] fund, which was announced in the budget." I think they've told the minister something, and I'm wondering if the Treasurer couldn't indicate that in a document that would be tabled in this House along with what I asked for previous, and that is what took place in those meetings, and if he could talk a little about what was discussed, about what to do with the heritage savings trust fund or their comments on it.

Point of Order Dress Code in Chamber MR. WHITE: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Y es. MR. WHITE: I rise on a point of order under Standing Order 13(1), which reads that "the Speaker shall preserve order and decorum." I cite 329 in `Bowchesnee' for the member opposite. It is extremely difficult for members from this side to carry on debate when they must look opposite and see this flash of colour. It's really, really difficult. This flash of colour moves back and forth at neck breaking speed.

I cite in particular 329, the last line of which is: "In general, Speakers have enforced conservative, contemporary standards." Sir, I suggest to you that wearing pajamas in the House is certainly not the order of the day, and I ask you to rule on same. MR. DINNING: In speaking to the point of order, most members on this side of this Assembly would heartily concur with the hon. member. If you are unable to rule in favour of the Member for Edmonton-Mayfield, then I think it would be only in the interests of you, Mr. Chairman, that you might provide us all with sunglasses. MR. HENRY: Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to also speak in support of the point of order. I wanted to point out that the Member for Lacombe-Stettler has been vying for the brightness, but there's a matter of taste. I believe that's in good taste, but I think the pajamas have to go. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Just one minute then. Okay; just a second. Go ahead. We let two go. The Minister of Labour, 30 seconds. MR. DA Y: Strictly on the point of order, because I am going to be rising to speak against the estimates of the Provincial Treasurer in a minute.

Clearly, there's an element of discrimination regarding my dress, and I honestly didn't think . . . [interjec- tions] For those who are reading Hansard at this moment, I'm not wearing a dress; I'm talking about my clothing. I know that envy has pervaded and snuck into the Assembly this afternoon. It's raw envy that has spurred these remarks. And there's an element of discrimination, because clearly the Member for Lacombe-Stettler is wearing an outfit equally as brilliant and as celebrant of springtime as I am, yet nobody has complained about hers. So I do not intend to tone this down.

I will have it on record that my wife actually gave me a lift here this morning, and as I was departing from the vehicle, she said: if anybody makes a comment on what you have on today, please make it plain that I had nothing to do with the selection of the garments. So I'm clearing her good name, but I'm not promising any retraction of dress or of my attack to follow in just a few minutes on the Provincial Treasurer's estimates. 4:00 MRS. ABDURAHMAN: Mr. Chairman, with regards to discrimination, I want to reassure the hon. member that that's indeed not the case.

I made the comment that I found his outfit very attractive. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Well, obviously there's not a point of order. I do think your wife has got wonderful taste, and I'm sure that she didn't pick that outfit out. With that, hon. Member for Edmonton-Roper. Debate Continued MR. CHADI: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I hope that didn't cut into my time. Mr. Chairman, I want to refer my comments now to page 13. I'm looking at full-time equivalents in the business plans.

When you look at the full-time equivalents and you see the projections for 1996-97, by that time we are expected to see a reduction of jobs in the range of about 175. Currently, in this fiscal year, we're going to see in the range of about 40 full-time equivalents within the Treasury Department alone.

I know that there was never anything done with respect to co-ordination of all the full- time equivalents between all the different departments, because I'm certain that the department of social services is going to have the same thing and the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Labour and public works, et cetera, et cetera. I'm wondering if there wasn't an overall impact assess- ment done with respect to the amount of jobs that will be lost and the impact on the province. I su spect that is going to be quite dramatic.

I'm hoping that the Provincial Treasurer would advise us that not only did he do some sort of an impact assessment with respect to the full-time equivalents within his department but he actually co-ordinated something for all departments.

March 17, 1994 Alberta Hansard 717 [Mr. Tannas in the Chair] My next question, Mr. Chairman, is with respect to the collection of taxes. Some time ago I asked a question – I believe it was in the last budget estimates of Treasury – on whether or not the federal government was charging us any money for the collection of corporate income taxes, and the answer was, no, they wouldn't. I find that difficult to believe, and I kind of want to have that in writing. I'd kind of like to know whether or not we are actually charged any funds or what the arrangement is with the federal government. In a letter that was sent from the Provincial Treasurer to the then Minister of Finance

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19940317
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L23 S2 19940317 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	bfb5c9b71166298feeebe441c890ec880af4c815

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