Alberta Hansard — 20 April 1972, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 17, Session 1)

19720420

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Thursday, April 20, 1972 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 pm.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair.] head: NOTICES OF MOTION M R. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, with regard to Notices of Motion, I wonder if I could have the consent of the House -- the Government Motion standing in my name with regard to the Select Committee involving the matters of ownership by Albertans, has inadvertently missed the name of the MLA Mr. Les Young. I would like to have that, if I could, added to the Notice of Motion. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. PURDY: Mr.

Speaker, it is my pleasure to introduce to you and to the hon. Members of this Assembly, 36 Grade IX students, their teacher Mr. Hrasko, and bus driver Mr. McDowell from the Winterburn School. They are seated in the members' gallery. Mr. Speaker, in the public gallery, we have today 25 ladies from the Progressive Conservative constituency of Stony Plain. I would ask that both these groups rise and be recognized by the Assembly. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and to the hon. Members of the Assembly, 25 Social Credit women who are here to observe proceedings today.

These women are representative of the growing army of Social Credit women -- [laughter] -- across the province. They come from the Stony Plain constituency, and I am sure the hon. Member for Stony Plain wouldn't begrudge a bachelor from Drumheller the pleasure of introducing such beautiful women. MR. HINMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce to you Mr. Louis Soop who is in the Speaker's Gallery. Mr. Soop is president of the Tribal Employees Association who are meeting in Edmonton tomorrow. He was educated at St.

Paul's School and at the Cardston High School, is currently the manager of a very successful Superette owned and operated by the Blood Indians at Standoff. Mr. Soop will please rise and be recognized. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1975

33-2 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me today to introduce to you and all Members of the Assembly, some 30 members of the Grade VI class at Laurier Heights School, accompanied by Mrs. Neuman. They are in the members gallery. As yet their political affiliation is unknown, but I would ask that the Assembly welcome them at this time and that they rise and be recognized. MR. COOPER: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to introduce to you and to the hon. Members of the Assembly, 30 Grade X students from the high school at Viking in the Viking-Vermilion constituency.

They are accompanied by their teacher Mr. Tom Newcomb. They are seated in the Public Gallery and I would ask them to stand and be recognized. MR. J. MILLER: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to the hon. Members of this Assembly, a group of Boy Scouts and Cubs from Marwayne. They are accompanied by Mr. Lloyd Payne, Mr. Dennis Alward, Mrs. Tupper, Mr. and Mrs. Jerry Hines and their twin daughters. I would ask that they stand and be recognized. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Conservative Policy Manual MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon.

Premier. Did your government provide each one of the Deputy Ministers and the senior administrators of the Civil Service with a Conservative policy manual? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I believe the answer to that is yes, we did. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Would the hon. Premier agree to tabling that document, as it is in the best interests of the public? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, there's no question about the conclusion to the hon. member's question, and we'll take that under advisement. Oil Allowables MR. DIXON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon.

Minister of Mines and Minerals. Is the hon. minister aware of the announcement yesterday by the National Energy Board officials, and by the Federal Minister of Energy and Resources regarding the Mackenzie Valley pipeline to transport Northwest Territories and Arctic oil and gas south, and also a possibility of exporting the Alaska oil and gas by that same line? Mr. Macdonald stated yesterday that increased use of Alberta oil will be sought to take care of any delay in the proposed pipeline construction. My question to the minister, Mr.

Speaker, is: has the government had any negotiations or discussions on this matter of increased Alberta production? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1976

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-3 MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, I have followed with interest the press reports on this. We have had a number of discussions with the Minister of Energy for the federal government, Donald Macdonald, not specifically dealing with the question that's directed by the hon. member, but dealing with this whole question of the negotiations between Canada and the United States. This is one of the reasons why we were interested in this question of consultation and observer status on the energy talks between Canada and the United States. MR. DIXON: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Is the government considering an immediate increase in oil allowables for Alberta producers in any case? MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, to my knowledge, there are no plans at the present time for that. That is within the jurisdiction of the Energy Resources Conservation Board. I might, however, add that we are continually pressed for free access to the United States markets and this deals with the whole question of the relationship between Canada and the United States. As I understand the arguments, one of the bargaining points deal with the restrictions, that are, of course, placed on by the United States.

One of the arguments they have before lifting the restrictions deals with the question that they consider the supply to Eastern Canada from Venezuela as an insecure source, and there have been suggestions that Canada should build a pipeline to transport the oil to Eastern Canada and store it there. This is a part of the negotiations that are going on. As I understand it, the United States will hold up those restrictions, or have tentatively said they will do that, pending the settlement of those negotiations.

It was in that interest that we first explored this question of consultation, because we wished to make sure that the interests of Alberta are properly looked after in negotiations and have continually pressed for consultation at the energy talks between Canada and the United States. MR. DIXON: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the minister.

Owing to the fact that your government has announced that you are going to allow more allowables for oil exploration wells in certain areas of the province, I wondered if this has been taken into consideration as one of the proposals to bring forward an earlier and a larger allowable in the near future. MR. DICKIE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I think we can answer that. We have read with interest the Energy Resources Conservation Board where they have changed the allowable, perhaps not to the satisfaction of everyone, and we are looking at that to see what results can be achieved by further efforts in that area.

Crude Oil Price MR. DRAIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals what is the average selling price of Alberta crude oil, f.o.b. wellhead at this time. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1977

33-4 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 MR. DICKIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, the selling price per barrel is $2.83 1/2 per barrel in Alberta at the present time. MR. DRAIN: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. What is the total amount of money per barrel that accrues to the Provincial Treasurer through royalties, lease rentals and other increments from the oil business? MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, I don't have that figure. I would thank the hon. member for giving me notice of the question, but the question I had was, what is the total revenue that accrues to the province, taking in lease rentals, royalty, and crown reserve bids?

I have that information if the hon. member wishes it. MR. DRAIN: We will pursue that later. There is a price differential between Alberta crude and American crude, f.o.b. the Chicago market. What is the reason for this? MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, I would certainly like to take notice of that question. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Buffalo, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Bow, and the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview. MR. NOTLEY: Supplementary question to the hon. Member for Pincher Creek- Crowsnest.

Will the policy paper on the royalty question contain the two very important points raised by the hon. Member for Pincher Creek-Crowsnest, i.e., the amount on a per-barrel basis that we collect on crown lease sales, rentals, and royalties, and (

b) the reasons for the price differential between here and Chicago? MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, as I said before, I have been reluctant and would ask the hon. members to withheld any questions on our review of natural resource revenue. I would, however, say if the hon. member wishes to have information so that he could properly consider the position paper that would be brought down by the government, we would be glad to accommodate him, to give him that information. On the specific question he raises, and raised by the hon.

Member for Pincher Creek-Crowsnest, I would like specific direction on that question if he is referring to the rentals, royalty and crown reserve sales. The difficulty in making a calculation of that nature does deal with how you calculate the crown reserve sales. If the hon. members are proposing to place on the Order Paper questions along those lines, I would ask that they direct how they would like to treat the crown reserve sales; that is, the income from the crown reserve sales in respect to the calculation of the cost per barrel of oil. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the hon.

Minister of Mines and Minerals. When can the House expect to get this position paper? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1978

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-5 MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, I believe last Monday the hon. Premier announced that it would be within ten days. Impaired Drivers' Licenses MR. GHITTER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Highways. Possibly the hon. Attorney General might wish to make comment on this question. It arises out of the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Alberta which, I understand, held that the Department of Highways could not return licences to drivers convicted of impaired driving during the period pending the hearing of their appeal to a higher court.

This decision results in a very unjust circumstance, in that drivers convicted of impaired driving may suffer the loss of their drivers' licences, although at a later date they might prove their innocence. My question is, is your department, Mr. Minister, considering this decision with a view of taking appropriate steps to overcome this injustice? MR. COPITHORNE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we are considering this point. Maybe the hon. Attorney General would like to make further comment on that. I don't know whether he has something he would like to add to it or not. MR. LEITCH: Not really, Mr.

Speaker, except the situation that now exists is one that obviously needs to be cured, and the hon. Minister of Highways is about to do that. Auctioneers' Regulations MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Industry. Inasmuch as you have advised this Legislature that you are revising the regulations governing auctioneers, and that they would be available April 1st, when can we expect you to table a copy of the revised regulations? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, we tabled those yesterday. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Does the hon. minister not know that what he tabled yesterday was Alberta Regulation No. 200 for the year 1970? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, if there was some slip between the transmission of the regulations and what I had in my hand, I will correct it. Release of Information MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister advise what his priorities are when it comes to releasing information. Specifically, does he feel that he should give members of the Legislature information at the earliest possible time when it is available?

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1979

33-6 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. member asking the minister for a personal attitude or does he want government policy? MR. WILSON: I am asking for his policy on priorities of release of information from his department. MR. PEACOCK: I think that goes without saying really. Certainly it would be privy to this Legislature first. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I wonder why the hon. minister refused to answer a question yesterday, and then answered it on the radio or television last night? That was really contempt for the Legislature. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR.

WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister tell us why, when I asked yesterday a similar question to that asked of him later on television, he refused to answer in the Legislature, but promptly went out of the House and made a lengthy television and press release on the same subject? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the question is. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, for the hon. minister. I would ask him to tell us why, in light of the policy priority he just enunciated, that yesterday he refused to answer a question for me, left the House, and made a television release. MR.

SPEAKER: The minister has asked which question did he refuse to answer. MR. WILSON: Well, if he wants the specific question, it was in relation to the proposed steel mill for Alberta, and coal mining along the Alberta Resources Railroad. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the hon, minister gave quite a detailed answer in that regard yesterday. If the member has some specific privilege he feels was harmed by the minister, he should state the question and the answer and give the minister exactly what he is trying to seek as information now. MR. TAYLOR: Mr.

Speaker, on the point of order, waving your hand might be a detailed answer to the Progressive Conservatives, but it isn't to anybody else. And that is exactly the way the minister answered that question. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1980

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-7 MR. GETTY: Well, Mr. Speaker, on the point of order, the member obviously has the responsibility now to point out the question he is referring to, and to point out why he thinks he didn't get it answered. The minister has the right not to answer any questions that he wishes, but he may feel that he has answered. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

It was the last question that I asked of the minister yesterday and it reads as follows: "Is it the government's stated desire to see a steel company operating in Alberta, in any way connected to the current situation with M c I n t y r e - P o r c u p i n e M i n e s Ltd.?" MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, in order to clear up this situation, there is no connection between what I was speaking about in this House regarding McIntyre-Porcupine Mines and their loss of $7,169,000 in the year 1971 concluded December 31, and the ARR railroad and its losses and a steel company.

That is what I stated and I stated outside the House. If a steel company decides, we would certainly encourage a steel company in the private sector to move into that area. Departmental Exams MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Education and ask if the government is giving consideration to the removal of Grade XII departmental examinations? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the hon. gentleman opposite should mention that.

We are looking at that in addition to many other areas, the whole question in fact of examinations; centralized and departmental examinations or local ones. And the allied question of entrance to universities from high schools in the province is being closely examined by the department right now. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one such interesting question deserves another. I wonder if the government is considering a random testing system across the province at different grade levels? MR. HYNDMAN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, as I announced -- I believe it was Tuesday in connection with the ending of Grade IX departmental examinations - - there will be developed a method of random testing or sampling in order to be able to assess the quality of the educational level across the province and hopefully in order to assess whether, for the millions of dollars spent in education, the quality of education being given to children is remaining steady or going up or going down. So this is certainly one of things we're actively looking at as allied to the examination question. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, hopefully the third and last interesting question. Will the information from this random testing approach be available to school boards and education organizations as a means of assessing education accountability? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1981

33-8 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 MR. HYNDMAN: It may well be, Mr. Speaker. We haven't reached any conclusion or studied that aspect in depth. To the extent that that suggestion would assist in maintaining or increasing the quality of education in the province, it certainly would. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the hon. Minister of Education. Could the hon. minister give us the three or four main reasons why Grade IX examinations are being discontinued? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I believe I did give that to the House some three days ago.

But I think it would be useful if all hon. members discussed this matter and I would be quite happy to give those answers and debate it more fully under education estimates. Farm Credit Corporation Loans MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct this question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture. Is the government, sir, giving any consideration to requests from Peace River farmers regarding a moratorium on farm debts particularly those debts that relate to the purchase of land? DR.

HORNER: Well, I have been in communication with the farmers in the Peace River country almost on a continuing basis on this very serious problem. Primarily it involves loans that were made by the Farm Credit Corporation, the federal body, and also in relation to municipal taxation. We were able to delay the tax sales in the Peace River country with the co-operation of the hon. Minister in Charge of Northern Development and the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs for a considerable length of time -- as long as we could under statute.

In r€lation to the foreclosure actions of the Farm Credit Corporation I've made several representations to the regional office here in Edmonton and, in fact, have made specific recommendations and representations to the office in Ottawa. As a result of that I have recently had a visit from the chairman of the Farm Credit Corporation in Ottawa, Mr. George Owen.

We had a good discussion in this area and I'm hopeful that we can secure the co-operation of the Farm Credit Corporation to delay foreclosure action for at least a year, until we can attempt to revitalize the agricultural sector and make available additional and alternate sources of credit to the farmers -- not only in the Peace River country but all over Alberta. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister. May I just say by comment that I certainly concur in the efforts that you're taking in this respect. But I wonder, Mr.

Speaker, whether the minister -- and this could go either to the hon. Minister of Agriculture or the hon. Provincial Treasurer -- is giving consideration to the resolution passed by District 6, Region 7 of the National Farmers Union. The point that they raise is: "Be it resolved that the provincial government make monies available through its Treasury Branch to repay past due Federal Farm Credit loans in order that family farms under threat of foreclosure be preserved." Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1982

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-9 Now my question -- to either the hon. Minister of Agriculture or the hon. Provincial Treasurer -- is: has any consideration been given to using the Treasury Branch in cases of emergency such as this? DR. HORNER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I could answer it first, and perhaps if the hon. Provincial Treasurer has anything to add it would be useful.

I say this, that it is our consideration that monies under the Agricultural Development Fund can be used in a reasonable way for the consolidation of debts, which includes the payment of the arrears owing to the Farm Credit Corporation, and I made that point to Mr. Owen in my discussions with him. I intend to make further representations of an official nature to Mr. Owen after our discussions in relation to that. I might add, Mr.

Speaker, the question of a moratorium is a very precarious one to take in the agricultural field at this time, because it would severely limit the amount of money that might be available for agricultural credit from the traditional sources, and I would hesitate very much in establishing a moratorium. However, I think in going the other way we can, perhaps, achieve the same result and hopefully continue to have the input of credit that we are going to require in the agricultural field. Medicine Hat Hospital MR. WYSE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon.

Minister of Health and Social Development. Has the Alberta Hospital Commission approved a request by the Medicine Hat Hospital Board to put air-conditioning in the Medicine Hat Hospital? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, the present policy is to continue the policy of the recent government in connection with matters like that, and although it can be made subject to review from time to time as a matter of general policy, the specific answer in respect to Medicine Hat -- and I have discussed the matter with the chairman of the Hospital Services Commission -- is that the Medicine Hat Hospital District has been advised that if they want to proceed with air-conditioning they are free to do so, but at local cost rather than at provincial cost. MR. WYSE: Supplementary question, Mr.

Speaker, did this directive come directly from you? MR. CRAWFORD: I am perfectly happy, Mr. Speaker, to take full responsibility for it. It was the policy recommended by the commission and I confirmed it. MR. WYSE: Supplementary question; when will the government be prepared to meet the commitment of the Conservative party in that area, who said they would install air-conditioning in the hospital now? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, as far as I'm concerned, the hon. member is now giving information rather than seeking it. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1983

33-10 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 MR. TAYLOR: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Health and Social Development. Does a hospital board have to get permission from the hon. minister to spend its own money? MR. CRAWFORD: No, Mr.

Speaker, but when the budget is established and the request comes forward for additional funds and is put on the basis of a specific use, it is certainly up to the hospital board whether they spend it on that or not, but if the hospital board comes to the conclusion that they can't proceed -- in this case air-conditioning -- and have to have additional funds well then that is the point at which it is resolved. Farm Credit Corporation Loans (cont.) MR. BUCKWELL: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture on this moratorium.

Would loans under The Agricultural Development Loans Act be used to consolidate farm credit corporations? DR. HORNER: That is one of the uses that these loans and the other guaranteed loan programs can be put to. There's the consolidation or the bringing up to date of the arrears under FCC loans. MR. BUCKWELL: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, if they can't pay the FCC are the loans under this act going to be much more lenient? DR. HORNER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I have said in the House before, my attitude towards the provision of credit to farmers was to sit down with the farmer and work out his cash flow so that he could have a reasonable income and have enough income to pay off his obligations. It isn't our intention to plough him deeper into debt so he can't get out, but rather to try and assist him in finding ways and means in which he can improve his cash flow and his cash income and his ability to repay his obligations.

One of those things, particularly in the Peace River country where they have had a succession of crop failures, is the necessity for the consolidation of debts so that they can clean the slate and hopefully we can work out solutions for these farmers so that they can continue in operation and have a reasonable income. MR. BUCKWELL: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. minister's statement but surely there will be some of these farmers that will not qualify possibly under this act.

Is the government prepared to help them with the FCC loans because there will be some of them that are a very poor financial risk for both parties. DR. HORNER: Well, I would agree, Mr. Speaker. There are some of them that are in very serious financial difficulties because, as I've said, of a series of crop failures, and this sort of thing. I think that if we can -- and we will I would hope, be sitting down with each of them individually to work out a solution to their financial problems.

If it's available in the agricultural field in any way, we'll try and Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1984

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-11 make it for them in that sense. It may well be that other solutions will also have to be used. MR. BUCKWELL: Further supplementary then, Mr. Speaker. Does the hon. minister feel that there are other areas of the province or pockets, other than the Peace River, that might be in a similar situation as far as the FCC is concerned? DR.

HORNER: Well I think that while the situation in the Peace River may be generally a little bit more severe than it is elsewhere, my correspondence and my information is that this is more a general thing, and certainly the hon. member is quite aware of the serious situation in which, for instance, the potato growers were in and are in in southern Alberta. We developed a particular and special policy for them, and we would hope that in other areas, we could do so also.

Again I want to stress though that that policy in regard to the potato growers was keyed to marketing and keyed to the marketing opportunities, so that in fact we didn't just plow them in one step further in the debt field -- and I really want to stress that, Mr. Speaker, that the ability to use their credit wisely and to use it in a practical and in a way that is going to improve their income and improve their ability to repay their obligations has to be the primary consideration in all of these programs. MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary to the hon. minister.

Has an assessment been made of the amount of money involved in say the Peace River areas, as far as the matter goes? DR. HORNER: Well I'm sure that it wouldn't be very difficult to assess the amount of money involved. I think that in the last figures I had on FCC foreclosures for instance, there was something like 85 in process and most of those were in northern Alberta, certainly not all of them in the Peace River country but quite a bit.

So it wouldn't be hard to evaluate the amount of money that would be required, but to bring their arrears up to date and to sit down and work out programs using the guaranteed loans or some other particular program is our objective, and we would do it on the basis of across the kitchen table, working out a program for the individual farmer to reassess his financial stability and his ability to repay his obligations, and have an income that is going to be high enough to support his family. Industries for East Central Alberta MR. SORENSON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Industry.

Has the government received any verbal or written request from the East Central Alberta Industrial Committee asking for support to have east central Alberta included as a designated area for industrial development? MR. PEACOCK: Yes, we have, Mr. Speaker. MR. SORENSON: Supplementary question. Does the Government of Alberta support the inclusion of east central Alberta as a designated area? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1985

33-12 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I'm getting almost like the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs. How many times do we have to say that we are in the process of negotiating with the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs a new program with Ottawa and until we can release that we have nothing to report. MR. TAYLOR: Supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. When are we going to get some of the negotiations finished and get some decisions? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR.

SORENSON: Supplementary question to the minister, is it true that the reason that the brief submitted on two occasions to the hon. minister Mr. Marchand has not received favourable consideration, is due to the fact that the Goverment of Alberta is not willing to support the submission? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, it is not. We believe that as far as the present situation with the federal government and the DREE support in the Province of Alberta should be carried on until we negotiate a new deal. DREE Program MR. NOTLEY: Supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the hon.

Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. In view of the fact that the DREE program has a potential of crossing boundaries, has the government consulted formally with British Columbia and also the Government of Saskatchewan before making their representations to Ottawa vis-a-vis the DREE program? MR. GETTY: We have not discussed the DREE program formally with the Government of British Columbia, Mr. Speaker. We have discussed DREE programs with the Government of Manitoba and the Government of Saskatchewan during the course of meetings with the Premiers of our three provinces.

At that time, both those heads of government expressed the feeling that they were very dissatisfied with the operations of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion within their provinces. I think we expressed some dissatisfaction in our province. All of us were anxious to establish some better way of having the objectives of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion attained within our provinces. The Government of Alberta advised them that we would be dealing directly with DREE on the matter and it was pretty obvious the Government of Saskatchewan and the Government of Manitoba would also.

I hope that gives the hon. member the information that he requested. We have not formally discussed it with the Province of British Columbia. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I raise this by way of explanation because, as you know, the Peace Bloc really encompasses both British Columbia and Alberta. I think that any program that is negotiated must be negotiated in consultation with the Government of Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1986

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-13 British Columbia. My question to you, sir, is will you give the House an undertaking that you will consult with the Government of British Columbia, so that the two governments can work in unison in making representation on the DREE program and so that one side of the Peace isn’t discriminated against because of plans that might proceed on another side? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I would give the hon. member the undertaking that to do so appeared to be in the best interests of the people of Alberta to do that, then we would certainly do so. MR.

PEACOCK: A supplementary answer, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I just may enlarge upon the answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Coronation-Sedgewick. It is for that very reason and the discriminatory attitude of DREE in the Province of Alberta that we want to effect a change. This is what the problem is all about. MR. BARTON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. Have any DREE officials left the Province of Alberta as of September 10th to date? MR. GETTY: I am not sure what the hon. member is asking, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure whether you mean have they recalled some people, or cancelled some jobs or have they merely gone on a trip out of the province? Would you explain the question? MR. BARTON: From the programming in Alberta. MR. GETTY: I don't frankly know. I don't know whether the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is reducing their staff within the Province of Alberta. I might say that I would certainly have no particular objection to that.

I feel that the objectives of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion might best be attained within our province, if the responsible departments of the government of Alberta were directing the various projects that would benefit from that program, rather than have somebody in Ottawa, or under the influence of the federal government, trying to determine what the needs are of Albertans. Invitation to Prime Minister Trudeau MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Premier. Inasmuch as the hon.

Prime Minister Trudeau will be in Edmonton next week, I was wondering if you had, or if you would consider extending an invitation to the Prime Minister to drop into this Legislative Assembly? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I certainly will take that matter under consideration. My understanding of the purpose of the trip of the Prime Minister here has to do with political matters for his party. But it is certainly something that is worthwhile to consider. If Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1987

33-14 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 there is an appropriate way to do that, we would be pleased to look into it. MR. WILSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Do you not feel the expertise of the Prime Minister would be of considerable assistance to members of the Executive Council in fielding opposition members' probing questions? MR. HYNDMAN: We're waiting for some. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Would the hon. Premier also consider having the Prime Minister of Canada address this Assembly? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, because of the interest of the hon. members in the fact that the Prime Minister is making a trip to Alberta, when -- I guess over a month ago -- we became aware of the fact that he was coming, we had discussions with his office, and they felt that because of the pressure of his

schedule and the fact that it was -- I'd say -- totally a political trip, it would be very difficult indeed for him to also become involved in any additional duties as the head of the Government of Canada. Nevertheless, I think the question raised by the hon. member is worthy of consideration, and I'm sure that our hon. Premier will, in fact, consider it. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs.

Does he not feel that with Alberta now having television coverage in the Provincial Legislature that it would be of historical significance to have the Prime Minister drop in and say a few words to this august body? MR. GETTY: As a matter of fact, yes, I think that would be of some historical significance. In talking to some members of his office, though, I might say that they don't share with you your feeling about the probing nature of the questions. Rapeseed Crops MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture.

During the discussions of the estimates of the Department of Agriculture, I understood the minister to indicate that they felt that Alberta's rapeseed acreage would not drop significantly this year. Now a recent release from Canadian Press indicates that Alberta's rapeseed producers will reduce their acreage by some 800,000 acres. Is the minister taking any steps or expressing any concern over this? DR. HORNER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't recall saying in my estimates that the rapeseed acreage wouldn't go down.

As a matter of fact, I think I said that there would be probably a decrease, or at least rapeseed wouldn't be as important in acreage size as it was a year ago, and that that would be taken up by an increased acreage in barley, particularly, hopefully, and some additional acreage in wheat. I Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1988

think we would hope in the future to be able to be much more positive in our advice to farmers in relation to the marketing opportunities in a variety of commodities as time goes along. That's certainly our objective. On the other hand I think that one of the serious situations in regard to the rapeseed acreage that I think I may have mentioned during the estimates was the question of the disease situation -- in root diseases, the army worm and so on -- that tends to be much more severe in fields that are cropped on a continuing basis to rapeseed.

Our rapeseed producers are finding out that they have to use crop rotation like any other cereal grain producer, and because of this situation and because of the general marketing conditions, there will be a substantial decrease in the rapeseed acreage. I was primarily talking about the disease situation which is becoming fairly significant in relation to rapeseed generally. MR. RUSTE: A supplementary question to the minister. Is he considering something in the line of an incentive payment or a floor price as his colleague at the federal level has done -- Mr. Diefenbaker? DR. HORNER: In relation to... MR.

RUSTE: To the question of rapeseed. DR. HORNER: I don't think that the rapeseed growers or the Rapeseed Association are as concerned. Their primary discussions with me have led me to believe that they feel very strongly about looking after their own destiny as much as possible, that they appreciate government assistance where and when they can receive it, but that they would like to be directors of their destiny in the rapeseed industry.

You might say, in discussions with the association in Alberta and with the secretary of the Rapeseed Association of Canada, that essentially they were concerned about government input in the research field insofar as the disease field was concerned, and also in regard to the research into new varieties, particularly as variety is important in relation to the geographic areas. In other words, we are working on new varieties that are adapted to the Alberta climate. These are the important things I have learned in my discussions with the rapeseed growers generally.

They don't want the Wheat Board to cover them; they want us to assist them in any way we can in their marketing thrust and they require specifically some assistance in relation to disease and to varieties which are related to the province. Cattle Industry MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, a question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture. Does the Canadian Cattlemen's Association feel that their industry needs support by government? DR. HORNER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition is quite aware of what the Canadian Cattlemen's Association is of course saying these days.

The Canadian Cattlemen's Association is saying that government should stay out of their business. That is all very nice to a certain degree. I have had some discussions with the Canadian cattlemen, with the Alberta Cattle Commission, and Western Stock Growers. One of the reasons that I mentioned in my estimates in relation to the April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-15 Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1989

33-16 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 extension of the guaranteed loan for beef cattle to the remainder of the province. I invited hon. members from those areas to give their submissions to me as to their views as to whether or not we should expand the guaranteed loan for beef cattle into that area. I haven’t received too many submissions and I would appreciate receiving them. The message from the Canadian Cattlemen's Association is that government shouldn't artificially increase or stimulate the cattle industry. Invitation to Prime Minister Trudeau (cont.) MR. TAYLOR: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon.

Premier. If Margaret and Justin were to accept my personal invitation to the Legislature, would the hon. Premier go along with the Prime Minister accompanying them? MR. SPEAKER: That is a hypothetical question. Cattle Industry (cont.) MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture. Is he considering withdrawing assistance for the cattle industry in the Province? I am referring to the project that is under way in a portion of the province at the present time. DR. HORNER: No, Mr. Speaker.

I might say that we think this has had substantial impact in an economic way in the grey wooded soil areas of Alberta. I have promised the hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury that we would include, for instance, the west of the 5th in his constituency, which I think is reasonable. We are trying to keep a close eye on cattle numbers generally in the beef cattle industry. The latest figures I have, as a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, are that beef cattle cows on farms in Alberta are down slightly from a year ago. And so the major impact so far has been a transfer of cattle from one area to another.

We haven't had a buildup as yet of cows on farms and ranches in Alberta. We appreciate that it is important to keep this knowledge in mind, and we intend to continue that kind of a survey. I think it is also important, Mr. Speaker, to say this. We intend that Alberta should continue to maintain its place in the overall Canadian situation in relation to the production of beef. MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, does the hon. minister have any information, or does his department have any information, as to the possibility of export of beef to Japan or to any other area? DR.

HORNER: We are working on this all the time, and have had various delegations from Japan to Alberta in relation to cuts of meat. I have had discussions with some of the major packers who have had excursions into the Japanese market, both from their plants in Canada, and also with some of them who have plants in Australia. He feel quite strongly that there is a market for ordinary Canadian beef as opposed to Kobe beef in the Japanese market, at a price level above the Australian product. We are working in that area at the Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1990

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-17 present time. There have been discussions going on between Japanese interests and processors in Alberta, almost on a continuing basis, to see if we can open up this market. There are problems in relation to transportation, in relation to processing, and we are hopeful that some of our processors will look at the Kryovac chilled method as opposed to the frozen beef or the fresh beef that has been going on trial shipments. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley has been extremely patient. Invitation to Prime Minister Trudeau (cont.) MR. ZANDER: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

I have a question to the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. If the hon. minister is considering the request of the hon. member for Calgary Bow, if he would also include in the invitation Mrs. Trudeau. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, in considering in some more detail the comment made -- and I don't think it was a request -- by the hon. Member for Calgary Bow, that we invite the Prime Minister.

It seemed to me that there were some reasons, significant reasons as a matter of fact, why the Prime Minister has not addressed -- and I don't know the historical facts -- very many Legislatures in the various provinces. But there may be some pretty significant reasons why it would be inappropriate. So I don't say we reject it out of hand, but I do think that there should not be a great deal of speculation about doing that until full consideration has been given to the matter, and I'm not sure as to what my own recommendations would be with regard to it. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Apparently the Prime Minister's itinerary will take him in and out of Edmonton and the surrounding environs both by car and by helicopter, and so on. It just seemed that because of the forward step that -- [Interruptions from Floor] MR. SPEAKER: Order. MR. WILSON: ...we took in Alberta to include television in our Legislature, I asked you if you did not think that because of the significance of the steps we have taken in this Legislature, that we could invite the Prime Minister to come and address us briefly. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, so that this matter may be concluded, my view of the matter is that it would not be appropriate and that we will be prepared, since the matter has been raised, to give it some consideration. We feel it is very important, as we have mentioned from time to time in this Legislature, that there be a government-to- government relationship, and insofar as the situation is raised by the member for Calgary Bow, I think that would lead us into that sort of request possibly being made to the Leader of the Opposition in the Federal House, and a continuing matter of that nature.

And frankly, as far as I am concerned, at the moment I do not think it would be Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1991

33-18 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 appropriate either on this trip or on future occasions, but we will give it some further thought. Alberta Farm Purchase Credit Board MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture, and ask him if he can give the House some indication when farmers wanting to purchase land through the Alberta Farm Purchase Credit Board can expect that the board will be able to deal with the applications of the funds, about $7 million, I believe will be available this year. DR. HORNER: Mr.

Speaker, just as soon as we can get the legislation through the Legislature. The legislation is at the printers -- it has been here for some days, and I am awaiting it -- as soon as it comes it will be introduced, and hopefully we can proceed with it as soon as possible. I would suspect then that that means that capital monies through the new Agricultural Development Fund which will be taking over the Farm Purchase Board would not be available until somewhere around June 1st. MR. SPEAKER: The time for the Question Period has passed. Record of Arsonists MR. LEITCH: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if I may be permitted to answer a question asked of me yesterday by the hon. Member for Calgary McCall. He asked whether my department kept a record of arsonists and their movements, and my colleague, the hon. Minister of Labour, has passed to me some information from the Office of the Fire Commissioner which comes within his jurisdiction, to the effect that all suspicious fires are reported to the Fire Commissioner's Office, and that office in conjunction with the local police forces investigates the fires.

In addition, the Fire Commissioner's Office does keep a record of the offences of arson, and they do exchange with other provinces information about the movements of known arsonists. Edmonton-North Battleford Rail Service MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I may give answers to a question posed to me by the hon. Member for Vermilion-Viking yesterday regarding the abandonment of railroad service between Edmonton and North Battleford.

At that time I stated that I wasn't aware of it and I might state now to the House that there has been no decision made on whether, and if so when, the matter will be set down for a hearing regarding the abandonment. I think for the information of the House it is rather interesting to point out this, that the CNR and CPR have now applied for abandonment of all passenger services as this procedure is necessary in order to comply with CTC regulations. So that all passenger service in Canada supplied by CNR and CPR are now, as far as the two railroads are concerned, under application for abandonment.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1992

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-19 head: FILING RETURNS AND TABLING REPORTS MR. COPITHORNE: Mr. Speaker, on a Motion for Return to this House by Mr. Benoit and seconded by Mr. Taylor, my apologies for misplacing a part of the documents that I thought were included. I hereby would like to table them. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: MINISTERIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS Forestry Tour DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, yesterday all MLA's received a communication from me indicating that we were planning to host in the Department of Lands and Forests, Alberta Forest Service, a forestry tour for four days, of the week June 19th to 22nd.

The tentative agenda was attached and I rise now for three reasons: to emphasize and draw to hon. members attention this tour that we have organized for the information of MLA's and to emphasize, personally, that I would very much like to see every single member who possibly can, come with us on this tour. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I have been asked by a number of people roughly what the costs would be. The cost will be very nominal, on the order of two nights accommodation, and no more than half a dozen meals. Thirdly, Mr.

Speaker, for the information of members, as I'm sure they'll find this information on Alberta's timber supply as useful as I have found it, I would like to table in this House a document called the Quota System of Timber Disposal. I asked the Alberta Forest Service to prepare this information and I felt it would be helpful to all members of this Assembly in particular, to have before the forestry tour. So I do now table it and this will come to each member of the Assembly. head: QUESTIONS 180. Mr.

Taylor asked the government the following question: What is the detailed breakdown of the following items included in the answer to Question No. 170: (1) $596.05 paid to Mr. Farran? (2) $2,120.68 paid to Dr. Paproski? (3) $408.60 paid to Mr. Moore? Answer:

(1) Details of payments to Mr. Farran: Approved and paid prior to March 31,1972. (Sept. 21-23; Oct. 7/71) Airbus $ 34.00 Taxi 7.00 Parking 7.00 Subsistence 48.00 Meals 5.50 $101.50 Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1993

33-20 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 (Nov. 2, 3/71) Airbus 36.00 Parking 7.50 Subsistence 25.80 Mileage -- 30 @ $.13 3.90 Entertainment 20.00 Telegram .60 93.80 (Nov. 23-26/71) Airbus 36.00 Hotel & meals 63.20 Parking 5.50 Taxi 8.50 Office supplies 2.00 Mileage -- 30 @ $.13 3.90 Telegram .60 119.70 (Dec. 16) Airbus 36.00 Mileage 3.90 Taxi 5.20 Parking 1.50 46.60 (Sept. 21-23/71) Airbus 34.00 34.00 (Jan. 11-12/72) Airbus 36.00 Parking 3.50 Taxi 2.20 Hotel 20.25 Meals 5.00 66.95 (Jan. 28/72) Mileage -- 360 @ $.13 39.60 Hotel 26.05 Telephone 1.75 67.40 (Feb. 23/72) Mileage -- 180 @ $.13 19.80 Hotel 6.50 Meals 8.00 34.30 Sub-Total 564.25 Approved for payment subsequent to March 31,1972. (Feb. 29/72) Mileage — 180 @ $.13 19.80 Hotel 6.50 Meals 5.50 31.80 TOTAL 596.05

(2) Details of payments to Dr. Paproski: Approved for payment subsequent to March 31,1972 (November, 1971) Mileage -- 1625 @ $.11 178.75 Subsistence 46.00 Meals 42.00 Air Travel 72.00 Taxis 21.00 359.75 Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1994

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-21 (December, 1971) Mileage -- 1200 @ $.11 132.00 Subsistence 79.20 Heals 60.50 Trip --Fed'l-Prov. Health Ministers Conf. 273.00 Taxis 34.50 579.20 (January, 1972) Mileage -- 1560 @ $.11 171.60 Meals 24.00 Taxis 10.00 205.60 (February, 1972) Mileage -- 900 @ $.11 99.00 99.00 (March, 1972) Mileage 600 @ $.11 66.00 Meals 17.00 83.00 (NOTE: Submitted but not approved or paid: $794.13) 326.55

(3) Details of payments to Mr. Moore: Approved and paid prior to March 31, 1972 1. Mileage -- 760 @ $.11 83.60 Meals 7.00 90.60 2. Mileage -- 680 @ $.11 61.60 Subsistence 128.20 Parking 6.00 195.80 3. Mileage -- 220 @ $.11 24.20 Meals 5.00 29.20 4. Mileage -- 500 @ $.11 55.00 Subsistence 20.00 Meals 14.00 Parking 4.00 93.00 408.60 head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS Merit Pay for Teachers MR. COOKSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise to move, seconded by the hon.

Member for Drayton Valley, a resolution that the government of Alberta give consideration to establishing a differential staffing or merit-pay system, or the like, to reward teachers who demonstrate special competence, energy or ability in improving the quality of our educational system. I would like to point out first of all to the members of the Assembly that I speak both as a former teacher, a former trustee and at the present time a parent. I have a particular interest in this subject, probably because of some of this background.

I would like to say first of all that I have been disappointed in years past at the lack of action on the part of the former Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1995

33-22 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 government to take some initiative in this particular area. I think it has been a sad mark for education because we have a situation today where our teachers are locked into a lock-step system which pays primarily on experience and on training. The lack of incentive has created a situation where highly qualified and very capable teachers have quit the system because of their disillusionment with this type of pay structure. It has also created a situation where highly incompetent teachers have been able to maintain their income at the expense of the taxpayers. I think, Mr.

Speaker, that the relationship between teachers and parents is probably at its lowest level that it has been in a very, very long time, and perhaps we can lay the blame partly on this rigid type of structure that has been permitted to exist in our school system. Merit pay has been a subject of long controversy between teachers and trustees. The Alberta Teachers' Association has danced around the subject and charged the trustee or the public, in general, with failing to come up with some situation in which merit pay can be established. I think probably, Mr.

Speaker, this is one of the few arguments that has been posed against some form of merit pay in the school system. I hope that in the few remarks that I have to make I might be able to clarify some of these problems and I hope that all the members of the Assembly will take note of these. I would like to see the members of the opposition, in particular, give some contribution to this particular problem. Many trustees, of course say that it is possible to establish merit pay. Unfortunately there has been no legal process established which will make it possible.

Local boards have been left on their own to negotiate with teachers as to working conditions and income. Merit pay has been long the subject over these tables and I can remember them very vividly, being one of the members on the firing line on both sides of the table. But nothing has ever been resolved; primarily I think because government has never taken the initiative itself to guarantee some right to local government to initiate this type of thing.

Often at the local government level we found as trustees that we had to seek advice and direction from the Alberta Teachers' Association almost in advance from government. In fact it was a controversy at times as to which group was, in effect, legislating and directing the country. I hope that our new government might in some way clarify this point that municipal government and school boards are the child of the provincial government.

They are assigned the responsibility of being employers of teachers who, in effect, are employees and therefore they should have the freedom and right to move in whichever direction they see fit and desirable to provide a good quality type of education in the system. Now to point out to the Assembly the fact that many professional groups today do work on a merit-pay system, I collected -- and I hesitate to mention these figures because of the sensitivities of the hon. Member for Edmonton Kingsway -- the type of pay structure established, for example, for general practitioners.

If you take the tables for 1971 you will find that general practitioners in 1971, there were some 88 in an area of some $10,000 to $20,000. There were 217 in an area of $20,000 to $39,000 or $40,000 -- this is gross -- 259 general practitioners were in the area of $40,000 to $60,000 and so on. To indicate to you, I haven't got the dental figures, but perhaps the hon. member opposite might provide those -- to indicate there is even merit pay in pulling teeth.

Psychiatrists in 1971 -- we could use a few of them in this Assembly -- there were ten in the area of $10,000 to $20,000; there were 14 in the area of $20,000 to $40,000; there were 17 in the area Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1996

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-23 of $60,000 to $80,000. My point is this, that you do have a merit pay structure in these two professions that I have listed. Even if you go into the areas of non-professional people and if you go into the statistics on farm income which is probably a deceiving figure because it doesn't include all the other, perhaps, hidden forms of income. It does give you an indication of the type of merit pay that is established in even non-professional groups. In 1969, there were some 2,700 people in the area of $2,000 net income.

In that same year there were 4,000 in the area of $2,000 to $3,000. There were 5,000 farm people in the area of $3,000 to $4,000 net income. I can go on and quote these variable figures. There are incentives built in to practically all professions and non-professions, with the exception of the area of teaching. Still we work on the old lock- step method of payment. My intention in presenting this to you is to make also very clear that I don't think trustees or taxpayers are necessarily interested in reducing teacher income. I think primarily the result would be an increase in teacher income.

Certainly it would be to give a range of incomes and eliminate incompetence at one end and give people of outstanding ability some incentive at the other end. The Alberta Chamber of Commerce -- I have a number of position papers that have been placed before the government and at different times in the history of merit pay. The Chamber of Commerce mentions merit-rating for teacher payment. "We understand considerable discussion has taken place with regard to merit-rating plans for teachers' remuneration.

We trust the delay in implementation is due to the unsuitability of the plan, so we recommend a serious effort be made to develop plans which can be generally accepted by Boards of Trustees and teachers." I can go on to quote some the advantages and disadvantages, but mainly the general concensus is that a merit-pay system would make a great contribution to education. There is an

article in several other magazines that I thought you might be interested in. This is one by H. Gordon Green. H. Gordon Green who teaches at Dawson College in Montreal. You probably are familiar with the articles that he wrote in the Family Herald, and he also has several books to his credit. He says this, and I quote: "I am sure that the potential of our teachers today is higher than it ever was. The profession is certainly better trained than ever before and although it still has more than its share of misfits and mediocrity, it also attracts some of the most conscientious men and women in Canada.

The reason for the poor quality of our teaching then, is not so much in the quality of the profession as it is with the system. Before a teacher ever enters a school, the system has selected him on the basis of two facts only -- his years of experience and his certificates. On these two credentials his pay rate is established. So we are afflicted with a system which takes no account at all of a teacher's personality and his power to communicate. The PhD must always draw the highest pay on the scale even though he may be a completely fogbound individual who doodles all day, with great respect to PhDs.

And the lovely little woman who has been mother confessor to two or three generations of youngsters must close up her desk entirely when her humble certificate is no longer good enough." I would like to suggest to the members of the Assembly that there has been some movement in this area by the Alberta Teachers' Association at their recent convention in Edmonton. The intent, primarily is to weed out, in effect, incompetent teachers. The controversial by-law amendment, which passed following several hours of heated debate, would see the establishment of a five-member Professional Competence Committee.

Its job would be to investigate Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1997

33-24 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 cases of alleged gross incompetence among teachers and to recommend that incompetent teachers be decertified. It would protect our members against being judged by people who are not their colleagues, as mentioned.

So I point out that although the Teachers' Association has taken, in the past years, a very negative approach towards a merit-pay structure, that there is some movement, primarily because of pressure both politically and by taxpayers, and because of the cost of education, and perhaps because of what is happening in some of our other provinces in regards to the teaching profession.

In conclusion, hon. members of the Assembly, I would like to see some consideration by our government to establishing permissive legislation in The School Act or Labour Act, whichever, so that local boards, may in fact, have the power to initiate their own merit-pay structure. There are some directions given as to how this could be done and by no less a person than Dr. Brownwell who is the United States Commissioner of Education. In summarizing, I would like to point out a few of his principles which he suggests in order to accomplish merit pay. "

(1) All staff members need to know the basis upon which their services are evaluated.

(2) Decisions as to what are the characteristics upon which services will be evaluated which is a job which calls for co-operative participation by teachers, the administration, and the school board." I would like you to note this, because there is no way that such a system can operate without this very close co-operation. "

(3) Basis for collecting evidences of merit should be worked out together by the staff, teachers, and administrators.

(4) More than one person needs to participate in evaluating evidence upon which salary or promotion recommendations are made, in order to reduce, as far as possible, personal bias in interpreting evidence, some of which will inevitably be subjective." And finally, I felt this was important in his recommendations. "

(5) It is important that all parties recognize the purpose of a plan of recognition of merit is to provide pupils with the best possible staff and to encourage staff members to give their best services." Mr. Speaker, these are just a few points that I've gathered. I would welcome general discussion, because of the importance of this matter and because I think that it has been too long delayed in our province.

I'm concerned that if we do not move into some of these areas, that our province may have to take some actions that have been taken at the present time in British Columbia, and I think, Saskatchewan too, in effect, limit the power of a professional organization. It's important to bring our school people, our parents and our taxpayers and our teachers back close together. I would recommend that the government consider carefully this type of permissive legislation and put it into effect.

If we make mistakes we'll have to rectify them, but it isn't sufficient to say that it won't work because there's no way merit pay can be initiated. MR. ZANDER: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I certainly concur with the hon. member for Lacombe, and I, as the seconder of this motion, can certainly go along -- having been many years on the county council and school board -- but I believe we have to go into the history of what has Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1998

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-25 actually happened to our teaching profession in the past six to eight years. If we go back to about 1964, '65, '66, in that region, we find that we, the school boards, had no alternative but to accept teachers, regardless of what their teaching capabilities were, as long as they held a certificate, or even held a letter of authority to teach. Consequently we had to include teachers that had to be brought in from other parts of the world to teach in our schools.

We arrived at the position where we had possibly accepted all teachers with all types of certificates, which were all possible to obtain, and also teachers with letters of authority to teach in our schools, and we found that the supply was still not meeting the demand of the school boards. Consequently, we had teachers that were borderline cases as to whether they should have a certificate or whether they should not have a certificate. I can only refer you to my own experience and that is, Mr.

Speaker, where we found that a teacher that had a Bachelor of Education degree, who had taught something like 25 to 30 years, commanded a considerable amount of salary, but did not get a refresher course in the modern techniques in the mathematics and sciences, and consequently we had to hire another teacher. This was a much younger teacher at less pay, who had accepted the position to teach mathematics and science. We were not able to fire the teacher or even transfer him or give him a different position. We found our hands, in total, bound by the fact that we could not move in the area that we wished to move.

I would say, that today in Alberta, I believe that we have a considerable number of teachers who are in the age group between 59 and 64 who should have been pensioned off a number of years ago, and it possibly would have done the province a great favour. We have today teachers that are graduating from our universities, that are coming out considerably better prepared and more capable of teaching modern sciences, modern mathematics, and we find that these teachers are not able to be placed.

They have to go into other professions, and therefore, they have spent four years in university and have come out and have no employment. And yet, we have teachers who are not capable or as well equipped as the teachers who are now arriving on the scene and are holding jobs by school boards who don't wish them to have these positions but are reluctantly tied by the strings of an organization which they can do nothing about, and they cannot hire these teachers that are better equipped to teach our children. I think we must recognize that sooner or later these people must leave this organization.

I would certainly hope that the ATA, together with the Department of Education, would start an immediate screening process to weed out these teachers that are not carrying the full load of responsibility in the classrooms. I find that in the years I have been on the school board, in one particular case I could see, out of some 285 teachers, we had something like 20 per cent of our teaching force that I would say were on the border-line of being in a classroom.

Yet the school board had no authority, no means of disposing of them and getting some of the teachers whom they would have been so delighted to get if they could only replace them. I believe the time has come to take a look at the organization, the ATA -- I think it can be worked out. I don't know if we have to go to the extreme -- but I do believe that the hon. Minister of Education, with the co-operation of the ATA and the school boards in particular, must reach a decision sooner or later.

It has to be sooner if we are going to try to save some of these teachers who are well qualified coming out of our universities, who are unable to find Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1999

a job because it almost seems it is a closed shop, because we cannot move teachers in the manner that we wish to move them. I believe a better policing job must be done by the ATA; a screening job has to be done by the Department of Education. I am totally against a screening process by their own organization. If there are borderline cases, there should be personnel in the Department of Education who could screen these people, if they are not able to produce, as all other business in this world is screened as to ability to produce.

Certainly, if we can find an employee in our organization who has a permanent job, and he knows he can’t be fired, and he can't be laid off, and he is willing to drag his feet -- industry doesn't stand for it -- why should we the people of Alberta, stand for a program whereby we have to accept teachers, and we cannot move around in the area in which the school boards wish to move.

I think every school board in this province is willing to move in a direction to upgrade the teaching ability in the classrooms; they are providing excellent materials; they are building beautiful schools; yet, are providing in some cases inferior teachers for the children of our province. I think we have to take a good hard look at the direction we wish to take. I am sorry the Minister of Education in the former government is not in his seat, because certainly this was brought about by the school authorities many years ago, and it was always frowned on because there were not sufficient teachers.

But now we have in the province, I believe, somewhere around 2,000 surplus teachers. I think we should move in that direction, to try to improve the educational standards in our classrooms. If we continue to allow the organization to stifle the Department of Education or the school board from moving in that direction, then really, what are the school boards for? They are nothing but a tool for the organization, and nothing less. I believe the school boards, in co-operation with the government and the ATA, should certainly work towards this end.

I believe the children of this province can certainly expect the best, because we have some prime teachers in this province who are not in classrooms, and will never get there unless some ways and means are found to get them into the classroom. We must try to get rid of some of these whom we do not want in our classrooms. I think that most of the school boards in convention have expressed the concern of how to move teachers who could not be moved.

I believe the time is coming when we as a government, and the Department of Education, and all three organizations should sit down and come up with a program whereby we can put the best people in our classrooms. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton Highlands. MR. KING: Mr. Deputy Speaker, in rising to take

part in the debate on the resolution, I must say that I feel a little ambiguous about it. On the one hand, I believe firmly that some kind of judgment must be exercised about the quality of the teaching which is provided to young people in the province. I think that the resolution obviously takes a step in that direction. On the other hand, I'm not sure that the resolution suggests the most efficient way of achieving the most useful kind of judgment about the quality of teaching.

Any judgment about the quality of the educational experience is necessarily going to be subjective, because it is, in its nature, the decision by an individual or by a group of individuals, about the way in which another individual, or individuals, convey things which we simply 33-26 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2000

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-27 cannot define clearly and concisely and commonly to everybody in the province. The subjectivity that is involved in a merit-pay system is the subjectivity which comes from people within the system itself. That is merit pay seems necessarily to imply the judgment of someone within the system by someone else within the system, either someone immediately superior to the teacher, that is the principal or perhaps the guidance counsellor in the school, or someone in the system but more removed from immediate knowledge of what the teacher is doing.

That might be someone at the school board level whose job it is to assess all teachers, or it might be a team or a division or a program within the Department of Education. But, in any of these cases, it is still a fact that you have judgment brought on the classroom teachers, by other people who first of all work within the system, secondly, have been trained for the system, and thirdly, are presumably dedicated to the system as it is in its general form. And this is what causes me some concern. As my brief contribution to the discussion of this resolution, I would like to suggest an alternative.

The alternative is still subjective. Its only possible merit if it has one, is that it is subjectivity that is removed from a direct relationship with the system itself.

And what I am suggesting is that we judge teachers by our system of financing education, that instead of financing education directly, that we finance the parents of children with something that might be called a tax credit, and that the parents of children, then be authorized to spend this tax credit anywhere in the province where there is, according to uniform provincial criteria, a provincially-approved school system, whether it is in a specific school building or in a church basement, whether it has certain kinds of teachers of other kinds of teachers.

I would suggest that it is possible for us to compute what the median per pupil cost of education is at any grade level, that it is possible for us to make this program a little bit more sophisticated by including extra credits for children who are certified in one way or another to have physical, mental, emotional problems or any combination of those.

But it would be possible, therefore, for us to determine how much the parents of a Grade I student would have to spend on the education of that student in the province, and they at that point would be free to spend that, where they thought that their child would receive the best education. The advantages of this seem to me to be threefold. First of all that it allows for variety. It allows for freedom of choice and freedom of conscience.

It would, for example, resolve immediately the question of support of sectarian or private schools which are teaching, using new concepts or at least different concepts of the educational process. It would allow for this freedom of choice at the consumer level, rather than at the professional educators' level. Secondly, I think that it would recognize quality of instruction.

The decision by parents as to where they place their children for education would be based on the judgment of the parents, perhaps as the children were older it would be based on the judgment of the parents in consultation with their children, perhaps at some point it would be based on the children themselves, as to the kind and the quality of instruction that they wanted in terms of social or moral standards, in terras of the clarity and the consistancy of the communication within the educational experience and in terms of the relevance of the educational experience to the real world in which they live.

I think the third advantage of this would be that it would make the educational experience immediately reflective of the values and the standards of society. I cannot help but feel that the kind of educational system we presently have is -- to some extent at least -- Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2001

33-28 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 isolated from the real world in which we live and that -- to some extent at least -- it lags behind the values and the standards of society at large. I think that the freedom of choice, which would be provided by the opportunity for parents yearly to change the focus of the instruction of their children would make the educational system more immediately reflective of society; it would reduce what has been referred to in sociology as the cultural lag of the educational system.

Now it is a fact that possible disadvantage is that it would encourage teachers to pander to the current interests of children or of adults. It would encourage teachers to say and to teach that which is currently popular. I would say that that's a possibility. I would also say, that based on my experience within our present educational system, that to a certain extent at least, that exists right now. I would also say that this is a system which has been used in the past. And that while there have been educators who have pandered to the current interests of the society, there have also been exceptions.

This was the method of education current at the time of Socrates -- Socrates was this kind of a teacher. Socrates made a contribution -- the age in which he lived made a contribution to our development in spite of the fact that there were also bad teachers at that time who said what they thought society wanted them to say, and did what they thought society wanted them to do. The universities at the time of the life of Sir Francis Bacon operated almost without exception in this manner. The students went to the classes and paid the professors that they wanted to pay.

They didn't pay the university, they weren't put into courses by the university and Sir Francis Bacon lived during that time which we call the age of enlightenment; at a time when this was the kind of education which was available to the population. Very recently, during the lifetime of many of the people in this Assembly, Frank Lloyd Wright, a well-known architect, charged students $1,000 for the privilege of living with him in his community for one year.

In addition to paying him $1,000 they had to pay all their own living expenses; they had to chop wood for his fireplace, and they had to act in the plays which he wrote and directed -- which I think makes it a considerably higher payment than $1,000 annually. But the fact of the matter is that consistently through history this kind of thing has been done.

It has not been done during ages of an inward-looking society; it has not been done during times of weakness, or at least it appears to me that this was not the case; it appears rather that this kind of opportunity was offered during an age of the expansion and the development of the cultural understanding of societies to the world around them. I think, in view of that, in view of the rapid change that we're going through in our own society, in view of our real desire to measure the quality of the education that we're getting that this is one alternative that may be considered. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon.

Member for Calgary North Hill please. MR. FARRAN: I was most interested in the speech by the hon. Member for Edmonton Highlands. I had thought from what he had said the other day that he believed in cutting education costs by a different form of cutting operations on the parents. I am generally in favour of the motion. It concerns a topic which is one on the lips of many people throughout the province. First there is a concern over the high and expanding cost of Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2002

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-29 education. There is no need to repeat the statistics that show that education is absorbing the lion's share of the provincial and municipal budget. The concern is not only over projections which show that if the current expansion of school budgets is not slowed down they will soon absorb all the resources available to the state. Clearly a determination has to be made and soon as to what percentage of our gross provincial product it is proper to spend on education.

But people are also concerned that they are getting the full dollar value for the dollar spent on education, that the proper benefits are being received for the expensive system we have set up.

I am reminded in this context of that little nursery rhyme about the little pigs -- you know when you count the baby's toes -- "This little pig went to market; this little pig stayed at home; this little pig had roast beef; this little pig had none; and this little pig went wee wee wee all the way home." Well the first two big toes, I think, are definitely education and health and I am afraid the rest of the state services will soon be represented by the little toes on the other side of the foot. Because the big toes will soon be taking all the milk Mother Alberta has to spare for her litter.

Some 70 per cent of all school costs are attributable to salary. Teachers are highly organized -- what has become more of a trade union than a professional organization. Their union takes every tactical advantage of the splintered jurisdictions of the local school boards, playing off one against the other. And their members are extremely aware of the wage gains made in the other sort of splintered jurisdictions of local government where various civic unions compete with each other for the property tax dollar.

A teacher is just as conscious of the wages paid to a policeman or a fireman as he is to wages paid to other people, or to other teachers. The teacher is also conscious of the prestige attached to his profession -- a prestige he tends to measure in dollars. Of course teachers are aware of the important part they play in molding a nation. And I'm not suggesting there isn't a proper amount of dedication to duty in the teaching profession, because obviously there is.

But it's true that at the same time teachers subscribe to all the principles of the trade union, the closed shop, the discipline of the strike call, all the other actions used by unions to support wage demands. They become very impatient with citizens who complain about rising costs and they argue that nothing is too much to pay for a high standard of education, such a very important field, which will reap its own rewards.

They find it impossible to put themselves in the minds of, say, the citizens of a small town where the wealthiest citizen is, perhaps, the manager of the local co-op store and perhaps gets a maximum salary of about $9,000 a year. The average income in a small town would be less than $5,000 a year. They just can't understand that there could be any resentment of the pretty little teacher in the mini-skirt who comes out from the city into a subsidized house and gets a salary of $10,500 a year and looks down on the local inhabitants.

They just can't understand why there is resentment then of rising wages and rising cost of education. They resent the municipal councils who resist school budgets in the name of the beleagured property owners. To them this is the attitude of a reactionary -- prehistoric, narrow-minded, ignorant. To the teacher, there is something almost criminal in the present policy of requiring the school costs above a certain level be submitted to plebiscite.

But at the same time, having said all that, there are many dedicated teachers -- and I have some evidence here to prove it -- many dedicated teachers who believe that there should be some fair and unbiased method of assessing the quality of education received for the dollars that are spent. In the current issue of the ATA magazine, there are several articles on accountability. There is one by Mr. K. W. Bride. He ends on a note of cynicism, generally in Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2003

33-30 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 supporting the accountability principle, but he ends with these words: "I contend that teachers will then react positively and enthusiastically if there is any indication that they will share in the development of a constructive approach for critical examination of school systems. It is not that I am optimistic about the possibility of school authorities suddenly going overboard to implement comprehensive meaningful assessment schemes.

I must report that my reading of the accountability barometer indicates that the strong vocal whims have subsided to cautious whispers in all but a few remote regions. The educational climate in this regard is expected to return rapidly to its normal unsettled state." Well, one of the recognitions is that teaching ability doesn't necessarily come with a degree. Now one of the most vocal directions from which this pressure comes for an assessment of the system, is from the students themselves. And the trend began in our universities, three or four years ago.

I think we make a mistake if we think that students are not aware that the huge expansion after the war led Canadian universities to grant tenure to professors who may not have been of first-class quality. They are aware now that the supply of university professors exceeds demand but there is no room at the top because of the tenure system.

They are irritated - - from my reading of students' newspapers -- at the number of foreign professors with an inadequate knowledge of English, who may be excellent for general research, may really be very intelligent and very well qualified, but are not always the best teachers for imparting their learning to students. In our schools we've been through one experimental phase after another. There was a time when the Alberta system had been bitten by extreme Deweyism.

There was a time when phonetics were out; there was a time when phonetics were in; there was a time when one brand of new math was taught and that was out; and now there is another brand of new math. There was a time just a few years ago when they bought a textbook written by some professor in B.C. for teaching English by numbers. The emphasis goes to the enterprise system, to the materials research system and then back again. There is emphasis on open schools and then there is a little bit of reaction back to traditional teaching in a closed classroom.

Examinations are out -- now they are in -- now they are out again -- grades are out -- then they are in, there is marking on a curve. There is a change in the form of reports the parents receive once every three or four years. Good old Alberta is always experimenting and always innovating in the field of education. Seldom has the system been measured against other systems; either in Canada, North America, or elsewhere in the English speaking world, or even against other systems in the province, one board against the other.

Now I don't believe that there is any way of measuring the competency of a teacher by the judgment of another teacher -- another teacher alone. The only way is to measure the output to the students. Even then, in order to be fair, to do it over a broad cross-section of students over a reasonable period of time and to make allowances for local peculiarities, such as the class size or the type of school or the region. There were many advantages and many reasons why one used to have the examination system of evaluation.

It could be done by an unbiased examiner at a distance and some cost but personality considerations were not present and the tests could be reasonably uniform. The education establishment now -- and it is acknowledged by the government -- really the pressure comes largely for psychological reasons. Everybody now frowns upon examination. So we have to fall back on some version of the ancient method of the travelling inspector, who will of course, be subject to human failings, occasional bias, and Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2004

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-31 occasional considerations of personality, and the way he perhaps implements set tests that are laid down at a departmental level. Even here, a fair system of appraisal will be difficult because standards are not uniform throughout the province. Until we get comprehensive manuals on a provincial level which give guidance on such things as teacher-pupil ratio, what support materials there should be in a school, there can be no uniform, fair approach. Under the present system, a hard-pressed school district with a narrow tax base may be able to afford less than a wealthier area.

I have quite a bit of evidence here to this effect from a teacher in the riding of my friend from Pincher Creek-Crowsnest. She also comes from my riding but this is where she worked. She is a music teacher, who has a fantastic record. As you all know, there is a great symphony orchestra out at Pincher Creek, and this is a very famous area of Alberta for music.

This lady co-ordinated all the music of Lundbreck, Pincher Creek, and so on -- had a big record at the school festival -- she had been laid off, not because she was a poor teacher, not because she failed to produce results -- because she did produce results -- but because the school board figured they had to keep to a 25:1, 26:1 teacher pupil ratio, so they laid off teachers to stay within the 6 per cent increase factor.

This, of course, this business of equating everything with a narrow tax base, contravenes the principle of equality of opportunity for all Albertans, even if it does underline that other principle that everyone is so keen on, of local autonomy and decentralization. Next year, the province intends to assume a larger share of the costs of education. Without so much constraint, the desire to avoid increasing mill rates, there may be even a greater tendency for the education establishment to live beyond the means of the province. There must be a new formula, new guide-lines, new directions.

Certainly there will be some areas still left to supplementary requisition, but there will be even a greater need for evaluation, cost benefit studies, for making sure that we get dollar value for dollars spent. The supply of qualified teachers now exceeds demand. Those who are employed usually get an annual increment of around 4 per cent a year, plus whatever percentage increase the union manages to negotiate. So what is sometimes announced as a 6 per cent increase for teachers, is often a 10 per cent increase when you add in the 4 per cent increment.

That is why it was so very difficult to live within the 6 per cent flexibility factor. There will be a need to replace the present plan for mandatory plebicites. After exhaustion of the 6 per cent increase with the flexibility factor spread over three years, and the three years comes to an end this year. The limit has just about been reached for the increasing of teacher-pupil ratios, the laying-off of teachers, the reorganization within the system. There has to be an alternative. In industry, as the hon. Member for Drayton Valley pointed out, annual increments are not automatic.

Increments are only awarded if management is satisfied with the employee's productivity. It's common practice, unless it's specified in the work contract, that increments are occasionally postponed because of poor performance. Merit, rather than seniority, prevails at salaried levels throughout industry. It's only in the field of day labour, where hourly rates are specified in a short term union contract, that you get these universal increases for various classifications across the board. You don't usually get it for the salaried staff personnel in corporations.

These are some of the considerations, and I've only spoken in this debate because I know we've got to face up to this problem before 1973. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2005

33-32 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 DR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words, just for two or three minutes. I speak today as a parent, primarily, although I've had the privilege and honour of being involved in the profession of medicine -- I re-emphasize that I speak as a parent. I would like to mention a few items that I think should be considered by the Assembly. The consideration would be firstly, who would measure, or who would be applying this merit system for the teachers? Are they a lay group, a professional group, the peer group themselves, or students?

Another consideration, the merit system itself in principle, I'm afraid, would cause undue stress on our teachers. Why? Because I feel that it would result in overconcern for the teachers to actually show their competence and worse than that, I feel that probably the teachers may very well show off their competence. I think it would cause undue stress to those people who are involved in the assessment themselves, because in fact, it is subjective, and any subjective measurement is very, very difficult. However, with these concerns, I quickly make some qualifications and I would like to congratulate the hon.

Member for Drayton Valley and the hon. Member for Lacombe who moved the resolution. I feel that it is a worthwhile resolution and as a parent again, I feel very strongly that we should have some sort of merit system in our province for our teachers, despite the difficulty I have just mentioned. I feel very strongly about this, but I feel even more strongly that the merit system is a necessity. I don't think you can draw an analogy, as the hon. Member for Lacombe has stated, that the medical profession, there are doctors who earn more money because, in fact, this must be a merit system.

It is a merit system in quantity, not necessarily in quality, although it can be both. This is not truly a merit system, because it is not monitored by anybody outside unless you monitor dollars and cents alone.

So that when we speak of a merit system, we must consider not only quantity of teaching, and I feel this is important because many teachers are involved in increased quantity of workload, and this should be measured -- and easily measured -- and this should be compensated accordingly right now; but also the quality of teaching which is more important, and undoubtedly the most important deserves special merit. There's no doubt about it that after graduation the quality of teaching is measured by dolalrs and cents to some degree. But it is even more important that the quality is measured on an ongoing basis.

This is the most difficult portion of this merit system, although I support it in principle as I have stated. Now how can we measure this? I have indicated before, it could be measured either by the people, by the students themselves -- and I suspect that the students being a gauge at the lower grades is very difficult -- or by the peer groups. I would support that the peer groups, the profession, in fact, do this monitoring.

But let us have a sustem whereby the profession themselves should expose to the citizens concerned, and it's clearly understood what kind of a system they are going to use, that is the profession themselves. Another additional item would be that the lay people in the community not only should understand what merit system the professional group is using, but should be allowed to have an input regarding that system on a yearly basis. The citizen should know whether this input is being acted on or not acted on. These are my comments. Thank you.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2006

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-33 MR. TOPOLNISKY: Mr. Speaker, the motion asks that the government give consideration to the establishing of a merit-pay system for teachers. In this it has merit. I'm sure this government will always be open to new ideas, and even to old ones in new disguises. The motion, however, has in it an error, in that it equates differential staffing and merit pay. Differential or differentiating staffing, as it is usually called, is aimed at the most effective organization and deployment of school staffs according to the tasks and functions involved in educating children.

I understand that such organizations are currently being used in numerous schools in Alberta on an experimental basis -- Bishop Carroll, Calgary Separate School Board, Edmonton Public School Board, Lethbridge Public School Board, are examples. These trials will be evaluated and the government will, no doubt, have access to all the information regarding their value in improving the quality of education. The merit pay proposals had been given a great deal of consideration throughout North America in the last 15 years. They have cost a great deal of time and money.

Their findings are available, and therefore certainly do not need to be repeated. The most recent report (1971), an extensive study of the Metropolitan Toronto School Boards is also available. Its recommendations may be need to be repeated. A most recent 1971, an extensive study of the metropolitan Toronto school boards on this matter, are also available. Its recommendations may be equally applicable to Alberta. The American experience is that such plans are abandoned shortly after they are begun. They are based on the assumption that there have to be on our staffs some less than competent teachers.

But we find it is similar in other professions. I believe that all our teachers should have special competence, energy and ability. I note that the Alberta Teachers' Association is proposing some steps towards achieving this objective, through the competence proposals it approved at its recent Annual Representative Assembly. A great deal more could be said about the results of all the merit-pay attempts, but in essence the experience is that we already know they are extremely costly to operate; they do not work; and they do nothing to improve the quality of education. MR.

SPEAKER: Would the hon. minister wish to conclude shortly with the leave of the House, or would he prefer to adjourn the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: Does the House agree that the hon. minister may conclude? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. TOPOLNISKY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The resolution proposes expenditure of a large sum of money. A similar investigation cost $1 million in Utah several years ago, on a matter which has already been dealt with exhaustively. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2007

33-34 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 With every type of professional job at a premium these days, the natural law of survival of the fittest will surely be the best leveller, without expense and without openly labelling our fellow-man as first-, second-, and third-rate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. LEE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to adjourn the debate. MR. SPEAKER: Has the hon. member leave to adjourn the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: PUBLIC BILLS AND ORDERS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT ORDERS [Second Reading] Bill No. 202

An Act to Amend the Election Act MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I move Bill No. 202 for second reading. In addressing my remarks to second reading on this bill, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the members of this Assembly will concentrate on the two principles in the bill, discussion of the philosophy of these points, rather than getting bogged down discussing the various details which, if the bill passes second reading, we can discuss in a more detailed way in committee. The first major principle in the bill is the concept that election expenses should be limited. It is my submission, Mr.

Speaker, that it is important in a democratic society that all political points of view should have, as much as possible, equal access to public opinion. The lack of control over the expenditures in an election campaign can lead to a great inequality in the right of political organizations to make their case before the people of the province or the country. It is a known fact that there is a great disparity in election budgets. Let me cite an example from the last federal campaign, the riding of Calgary South, the winning candidate spent just under $50,000.

By comparison his New Democratic opponent managed to gather together some $635. Now frankly, without being too concerned about the inequality in that particular case, the fact is that a real disparity exists and, as a consequence, it is important to look at legislation which places some reasonable upper limit on the expenditures in modern political campaigns. This is even more important, Mr.

Speaker, because of the fact that today election campaigning is becoming increasingly expensive -- the public media, television, radio, newspapers, indeed the professional advertising agencies and the great amount of work and professional advice which is increasingly necessary in order to mount a successful modern campaign. All cost a good deal of money. Nell, frankly, in many respects I think that perhaps there is a tendency in our society to place too great an emphasis on this type of election campaigning.

I for one would like to get back to the good old days when we had public meetings, and I am going to say something about that later. But the point that must be made here is that modern campaign techniques are extremely expensive, and that when you have an election campaign for one political point of view, have enough funds to take advantage of all the modern techniques and yet another Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2008

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-35 political point of view isn't sufficiently funded, you have the kind of disparity that I talked about a moment ago. Mr. Speaker, one of the principal reasons for limiting election expenses is that, in my view, it would force political parties to move away from what I claim to be an over-dependence on the public media and to get back to the kind of participatory campaigning which to me is basic to the whole democratic process. We all know that the media campaigns make it much easier for politicans today than 40 or 50 years ago.

When the United Farmers of Alberta, first won in this province in 1921, it was as a result of a campaign from one end of Alberta to the other, by people like the late Robert Gardner, William Irving, many others I could name who cris-crossed this province and addressed public meetings -- public meetings where they found themselves under fire from those people who differed from their particular political views. Similiarly in 1935, when the Social Credit party was successful, again if we look at the record of the 1935 campaign and the years leading up to that campaign, we find that the late Mr.

Aberhart and many of the leading figures in the Social Credit party took their case to the people of Alberta in the kind of atmosphere where the people could talk back, It is not easy, Mr. Speaker, to talk back to a television screen, But in the public meeting setting, it involves the give and take which to me is so essential if we are going to have a public opinion which is aware of what's going on and a democracy which is based on citizen participation. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think the need to limit election expenses is, in my submission, a pretty strong one.

Let me go on to discuss the second major principle in this bill, namely that political parties should disclose the source of their contributions. In discussing this principle it's important as I view it that we recognize that a political party is not essentially a private organization in the sense that perhaps a Lions Club is, or an Elks Club or a Women's Auxiliary of the United Church in a particular community -- these organizations which are largely private in nature. Therefore it's up to the members of these organizations where they get their money and how they spend it, and so on.

But a political party is quite different. A political party is a group of people who are asking their fellow citizens to entrust them with the responsibility of governing. As a consequence, a political party is really a public organization. As a consequence, Mr. Speaker, it's my submission that the public has a right to know. If government is going to be accountable, the public has a right to know who is putting up the money, for whatever political party may be running.

I also claim and I'm going to be reading from the Barbeau Report, which was commissioned by the federal government -- I also claim that the reporting of political contributions would have a cleansing affect on the whole political process. I'm not submitting, Mr. Speaker, that the major scandals that we know from reading Canadian history -- the CPR scandal that rocked the first government of Sir John A. MacDonald, or the Beauharnois scandal that was a major political scandal in the early 1930's -- is typical of what is going on, because I don't really believe they are.

But I do submit that political contributions -- while they may not act in a corrupt sense - - often have a very influential effect on determining the course of government's action. We have, for example, the statements made by Rene Levesque, who was a member of the Liberal Cabinet in Quebec between the years 1960 - 1966, who made it quite clear, Mr. Speaker, that, in his view, the large contributors had a good deal of indirect influence on the course followed by that government. Mr.

Speaker, the point that I think must be made is that there is really no way of judging, because without full disclosures of where political parties acquire their funds, the public -- which is concerned -- isn't in a position to amass the type of information necessary to find out whether undue influence has taken place. This, Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2009

33-36 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 Mr. Speaker, is one of the reasons why I submit the disclosing of political contributions would have a cleansing effect on the whole process of government. I use the words "cleansing effect", Mr. Speaker, because this was a phrase used over and over again in the American Congress which, as some of the hon. members may know, recently passed a piece of legislation which embraced the principle that I am enunciating now. Mr.

Speaker, one of the most serious arguments against the disclosing of political contributions is one which, quite frankly troubled me at first, and I think troubles all of us somewhat, and will this not infringe on the right to anonymity on the part of the individual donor? Mr. Speaker, I think that you eliminate this by setting some sort of reasonable ceiling - we can argue what that ceiling might be. I say $50 in this bill. The American Congress has set a figure of $100. You might say it to be $500 or $1000. But I think you eliminate the vast majority of cases by setting a reasonable ceiling.

I acknowledge, however, that there may be a problem -- the donor who, for quite legitimate reasons, wants to make a donation of over that ceiling and who is doing it for perfectly legitimate reasons. But, Mr. Speaker, I submit that in most cases we are not really talking about a restriction on human liberty because in most cases it is a matter of convenience. And if it is a matter of convenience then I don't think there's too strong a case.

But I acknowledge that there will, however, be some small number of people who will be legitimately denied the right to make contributions of a somewhat larger figure than prescribed in this bill. Well then, how do you justify enforcing disclosure? I think in the final analysis we must weigh the rights of the many to know; the rights of the many to have a government which is truly accountable on one hand against the right of a few to give anonomous donations over a specific ceiling. Mr.

Speaker, quite frankly, one of our responsibilities as we go through the process of determining priorities and passing legislation is to, perhaps, make value judgments and to balance the rights of individuals. It might be nice if we lived in a kind of simple society where we had black and white issues before us but, frankly, in this case it's not a black and white issue. And I think in the final analysis the overwhelming importance of the general public's right to know supercedes the interest of what might be a group of ten or 20 or 50 or 100 people who might otherwise come in this category. Mr.

Speaker, the reason that I submitted this bill is not just because it happens to be a viewpoint I hold very strongly but I think I should point out to the hon. members in this House that we already have a report commissioned by the federal government. It is called the Barbeau Report and it was tabled in the House of Commons in 1966. I would like to outline the members of that commission, Mr. Speaker, for the interest of the House. The Chairman, Mr. Alphonse Barbeau from Montreal, a lawyer, who was the chairman of the committee; Mr. Gordon R.

Dryden, a lawyer and secretary-treasurer of the Liberal Federation of Canada; Mr. N. J. Coldwell, former national leader of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation; Mr. Arthur R. Smith, a business man from Calgary and a man who the hon. members across the way will know has a least more than a fleeting acquaintance with the Conservative Party; and Dr. Norman Hard of Saskatoon, an author and professor of political science at the University of Saskatchwan. Mr. Speaker, the Barbeau Commission examined the whole question of political financing in Canada and discussed the various matters that I have raised today.

In this report it based its recommendations on a number of important assumptions and I am going to read these assumptions into the record of our Legislature because I think they are worth noting: Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2010

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-37 1. Political parties should be legally recognized and through the doctrine of agency made legally responsible for their actions in raising and spending funds. 2. A degree of financial equality should be established among candidates and among political parties by the extension of certain services and subsidies to all who qualify. 3. An effort should be made to increase public participation in politics by broadening the base of political contributions by tax concessions to donors. 4.

Cost of election campaigns should be reduced by shortening the campaign period by placing limitations on expenditures on mass media by candidates and parties, and by prohibiting the payment of poll workers on election day. 5. Public confidence in political financing should be strengthened by requiring candidates and parties to disclose their incomes and expenditures. 6. A registry under the supervision of a registrar should be established to audit and publish the financial reports required, and to enforce the provisions of the proposed Election and Political Finances Act. I might point out, Mr.

Speaker, that in reviewing the recommendations of the Barbeau Report, the Report also said that in the event that the spirit of this legislation was not lived up to, and that if it was broken, that the penalty would be forfeiture of a seat in precisely the same way as I have enunciated in the bill, because I think that if we don't have reasonable penalties outlined in the legislation, all we are doing is engaging in

an act of window- dressing. I want to quote from the Barbeau Report dealing with the issue that I talked about a moment ago, namely the disclosures of election finances because this is something which I know concerns, quite legitimately, a number of the members in this House, and I quote from the report. "Disclosure would assist in educating the public on the need for involvement in the financing of the legitimate though high campaign expenses required in an increasingly complex political system. Disclosure also has a cleansing effect on politics and acts indirectly to reduce campaign expenditures.

The committee was told that no candidates or parties would attempt to buy an election if the public were made aware of their tactics. The committee also heard that the fear of public disapproval as a result of disclosure would reduce the possibility of a wealthy candidate overpowering his opponents by the sheer weight of money. Disclosure, the committee was urged, would reduce the mystery surrounding political influence and perhaps elevate the image of political parties and politicians.

On the other hand, the committee was told that disclosure is an invasion of privacy and a breach of the principle of the secret ballot since a person would be presumed normally to vote for the candidate or party he supported financially. It was also suggested that the publication of a donor's contribution would subject him to embarrassment from his associates, his employer, and adherents of other political parties. It was argued that a person should be protected from these consequences on the same grounds that are used to support the secret ballot.

It was also argued before the committee that a financial contribution is not the same as the privilege of the secret ballot, but an attempt to influence the votes or opinions of others and thus a public act. Electors are consequently entitled to know who is attempting to use financial resources to bring influence on their decision." Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2011

33-38 ALBERTA HANSARD April 20th 1972 Then, Mr. Speaker, the report balances both the arguments and says: "The argument both pro and against disclosure have merit, but in the minds of the committee members the need for meaningful disclosure and reporting appears vital if any controls are to be introduced. Therefore in spite of the obvious shortcomings in the present disclosure law, the committee is encouraged to retain the principle as it applies to candidates and extend it to cover political parties." So said the Barbeau Report tabled in the House of Commons in 1966. Mr.

Speaker, other provinces in Canada have attempted various types of election reforms. In the Province of Manitoba the government there has introduced legislation which has put a limit on the amount that can be spent by individual candidates and by the central offices of the political parties of that province. In the Province of Quebec, legislation has been introduced which goes somewhat farther than I can in this bill. It allows for public subsidy.

I personally favour this kind of approach, but because that would involve a money bill it is not within the purview of a private member to introduce that kind of legislation. Similarly in the Province of Nova Scotia, the former Conservative government in Nova Scotia introduced election reform legislation and I'm not sure of the exact figures, but on the basis of the number of votes polled by parties in the election in riding by riding that a certain public subsidy is paid. This is not done on a provincial basis but it is done on a constituency basis.

So there is some precedent elsewhere in Canada in other provinces, Mr. Speaker, for this type of legislation, or at least the principle of this type of legislation. I think that it is also worth noting that in the United States, the Congress just several weeks ago finally passed

an act which really does the two major things that this bill I'm introducing spells out, namely it limits the amount that political parties can spend. For example, in a presidential election the limit, as I understand it, is ten cents per voter for the presidential election. The other part of the legislation, Mr. Speaker, is that it forces the disclosure of every contribution over $100. Frankly, there are some people who say that I tend to be a little anti-American on occasion. I don't really think that is true, but I think that there are many things that we can learn from the great Republic to the south of us.

Quite frankly, the action that Congress has taken this year is one we would do well to follow. May I say, Mr. Speaker, that if the men who are running for the presidency of the United States -- the highest elective office in the world -- can accept this kind of legislation, who are we in the Alberta Legislature to resist it? I also say, Mr. Speaker, that it is interesting to note that Mr.

McGovern -- the man who some reporters argue is, if not the leading contender, at least a candidate who has come from obscurity to the point where he is one of the major contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination in the United States -- was the first man to disclose who contributed campaign funds. He disclosed every contribution, all the way from one gentleman who had given him $25,000 down to a young man in California who was attending, I think, junior high school and had contributed something like $2 to the McGovern campaign.

Frankly, I think Senator McGovern's approach in this respect is laudible, certainly one consistent with the new American legislation, and one which I believe shows a pretty sound Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 2012

April 20th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 33-39 regard for the public's right to know, and for the need of all public officials to be accountable. So, Mr. Speaker, I think the two principles that I have outlined are essentially sound and I would ask the hon. members of this Assembly to seriously consider the merit of the points I have made. MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker. . . MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton Strathcona, I believe, was on his feet first. MR. KOZIAK: Mr.

Speaker, when I first viewed the bill presented to this House -- Bill No. 202 -- the explanatory notes which are provided with the bill somewhat amused me, because here I expected to find another bill based on that old myth that established wealth unfairly influences elections. My approach to the bill was then based on the explanatory remarks. I must point out that some of the remarks made by the hon. member presenting the bill, in his presentation of the bill, were of course, good remarks -- well taken -- and some of my thoughts on the bill have been tempered as a result of these remarks.

I also view, with interest, the remarks of my learned friend for the Spirit River-Fairview constituency in connection with his adoration -- if I may call it that -- of that great Republic to the south and the decisions made by the supreme head of that government. I trust that his feelings in that regard will be somewhat tempered when he joins me on the committee dealing with foreign investment. AN HON. MEMBER: We'

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19720420
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L17 S1 19720420 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	c9b7dac32a7ebaa6a46e0a0559fe962d1849f80d

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