March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 555 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 1:30 p.m. Date: 2003/03/18 [The Speaker in the chair] head : Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray . O Lord, w e give thanks f or the bounty of our province: our land, our re sources, a nd our people. W e pledg e ourselves to act as good stewards on behalf of all Albertans. Amen. Please be seated. head : Introduction of G uests Mr. Doerksen: Mr. Speaker, it gives me a g reat deal of plea sure today to introduce to you and through you a true friend of Alberta.

In Sep tember 2000 the curre nt Minister of Environm ent with Innovation and Scienc e on an annual trip visit ed Silicon V alley where the departm ent has fac ilitated the interact ion of Al berta technology companies with i nvestors, mentors, and cus tomers in California. Mr. Nissley was t he first California angel investor t o work with us, and we now have over 60 investors working with the Alberta/California venture channel. Mr. Nissley is responsible for another first as he and his partner Frances Chang have invested in an Alberta company, the first Californian in the venture channel to do so.

May I introduce to the House Hal and Juanita Nissley and Edgar and Frances Chang fr om Los Altos Hi lls, Calif ornia. The y are accompanied by Ran dy Thom pson, board m ember of the A l- berta/California venture channel, and David Antoniuk, director of research and technology commercialization with the Department of Innovation and Science. They are seated in the members’ gallery, and I’d ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Children’s Services. Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s such an honour today to introduce a young lady fr om Aus tria, Lisi Aichinger, who is he re with Dennis Pommen, a Rotarian in Sherwood Park. She has been an exchange student on a program here for almost a year. It will be a year in July, and then she ’ll go back to Austria. But s omething remarkable that we should all pay attention t o: she’s been in high school at Bev Facey, but when she started her tutorial as a student, she studied English for seven years, Latin for five years, Spanish for three years, and Russi an for a year so far. What a n international student of absolute world acclaim.

I’d ask our speci al guest, Lisi, and Dennis Pommen to please rise and the Assembly to give them a warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Lund: Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker. It giv es me a grea t deal of pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to the House a group of ei ght very c aring a nd compassionate people, funeral directors from around the p rovince. T heir nam es are G erald Connelly, Ron Smith, LeeAnne Snodgrass-Allen, Ken Papirny, Pat Wisener, and, from my hometown of Rock y, Gordon and Diane Flinn.

They’re seated in the members’ gallery, and I would ask them to rise so we could give them the traditional warm welcome of the House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-West. Ms Kryczk a: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I am very delighted t o introduce to you and t hrough you t o this Assembly this afternoon Jeannie Morrison. Jeannie has been a Calgarian and a constituent of Calgary-West for five years. She lives in the community of Coach Hill, and she came to Calgary via Vancouver and Nova Scotia. She is presently extern al aff airs m anager f or the we st for W yeth Pharmaceuticals.

I would a sk Jeannie to rise and rece ive a warm welcome from this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and thr ough you to a ll members in the Assembly today 59 visitors from Holy Family Catholic school. It’s one of my favourite schools because that’s where my children w ent. Today they a re accompanied by teachers Mrs. Caroline Lepps, Ms Colette Coumont and student teacher Mrs. Alison Tymchak and teacher assistant Mrs. Marta Molnar. Parent helpers today are Mrs. Brenda Manning, Mrs. Joan Walters, and Mr.

Scott Vickery. I would ask that they all please stand now and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assem- bly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I hav e two in troductions today. The first introduction – and I’m very pleased to introduce this group – is a group of five students and their teacher from Inner City high school. Inner City hig h was f ounded in 1993 and as sists students to find success in high school and to move on to employ- ment. They’re accompanied by their teacher, Mr. Tim Christopher- son.

I would ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. My s econd introduction to day, Mr. Speaker, is Mr. William Newhouse, the director of Poverty in Action, a group who advocates for low- income earners who are facing severe financial hardships. I would ask Mr. Newhouse to rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Learning. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to rise today to introduce to you and through you the assistant to the U of A board of governors, Louise Shulko.

As well, she is accompanied by an assistant from my office, Ms Neris Valle. I would ask both of them to stand and receive th e warm welcome of the Legi slative Assembly. head : Oral Quest ion Peri od Energy Prices Dr. Nicol: Mr. Speaker, today some Albertans will receive their third successive skyrocketing natural gas bill but still will not recei ve protection from price spikes that this government promised during the last election.

In October 2001 the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board ruled that utility companies co uld no t employ hedging to protect their customers from volatile prices because this government already had legislation in place to protect Albertans. To the Premier: will the Premier please explain how – and I quote f rom the EUB – consumers’ interests are adequately protected by the Natural G as Price Protection Act, end quote, when the price of gas is over $9 and consumers are not receiving any protection? Mr. Klein: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the price of natural gas is determined by the market, and Albertans pay no differently than people in New

556 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 York or people in Minnesota or people in Ontario or Quebec. It’s a market determination, although most of the gas, of course, is under our feet here in Alberta. Still, market forces prevail just like they do for any other commodity. Now, relative to the role of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board they make sure that any application for a rate increase is based on solid evidence relative to the need for such an increase, and members of the public a nd intereste d groups are invited to i ntervene, Mr. Speaker.

I don’t kno w what the procedure is, but the hon. leader certainly can make application to become an intervenor if he thinks that the rate increase being applied for is too extreme. Relative to the intricacies of the hon. member’s question I’ll have the hon. minister respond. Dr. Nicol: Again to the Premier: by allowing flow-through pricing, are the gove rnment and the EUB not s entencing Alber tans to the most volatile of pricing systems? Mr. Klein: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’ll have the hon. Minister of Energy supplement because he is more closely associated with the issue. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Smith: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. Indeed, the flow-thr ough pricing is something that Albertans have been use d to fo r many years. There are now increasingly more commercial entities that will be able to deliver appropriate contracts that will mirror Alberta’s consumption habi ts. For example, if you’re a re sidential home- owner, you’ll use about 45 perc ent of your natural g as during the period of December through March. If you’re a greenhouse, you’ll use 60 percent of your fuel through January, February, and March. So, in fact , these dif ferent market condit ions exist all acros s the province.

The structure of the legislation, that I don’t want to talk about because it is in fr ont of the House, will in fact deliver these types of alternatives easily and in an understandable fashion for all Albertans to get what they w ant from ener gy and el ectricity pur- chases. Do they want the best price? Do they want to have the level of pricing so that they can predict what they’ll pay? Do they want an equa lized p ayment plan? T hese are the type s of choic es and options that Albertans will have before them with the passage of Bill 3 and Bill 19. 1:40 Dr.

Nicol: Again to the Premier: why does the gove rnment have a monthly model for price determination yet a yearly model for price protection? Mr. Klein: Again, Mr. Speaker, the hon. minister is more intimately involved with thes e procedure s and these issues. I’ll have him respond. Mr. Smith: Well, Mr. Speaker, with respect I would correct the hon. member’s asserti on in the questi on because, in fact , the ye arly average annual price i s based on the monthly prices on w hich we collect our royalty.

Of course, w e spend money in a budgeted fashion throughout the year, and then for a rebate to take place, we need that time based on monthly prices for the money to come in to the government so that a gas rebate cou ld be pai d if the average annual price exceeded $5.50. Dr. Nicol: In 2003 the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board approved a flow-through option for ATCO electricity customers. This is the same pricing model that has created unstable and uncertain natural gas prices for Albertans.

To the Premier: why does this government want to have the same i nstability and uncertainty in the electricity market that you have had in the natural gas market? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, the whole purpose of deregulation is not to create uncertainty and instability. It’s done to create competition and to bring more power onstream, and that, indeed, has happened. We see many cogeneration projects, new coal-fired projects now coming onstream, more wind power now coming onstream.

As this thing settles down, market conditions will prevail and people, as they are now starting to realiz e, can ge t some deals that will st abilize an d provide some certainty to the power prices they pay. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Smit h: Thank y ou very much. I just do wan t to add that Albertans have purchased electricity and they have purchased natural gas on a flow -through rate ever since the first kilowa tt-hour was generated and ever since the fi rst cubic foot of gas was sold. It’s called spot-rate pricing.

T his is ex actly the familiar territory that Albertans have been in and exactly the reason why they want to see Bill 19 and Bill 3 passed: so that they can employ these options. If you’re on a fixed income and you want to know what your payment is going to be on a 12-month period, you’ll be able to take advantage of that. Mr. Speaker, these are market forces tied in with a compas- sion for those who are on fixed incomes and those seniors as well as being able to deliver the maximum amount of choice and benefit to Albertans. Dr.

Nicol: To the Minister of Energy: will the minister commit to having the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board review their decision not to allow price protection by Alberta companies so that Alberta natural gas and electricity co mpanies can provide some consumer protection that your government won’t provide? Mr. Smith: Will we tell the m to do som ething in ca se somebody else doesn’t do something so that if they can do something, then it would protect somebody else? Mr. Speaker, the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board has worked in the responsible domain of all Alber- tans since its inception.

It works in the public interest. It goes out; it holds hearings. Those hearings are open. Those are transparent hearings. They’re transcripted decisions; they’re recorded decisions. The EUB has a 50-year plus record of operating in the public interest of all Albertans. Dr. Nicol: To the Premier: is it the government’s policy here not to have the Albe rta Ene rgy and Utilities Board parti cipate and work with the companies in Alberta to help consumers get some stability? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, I stand to be corrected, but I believe that they do precisely that, in addition to conducting open and transpar- ent hearings. If the hon. leader of the Liberal Party has a problem with the Albe rta Energ y and Ut ilities Boa rd, which, as the hon. minister pointed out, has operated very successfully in this province for 50 years, indeed is recognized as a model for regulatory regimes around the world, then I would suggest that he take his problem directly to the board. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Education Funding Dr.

Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the Minister of Learning’s

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 557 constituency parents fund-raise for student trips to Malaysia. Diane Williamson, an Edmonton pa rent, says that her daughter’s school had to use $5 0,000 in casino fu nds to buy c omputers that are required by the c urriculum. Obviously, two very different school worlds. My first question is to the Minister of Learning. Does the minister consider that this casino purchase was for basics, or was it for so-called extras? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

If, for example, the computer purchases were to add 10 or 15 or 20 computers to those that are already there, then I would consider it the parent council’s choice as to where those dollars have gone. I would like to see from the hon. m ember how many computers, what the com puters were used for, and all of the above in order to answer that question. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you.

Again to the sam e minister: given that some American jurisdictions allocate close to $150 per student for technology servic es, does the ministe r beli eve that the $43 per student that we provide offers an adequate level of ser vice to students? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the answer to that is quite simply no. The $43 was a technology suppleme nt to be used on top of the per student grant that is given to the school districts. Dr. Massey: My third question is to the Minister of Innovation and Science.

Does the minister believe that the $ 43 per student will cover the cost of buying computers, evergreening, and the purchase of current software so that scho ols can ta ke adva ntage of the Supernet? Mr. Doe rksen: Well, Mr. Speaker , the Ministe r of Le arning is primarily responsible for the budg eting to sc hool districts , but I would like to comment in terms of the Alberta Supernet because the advantages that that will provide to bring distance learn ing from remote locati ons to central locations is going to provide a tremen- dous advantage to Alberta students. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Electricity Prices Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday over 100,000 ATCO Electric customers found out that they are to be the latest sacrificial lambs on the altar of this government’s disastrous and ideologically driven deregulation scheme. They will f ace an immediate jump of over 120 percent in their electricity bills, and in all likelihood they will face even higher increases in the future, and all the gove rnment can say in response is that A TCO customers previously had the cheapest power in the province with the highest prices in the entire country.

Some comfort. My questions are to the Minister of Energy. How high will prices and bills for electricity have to rise be fore this government admits that deregulation has been a failure? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Smith: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Mason: Is it 15 cents a kilowatt-hour, 25 cents, or even higher? The Speaker: The question has been identified. Mr. Smit h: Mr. Spea ker, one of the things that we ar e quite comfortable about is that we know that the prices from EPCOR are now going to be lower since he’s left the m anagement side of that company. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, given that the minister doesn’t have an answer for the people of Alberta, who have to pay higher prices, and he won’t give a straight answer, I’ll try again. How bad does the damage . . . The Speaker: Please, please, please. Hon. member, we have a rule about no

preambles, that your caucus agreed to. It was signed. Let’s get to the question. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How bad does the damage have to get before this government admits its mistake and fixes the problem? It’s very simple. 1:50 Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, there has been some comment on this side of the House: would we like to g o back to a socialist regulated system where we would put billions of dollars of debt on the backs of future Albertans, on the backs of future children of Alberta, on the backs of future business endeavours of Albertans?

The deregulation formula was structured so that we could have generation come on at a timely rate. Now , a lot of factors hav e occur red since then; namely, the fact that this has been a very healthy economy. Growth means that you need new generation, and in fact – and I know that the Minister of Economic Development will want to supplement this – there has been a tremendous increase in wealth in this provin ce.

Yes, we have seen increased electricity prices, but what we see with the passage of Bill 19 is more options, now moving towards choice, new generation, and different alter natives for people in Alberta to purchase their power. I would ask the Minister of Economic Development to supple- ment. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister admit that during the late 1970s the economy of Alberta grew even faster than it’s g rowing now, yet g eneration was br ought on in a timely fashion? Ther e were no shortages and no brownouts, and prices were stable, not like now. Mr.

Smith: Well, Mr. Sp eaker, I think that an ND politician may have come up with a new Trivial Pursuit game, and it’ll be called To Predict the Past. Ev ery time we sit and have this discussion, this hon. member wants to go ba ck to the days when there was a n economy of some $30 billion or $40 billion. There was basically a one-strength economy. The circumstances of the 1970s were entirely different than the circumstances we’re faced with today.

If the hon. member would visit back in his rearview mirror, without the added comments that he wants to put in, he would find that the last regulated piece of generation took some 14 years from the time of approval to the time the first kilowatt was shipped. Now, Mr. Speaker, if we would have tried . . .

558 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 The Speaker: Hon. minister, through the chair. Mr. Smith: Now, Mr. Speaker . . . The Speaker: Now, please. There are a lot of young people in the galleries today. I’d sure like to impress them with decorum. The hon. Member for Red Deer-No rth, follow ed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Recent reports hav e talked about a mysterious illness that has already killed two people in Ontario and more in Asia. Little seems to be know n about this illness.

Yesterday there was a suspected case reported in Alberta. Many Albertans are concerned about this, and my question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Can the minister tell us what this illness is and who is susceptible to it? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, an isola ted case in Edmonton o f atypical pneumonia was re ported yesterday afternoon by my department’s provincial health office and the Ca pital healt h authority . This particular illness is now being referred to as SARS, or severe acute respiratory syndrome.

This case appears to be similar to cas es reported in both the cities of Vancouver and Toronto and is charac- terized by high fever and a cough. The patient in the particular case in Alberta was admitted to an emergency room, and because Alberta participates in the exchange of information in monitoring these types of problems throughout the world, the patient’s conditi on was identified, and the patient was put in an isolation ar ea while her illness continues. At this point, Mr.

Speaker, what health officials have confirmed is that this dis ease is transm itted person to person, spe cifically through sn eezing and coug hing. All evidence suggests that it i s transmitted only through close contact. It appears that in Canada the illness has only affected recent travelers to southeast Asia, some of their family members, and one physician who was treating a patient with SARS in the city of Toronto. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you.

To the same minister: can the minister tell us what his department is doing to protect Albertans from this illness and what precautions Albertans can take to avoid this illness? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, I think I need to give a very short history on the illness to put it in perspective and outline, then, what provincial health officials are doing in response. The World Health Organiza- tion issued an a lert on the 12t h of Marc h of this y ear concerning cases of SARS in Vietnam, Hong Kong, and China. The following day Health Canada reported several people ill in the cities of Toronto and Vancouver.

Based on that report, my department’s provincial health office advised the regional medical officers of health through- out the province, the Provincial Laboratory, and Alberta physicians to increase surveillance of respiratory illnesses that were accompa- nied by fe ver, specifically with respect to individu als who ha d a history of recent travel in southeast Asia. Physicians were also asked to notify their m edical of ficers of healt h as soon as they f ound suspect cases so that appropr iate off icials both provincially and federally could be notified.

Our office is in dail y contact with Health Canada and regional health officials to ensure that new information is shared as quickly as possible. We are working with our global counterparts to identify the organism that is resp onsible for this illness so that a potential treatment can be identified, thereby slowing the speed of the illness. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister tell us what precautions Albertans can take to avoid this illness? Mr. Mar: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I first of all want to assure Albertans that we have thus far just had a single, isolated case in Alberta at this time, i nvolving an i ndividual w ho contracte d the illnes s while traveling in Asia. At the best of times, Mr. Speaker, we should always say that Albertans should be enc ouraged to w ash their ha nds regularly to avoid contracti ng or trans mitting respirat ory dis eases. He alth officials are following up with other passengers who may have been exposed to this while on flights traveling to and within Canada and with family members of current cases.

As well, individuals returning to Canada from Asia are b eing made aware of t he illnes s and to watch for sy mptoms such as hi gh fever and cough or di fficulty breathing. If such people do find that they’re e xperiencing these symptoms, they should contact their family physician. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Energy Marketing Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Premier told this House that he was “not aware of any high-pressure sales tactics being used by any . . . marketers.” But last week an energy marketer visited an 89-year-old woman named Annie Matlock in the constituency of Edmonton-Gold Bar and even a sked for a copy of her late husba nd’s death certificate. Mrs. Matl ock, like so many Albertans, did not ha ve e nough i nformation about th e energy marketplace to protect herself from the high-pressure tactics and the offers being made and ended up signing a contract she later regret- ted.

The company, to their credit, delivered a handwritten apology to Mrs. Matloc k the fol lowing day . My f irst questi on is to the Premier. Where can seniors, who often don’t have Internet access, go to find out what rights they have when an energy marketer comes knocking on their door? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is absolutely right, but to try and twist it to somehow implicate me in this particular problem is, I think, to say the least, misleading the House.

I wasn’t aware and I’m not aware as to what various salespeople do relative to the sale of any com modity, whether it’s electricity or roo fing or s idewalk repairs or anything else. The department to which this elderly person and any other person who feels that they’re being misrepresented can turn is the De partment of Gov ernment Service s, and there are consumer protection programs relative to that particular department. The minister is not here today, but I will endeavour to get either the toll-free number or the Internet web page and pass it on to the hon. member. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier knows full well that energy deregulation is the first problem here. Again to the P remier: how is th is go vernment ens uring that a marketer is using only timely , accura te, veri fiable, and truthful comparisons in their aggressive sales pitches?

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 559 2:00 Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, this has something to do wit h marketing electricity and offering a customer a deal. T his has noth ing to do with deregula tion, which, as I said bef ore, has brought on vast amounts of new power and has provided competition in the market- place. I guess whenever there is competition, you have aggressive salesmen, and these problems will arise from time t o time.

But, again, as I po inted out, there is a consumer protection program in place through Government Services, and once I determine the toll- free number an d the web page address, I’ll pass it on to the hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Again to the Premier. Consumers in this province know that energy deregulation is not a good deal. Now, how is this government ensuring that an energy marketer is not abusing the trust of a consumer or exploiti ng any fe ar or lack of knowledg e or experience of a customer? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, you know, I get sick and tir ed of this. When the prices are high, then they complain.

When the prices are low, you don’t hear a peep. Six months ago the price of electricity was 4.4 cents a kilowatt-hour, and we didn’t hear a thing from the Liberals. Nothing. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. They use deregulation as a political football. When the prices are down, they say nothing. When the price s are up, it’s because of deregulation. When the prices are down, what do they say? Oh, it’s because of the Liberals. Be honest. Complain just as loudly when the prices are down as you do when the prices are up. Be honest for a change. The Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead, followed by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Seniors’ Utility Costs Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My only question today is to the Minister of Seniors. Re the special-needs assistance for seniors’ programs to help seniors with the rising utility costs, does the criteria change cover costs for items like propane and other alternative fuel sources? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Woloshyn: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Being brief, the answer is yes. The special-needs assistance program focuses on seniors in need who do n’t h ave th e finan cial r esources to fund onet ime shortfalls.

We expanded it to incl ude ut ilities, and under that category propane, hea ting fuels, natural gas, and any o ther items used, if y ou will, f or utilities will be considered a s pa rt of the program. Holy Cross Hospital Renovations Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, a for- profit cor poration bought t he Hol y Cross hospital in Calga ry to prov ide surgical and long- term care services on contract to the Calg ary health region. My ques tions concern renovations done at the Holy Cross by this corporation.

To the Minister of Health and Wellness: given reports that secondhand carpeting, some of it soiled and even marked with cigarette burn s, was installed in patient rooms during renovations at the Holy Cross, does the minister consider this an acceptable standard for a public partnership with a for-profit health care corporation? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, I’m not aware of the circumstances that have been raised to the attention of this House by the hon. member, and if he wishes to bring forward appropriate documentation to demon- strate this to me, I’ll be happy to look into it for him. Dr.

Taft: Well, then, given that substandard drywall was installed during the renovations of the Holy Cross, forcing building inspectors to issue cor rective orders to m eet fireg uard standar ds, can the minister explain why he continues to approve of the contract with the owners of the Holy Cross? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, I was not aware that the hon. member had taken on a nighttime job as a building inspector. Dr. Taft: Well, he should be better informed. So let’s try one m ore time.

Given that the m inister must grant approval of this c ontract, has he re viewed the government’s own files that show numerous safety and building c ode violati ons concerning the Holy Cross? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, again, if the hon. member is aware of such allegations, then I’d be happy to look into them for him. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Edmonton Public School Board Mr. Hutton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know that the Minister of Learning has stated several times that he is in the midst of an audit of the Edmonton public school board, but I am still receiving way too many calls and letters from concerned constituents regarding the memo that the chairman of the Edmonton public school board sent out across Edmonton which states that 350 teachers could be laid off. My question is to the Minister of Learning. Is the number even remotely accurate? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Dr. Oberg: Mr.

Speake r, we ar e still in t he midst of an audi t of Edmonton public, and I’ ll be more than happy to answer that question when the audit comes in. We have seen some extremely promising results on this audit to date. We’re attempting to have the audit done. We’re hoping that it will be done b y the end of next week, at which time I’ll be able to make it public. Mr. Hutton: Again to the sam e minister. A nu mber of my col- leagues attended a public forum last week, which most, if not all, of the parent councils from west Edmonton attended. They informed us that classrooms will balloon to as high . . .

The Speaker: Hon. member, I interjected earlier about

preambles. Let’s get to the question. Mr. Hutton: The question is: will the minister inform us if class- rooms will balloon past 30 to 33 students in kindergarten to grade 6 next year? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the answer to that is no. We just did the class size study that went around the province. You’ll be happy to know that the classes are actually slightly under what they were last year. For kindergarten the average is slightly over 19, for K to 6 the average is a round 23, and above 6 it’s aroun d 25. So I don’t see that. I think Edmonton public has taken steps by adding six minutes

560 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 to each school day, which will help considerably in keeping the class size down. So there are things being done. Mr. Hutton: While meeting with those parents last week, it wa s expressed that grade 10 funding was capped. My question is to the Minister of Learning. Is the cap on the number of credit courses in grade 10 still in effect? Dr. Oberg: Well, I’ll answer that in two ways, Mr. Speaker. First of all, there was no cap on the number of credits. There was a per student amount of dollars that was given for each student in grade 10, and that amount is $4,997. Mr.

Speaker, it is very interesting to note, though, the reason this was done. The reason it was done is that last year, in ’01-02, we had over 200 cases of students who had more than 70 credits per year. Another very interesting thing is that last ye ar there was approxi- mately $250,000 clawed back from Edmonton public for – and I’ll give you the e xamples – first of all, i nappropriate claims, where students were given credits for courses that they didn’t take, that they were never registered in.

In other cases students were given credits for simply casting ballots in a student election and attending regular school assemblies. There was a lot of abuse. The Auditor General even brought this out and said that there was a lack of accountability. Since that time, we have looked very closely at CEUs, and there will be changes brought forward this September. Mosquito Control Program Ms Carlson: Mr. Speaker, last year over 300 people in Ontario were infected with the West Nile virus; 11 of th ose infect ed died.

We now know tha t the adva nce of the West N ile virus is th reatening Alberta and its people , but in spit e of this fact thi s gover nment refuses to help stop the spread of the virus to Alber tans. My questions are to the Minister of Environment. Given that mosquitoes are exclusively how this virus is transmitted, why does this govern- ment not have a program to help control mosquito populations in Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr . Speake r. I t’s a good que stion the member has asked.

Until 1993 the province was working with the municipal governments in funding mosquito control programs, but in 1993 a deal was don e with the municipalities where they would take over their own mosquito control programs, and that’s where it sits today. T he munici palities ha ve had tha t responsibil ity and official control since 1993. Ms Carlson: Mr.

Speaker, with this new problem that’s occurring, can the Minister of Environment explain how he expects municipali- ties to shoulder the additional burde n of mos quito control and education now, when thi s gov ernment has dra stically reduced funding to those municipalities? 2:10 Mr. Mar: Well, Mr. Speaker, we expect to find West Nile virus in Alberta in 2003, quite likely, in a bird first and perhaps in horses and eventually in human beings. There has been one case of West Nile reported here in this province from a person who contracted it while traveling in the United States.

Now, we do have a contingency plan for West Nile virus, but it’s based on the best information about this disease in North America and on environmental and biological factors specific to the province of Alberta. We are preparing a provincewide physician education program to ensure that all physicians are aware of this disease and how to test for it an d whether or not and w hen they should refer a patient to a specialist. Mr.

Speaker, starting in April, we will be providing Albertans with timely information about the developments of this disease and about how Albertans can best protect themselves from the infection. We will continue to monitor the presence of this particular virus, again, in birds and in hors es, and we w ill notify Albertans as soon as we note the virus’s arrival in this province. I should note that in places in other parts of Canada where spraying has been introduced as a way of dealing with the mosqui- toes, there are health hazards associated with what is referred to as fogging.

It is the best advice of our medical officers that the risk associated with fogging actually e xceeds the risk associated with contracting West N ile virus. The lik elihood of a ctually showing some of the problem s associated with this virus are one in a thou- sand. It is a di sease that, from the best advice that we have, is relatively modest compared to, for example, this issue of SARS. So, Mr. Speaker, we are focused on the issue of West Nile virus. We do have a plan in place, but I want to point out that sp raying mosquitoes is not necessarily the best way of dealing with it. Ms Carlso n: Mr.

Speaker, my questions are to the Minister of Environment because we want to solve this problem befo re it becomes a health issue. To this minister. I agree that spraying isn’t the only option. There are lots of other options out there. Is he going to be involv ed in a pr ogram to educate individuals on how they can reduc e mos quito breeding a reas in pla ces lik e their backyard ponds and rain barrels? Dr. Taylor: Certainly, Mr. Speaker. We already have information like that available in regard to not allowing standing water to exist in your backyards or rain barrels, as she’s used.

W e enco urage people to get rid of standing water like that, but it’s not something that we can enforce. A s the minister of hea lth has quite clea rly stated, we have a good plan, giving peo ple information on how t o protect themselves; for i nstance, wearing prot ective cloth ing, wearing mosquito repellent. We have this plan in place, and we will continue to monitor the situation as we go forward. Postsecondary Tuition Fees Dr. Pannu: Mr.

Speaker, this Friday the board of governors of the University of Calgary will meet to consider hiking tuition fees for all students and impo sing even higher dif ferential tuition f ees in the faculties of business, law, and medicine. In a document that I will table later, the university president, Harvey Weingarten, lays part of the blame on a 70 percent hike in the U of C’s utility costs in the past two years. The planned tuition hikes will just about cover the hike to the U of C’s utility costs.

To the Minister of Learning: why is the government making students pay for its failed deregulation scheme through steep tuition hikes at the University of Calgary and other such institutions in the province? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, under legislation that was ta bled in this Assembly approximately six or seven years ago, the student will pay at most 30 percent of the cost at a pa rticular university. So, basi- cally, what that means is that the government, private business, and other individuals are paying for roughly 70 to 75 percent of those students’ fees. The Speaker: The hon. member.

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 561 Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: will the minister on behalf of postsecondary students make representations to his cabinet colleagues to scrap the disastrous utility deregulation policy, thereby allowing universities to limit the increase in tuition fees, to give them some breathing room so that they can contain the rise on a yearly basis? Dr. Oberg: No. Dr. Pannu: Appalling indifference, Mr. Speaker.

My last q uestion t o the same mi nister: why does the minister refuse to admit that the $9 million in additional utility costs at the University of Calga ry is directly linked to the ir planned hik es in tuition fees and do something to stop this increase from taking place? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, currently th e University of Calgary sits approximately number 29 out of 45 universities when it comes to the level o f tuition fe es. The y are currently looking at putting in a differential fee f or things suc h as busines s, l aw, an d medicine.

Interestingly enough, at the University of Toronto the Faculty of Law now charges approximately $16,000 per year for tuition. They also undertook a study which shows that the socioeconomic status of the participants in their faculty actually did not change when their tuition went up to $16,000. As we look across t he country , we see tuition in these three faculties being ext remely high. Mr. Speake r, in me dicine, f or example, across t he country we’re approachi ng $ 9,000, $10,000, $12,000. We want to ensure that our univers ities have the spaces available for our students.

The average cost of a medical degree is around a hundred thousand dollars per year of which these students are paying about $6,000 or $7,000. What this simply means is that the rest of the students are subsidizing those students in medicine. Mr. Speaker, I strongly stand behind the board of governors of the University of Calgary in their decision-making process that will take place this Friday. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-West, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Mental Health Services Ms Kryczka: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Some of my constituents in Calgary-West and others in Calgary are concerned over an apparent lack of information regarding the government’s plan for transfer of responsibility of mental health services in Alberta from the Alberta Mental Health Boa rd to the reg ional health authorities. My fi rst question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Will the minister explain the details of the transition plan and why they have not yet been communicated to mental health staff or the public? Mr. Mar: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we actually have been in contact with the employees, and the Mental Health Board has devel oped an internal newsletter specifically to alert st aff to new developments. Seven issues of this newsletter h ave been pro duced to keep staff informed. The transition plan includes the transfer of programs and services on a geographic basis, protection of funding for mental health programs and services, maintaining the Mental Health Board in an advisory role with governance responsibility for provincewide programs like forensic psychiatry.

We will continue to communicate extensively with mental health employees and service providers and stakeholders. I personally have been in contact with Mr. Dan MacLennan of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees to facilitate further commu- nication. Inform ation sess ions have be en held for mental healt h physicians and senior administrators both in Calgary and Edmonton, and these sessions are also availab le to oth er sites thr ough teleconferencing. Presentations have been made to key stakeholder groups such as the Alberta alliance for mental illness. Finally, Mr.

Speaker, last month a videoconference was held for staff and union members of AU PE throughout the pro vince, and senior human resource staff were available to respond directly to their questions. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Kryczka: Yes. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, my first supplemental question is to the same minister. Can the minister assure us that after the transition mental health services will receive designated funding through the health regions, which would cer tainly be in the best interests of mental health patients? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, the short a nswer is yes.

I want to assur e members of this House and Albertans that dollars that are currently targeted for m ental heal th will no t be diver ted to other t ypes of programs as a result of going to regional health authorities. Regional health auth ority busi ness plans will ens ure that m ental heal th funding will continue to be allocated to mee t the needs of mental health patients in that region. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Kryczka: Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. 2:20 Breakaway to Win Hockey Lottery Ms Blakeman: Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

In January 2002 the govern- ment introduced the new breakaway to win l ottery for the Calgary Flames and the Edmonton Oilers. At that time, I questioned whether or not these tickets would be added competition to existing scratch- and-win tickets whose revenue goes into the Alberta lottery fund to help charitie s, nonprofits , and v olunteer agencies. In terestingly, Alberta Gaming has now gone to a $5 ticket instead of the $10 ticket they started with. My questions are to the Minister of Gaming.

Why did the department break its commitment that these hockey tickets would not b e i n direct com petition wi th other scr atch-and-win tickets, particularly in the $3 to $5 range? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We monitor the volume of lottery tickets which are sold within the province on a regular basis, and I can advise the hon. member and other members that, in fact, on a budget basi s the sale of lotter y tickets is up ov er budget f or t he year, so it would appear that lotter y tick ets are doing very well notwithstanding a relatively small part of the market being taken up by the hockey tickets. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. What was the rationale to changing to the $5 ticket from the $10 ticket? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

562 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In business – and the issue of lottery tickets is a m atter of business – it’s necessary to create some variety and interest in order that people continue to have some attraction to the product. So it’s quite natural and necessary, indeed, that over time the product changes, and in this particular case one of the changes that was effected was a change in price from $10 to $5. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

Does the minister have any background information or any studies that would lead them to believe that this $5 version is going to be more successful than the $10 version was? Mr. Stevens: Like all lottery tickets ultimately the people who work on it are expert in their field. They do the best they can to design the ticket. The hope is that it will be successful, but at the end of the day the marketplace and marketing that goes along with the particular product determines whether it will be successful or not.

I can advise this member that both breakaway versions to date have been successful in that the hockey teams will receive funds, in fact have received funds, as a result of the sales, and we anticipate that the $5 version will be successful also. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Bilingual Programs Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week the federal govern- ment announced that it will be spending about $750 million i n bilingual programming across Canada.

Part of these funds will be targeted to increase t he number of high s chool students speaking French. My ques tion today is to the hon. Mi nister of Learning. How will this funding impact Alberta schools? Dr. Oberg: Well, as is often the case with the federal government, they have not fully announced any strings that are attached to these dollars. Mr. Speaker, I would say that I’m cautiously optimistic that they will he lp the s tudents of Alberta in promoting French as an alternative language, as a lan guage that can be learned within our schools.

We hope that it will be an adjunct to what we already do, but the biggest issue is that we don’t know what strings are attached. We don’t know how the m oney w ill be divvied out across the country. We ce rtainly hope th at it is the federa l governm ent’s intention to ensure that all students in Canada will benefit from this program, but again I really have to stress that we just do not know where these dollars are and where they’re going to be spent. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Merci, M. le Président. Une question secondaire pour le même ministre. My second question is to the same minister.

With our plans for mandatory second language training in schools will this mean that schools have to use these dollars to offer French program- ming only? Dr. Oberg: Well, Mr. Speaker, it certainly looks tha t way, that it will be directed directly towards French, and I actually agree with the federal government on this as it is their direction for bilingualism to support both of Canada’s official languages . What I do hope, though, is that we will be able to use this funding, which will free up funding for other l anguages.

I feel t hat the ad vent of second languages, the bringing in of second languages into our curriculum, is an essential component of what we teach our children. So we will be doing that, a nd again I’ll ju st reiter ate that I ’m cautiously optimistic that these dollars will be put towards good usage by the department in Ottawa. Thanks. The Speaker: The hon. member. C’est tout fini? Mr. Cao: Oui, monsieur. The Speaker: Then the Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Trucking Regulations Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Proposed chang es to the regulations concerning the amount of time that truck drivers can be on duty and the hours of service they can operate are scheduled to change in the near future. My constituency has a large number of oil field trucking companies and forestry companies, and they need to know how these proposed changes will affect them. My questions are for the Minister of Tran sportation. How were these proposed changes to drivers’ hours of service developed, and when will they come into effect for Alberta? The Speaker: The minister. Mr. St elmach: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

All the transpor tation ministers have been working on standardizing hours of service over the past two years. We’ve held public consultations in all of the provinces. The purpose here is to improve traffic sa fety but at the same time allow for the growth of trade and commerce. Transport Canada has rece ntly publis hed their am endments to the hours of service, and we will be worki ng with them in harmonizing them because, again, here their jurisdiction is over the provincial borders.

We’ll be consulting with our businesses, our transportation people as to how we’re going to enforce those rules within the boundaries of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. member. Rev. Abbott: Merci beaucoup, M. le Président. My first supplemen- tal to the same minister: will the rules be the same across Canada for similar industries? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, not necessarily. Presently oil and gas and agriculture have exemptions, and so does forestry, but in the new rules tha t are com ing forw ard, it se ems li ke the f ederal si de of forestry will not be exempt further.

As I s aid, we’re still going to work with the industry to see that the primary cause, of course, is safety, but on t he other hand w e want t o ensure tha t it doesn’t impede the growth in those industries. The Speaker: The hon. member. Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final supplemental to the same minister: will you commit to consulti ng wit h trucking firms that operate in the natural resources industries on the implementation of drivers’ hours of service? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’m getting a lot of advice back here as to what language I should use in responding to the qu estion.

Yes, we do commit to consulting with the industry. It’s imperative that we take our time to consult with all industry to ensure that at the end

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 563 of the day we f ind the bala nce be tween safety and the abil ity to conduct their business, not only protecting their workers but also allowing for the growth of trade and commerce. The Speaker : Hon. mem bers, as the last c omment by the hon. Minister of Transportation will probably elicit phone calls t o m y office about the language of the Assembly, I’d like to make it very, very clear to all those l istening that hon. mem bers may use a ny language they choose to use in this Assembly without restriction.

Speaker’s Ruling Responses to Questions The Speaker: Just a little clarification arising out of question period today. There was a series of questions and exchanges from the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie to the Minister of Environment. On the second ques tion the hon. Mi nister of Health and Wellness responded to the questi on which then elicited a response from the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie saying that her questions were to be directed to the minister of health.

All hon. members know that when questions are directed, they are directed to the government and the government may choose to answer and respond to the question. In this case, as the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness responded to the question, it is deemed quite appropriate because in the order of precedence, in fact, the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness comes before the Minister of Environment. So that certainly meets the test about responding on behalf of the Assembly per se. Speaker’s Ruling Decorum The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Energy should not feel that when the chair rose with respect to his comments on decorum, they were directed directly to him. They were directed to all members of the Assembly, and they were not directed in any particular direction, to anyone. Now, did the hon. Minister of Energy feel that I had cut him off before he conclu ded his an swer? If he wishe s to supplem ent the answer he was giving, I’ll certainly give him an opportunity to do that now. Mr. Smith: No, Mr. Speaker.

I have nothing further to offer, but I do want to thank you for that clarification. 2:30head : Members’ Statements Federal Gun Registry Rev. Abbott: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to let this Assembly and all Albertans k now that on March 9, 2003, I visited the Canadian Firearms Centre web site, and I did what I’d hoped I would never have to do while living in this great pr ovince; that is, reluctantly I registered my guns. On Januar y 1, 2003 , thous ands of average Albertans becam e crim inals by default. That’s right. By doing absolutely nothing, they became chargeable under the Criminal Code of Canada.

The federal gun registry is not only a colossal waste of money; it’s also a bad law. Alberta and other provinces have strongly opposed the universal licensing and registration of all firearms imposed by the federal Liberal government through the federal Firearms Act. My government took the posi tion that t hese regulations and l icensing provisions were beyond the constitutional authority of the federal government. We launched a legal challenge to these provisions and pursued this challenge all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. But you know who appoints the Supreme Court judges, Mr.

Speaker: the Prime Minister. So, needless to say, we were not successful in our constitutional challenge of this bad federal legislation. The June 2000 decis ion by the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the le gislation s o t hat the Firearms Act w as deemed valid, valid but not good and not right. Alber ta rem ains opposed to the provis ions on the bas is that the y are extrem ely expensive to implement an d do not preve nt or discoura ge the criminal use of firearms. As the Premier often says, a criminal is not about to stop and register his guns on his way to rob a bank. Mr.

Speaker, our government believes that it would be far more effective to have C riminal Code provisions that are str onger with respect to the criminal misuse and possession of firearms rather than a waste ful and ex pensive licensing and registration system that penalizes law-abiding Albertans. We further believe that the billion dollars spent should be applied to the enforcement of existing laws rather than the ineffective program of registry. Mr.

Speaker, in conclusion, I would like us to look further into the proposal put forward by the Responsible Firearms Owners of Alberta called the Alberta Western Firearms Heritage and Historical Act. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Wealth Transfer Mr. Lord: Mr. Speaker, the wealth of a nation and wealth transfers within nations are not mea sured in dolla rs and c ents alone. T he greatest asset of any nation is an industrious and creative population, and Alberta has truly been blessed in this regard and also to see so much talent moving here from across Canada.

In fact, this brain gain could easily be valued a t a minimum $350 billion into Alberta, dwarfing any cash flow s in the other dir ection. But this does not mean that we should rest on our laurels. Alberta has also been losing a few of our best and brightest for a variety of reasons, some of w hich maybe we co uld have f ixed. I think it would behoove our government to be aware o f our o wn losses in this regard, to study why people moved elsewhere, and to find out what w e could m aybe do t o improve the situation.

For example, we have seen a lot of Alberta talent in the film, entertain- ment, music, and art com munity leave. What m ight a T odd McFarland have done for our economy had he stayed? Many small business entreprene urs, including an Alber ta entrepr eneur of t he year, have al so left f or a vari ety of re asons, one of which is a parochial approach to and su bsequent lack of venture capital , a market in which A lberta i s still only a minuscule player globally. Perhaps a stronger push towar ds harmoni zed national security regulations might have helped.

What is the value of people like this lost to our province , Mr. Speaker? Well, le t’s just take the c ase of one person, Dr . Norm Dovichi, who, while right here at the University of Alberta, invented technology that was absolutely instrumental in cracking the human genome. If we had just helped out that one individual, Alberta may well have been at the w orldwide forefront of an industry that will rival our oil and gas industry. But we didn’t recognize that, and for want of a relative pittance of research and venture capital dollars he went elsewhere. Proud of Alberta as we are, there is more work t o be done.

We need all the inventors, entrepreneurs, and creative people we can get, and we need to encourage the ones we already have to stay here. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Education Funding Dr. Massey: Last week an Assembly exchange between a member and the Minister of Learning revealed a serious disconnect between the government and life in Edmonton schools. For the government the glass is more than half full. For them billions are being spent,

564 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 achievement scores are high, and teachers are the best paid i n th e country. Any problems are dismissed as the work of incompetent trustees or pesky teachers. For Edmonton parents there is little water left in the glass. Schools are cutting teachers, lack the money needed for textbooks and computers, and class sizes are growing. Parents are fund-raising for basics and a whole range of other items to free up school dollars for basic programs. A letter I tabled last week f rom Mr. D. Vinge c aptured this disconnect. Mr.

Vinge wrote: “I have noticed that when people with genuine concerns are asking questions, you throw out statistics . . . I think it w ould be so much m ore helpful if you could s incerely address parent and teacher concerns.” How has the g overnment become so out of touc h? Part of t he answer rests in th e ki nd of infor mation the governm ent uses to counter parent claims. For parents billions of dollars are meaning- less. What counts is how many dollars arrive at the school door to cover costs. Are there enough dollars for reasonable class sizes, to buy needed textbooks and computers?

Is ther e en ough to hire support staff and provide services for special-needs students? The answer to these questions in many schools is a resounding no. When the government hides behind billion dollar budget figures, they offend those who know better and contribute to the adversarial position they now find themselves in with parents and teachers, and they further a dd to the d isconnect, that wa s highlight ed again yesterday when a parent in the gallery shouted out in frustration at the minister’s responses. The time ha s come for the g overnment to heed Mr.

Vinge ’s advice: “I have no time for a regurgitation of your stats. We need solutions.” Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Global Conflict Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As a person who has grown up and lived through the long 30-year war in Vietnam and now living in freedom in the peaceful lan d of C anada, I want to share my experiences and perspective. To the leaders and the people of the hot spots of the world may I say that the m easurement of the people or nat ion is neit her i n building or owning weapons of mass destruction nor the quantity of the populace.

The true measurement is in the long list of achieve - ments in mass construction of humanity and the quality of its people. The sa me could be said about those who aspire to c ompete on religious grounds. I believe the final judgment is based on human quality, not the quantity of controlled followers. To those living far from the areas of problems, we need the ability to differentiate the criminal leadership from the populace on which they exert deadly control and to prevent that leadership from hiding in the name of the populace, race, national indepen dence, o r religious pretext.

Human rights and freedoms and democracy for all humanity must be the o nly guide for our det ermination and fig ht against the scourg e of ty ranny, domination, discrimination, inh u- mane activities even by a government on its own people within its own boundaries. The world has missed a great opportunity. Now we have to find and create a n ew one. The vacuum created by the end of the Cold War was quic kly filled by the attitudes resurfaced from the Dark Ages. The world leadership failed to raise high the torch o f humanistic ideals and take a ppropriate measures to prevent inhu- mane events.

The U N as a n organization not only has t he global mandate but needs the authority and help of str ong force and determination to carry it out. Thank you. head : Intro duc tion o f Bills Bill Pr. 1 Sisters of St. Joseph of the Province of Alberta Statutes Repeal Act Mr. Griffiths: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce a bill being Sisters of St. Joseph of the Province of Alberta Statutes Repeal Act. [Motion carried; Bill Pr. 1 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Montrose. Bill Pr. 2 Forest Lawn Bible College Act Mr. Pham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to introduce a bill being Bill Pr. 2, Forest Lawn Bible College Act. The purpose of this bill is to set up a bible college in Calgary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill Pr. 2 read a first time] 2:40head : Tabling R eturns and R eports The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. On beha lf of the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development I’m pleased to table copies of the r esponses to questions raised during supple- mentary estimates debate for the De partment of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development on February 27, 2003.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table the required number of copies of 59 letters supporting Bill 206, the Traffic Safety (Seizure of Vehicles in Prostitution Related Offences) Amendment Act, 2003. I’d like to mention that these letters being tabled are from Calgary and surrounding communities. I think this helps make the point that there is a desire and support for the legislation that preserves and rebuilds communities battling prostitution. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Shaw. Mrs. Ady: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to table a newslet- ter with the appropriate number of copies from Dr. Brendan Croskery, the sup erintendent of the Ca lgary board of e ducation, entitled Collaboration with Government.

He says in this letter that “over this past year international assessments of student achievement have placed Alberta students in the front rank of all achievers in the world.” He feels that there are m any reasons for this, but one i s because “the poli cies of our provincial government have made a significant contribution to student achievement.” He also states that he believes there is strong evidence that government . . . The Speaker: Please. Sit down. It’s called tabling, not editorializ- ing. This applies to everybody. Proceed. Do you want to table?

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 565 Mrs. Ady: Yes. Could I go ahead and table? The Speaker: Absolutely. Please table. Mrs. Ady: I can complete? Thank you. It’s just because of collaboration . . . The Speaker: Hon. member, just table the document. We’ll move on. Okay ? This a pplies to ev erybody. The re’s way too much editorializing going on. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today.

The first one is the energy policy from the Commu- nications, Energy & Paperw orkers U nion of Cana da tha t wa s adopted at their convention in September of 2002. The second tabling I have this afternoon is on behalf of a Calgari- an, Mr. Robbie White, who would like to express his concerns about tuition increases in this province. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve got two tablings today.

The first is five copies of a document from the president and vice- chancellor of the Univer sity of C algary, Professor Harvey Weingarten, in which he draws a ttention to the increase in utility costs from $13 million in 2000 to $22 million this year. The second tab ling, Mr. Spea ker, is j ust copies of a postcar d campaign that was run by the University of Alberta Students’ Union calling on the government to “freeze the fees” for this year. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings.

The first set is an announcement of the second annual Suicide Awareness March, which I attended on Friday. With that, I’m tabling copies of an information sheet prepared by the Support Ne twork on suicide statistics. My second tabling is a letter from a constituent, Claire Crummy, who is concerned that “Canada must reject the paradigm of endless war and embrace a paradigm of peace.” I’m happy to support her in her peaceful stance. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have 10 tablings today, but I’ll move through them very quickly.

T hey are a s eries of letters expressing concern over steeply rising tuition fees at the University of Calgary, which, the correspondence says, makes it dif ficult for students to continue their education. They are from Travis Murphy, D.B. Brown, Tanya K., Tyler Johnson, Robbie White, S.K. Cheria, Navid Nikou, R.T. Bergen, Kirstyn Elizabeth Nay, and J.D. Goble. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have one tabling today. It’s a document titled City Centre Educ ation Project: Planning 2003- 2004, for McCauley school.

This doc ument states that the school budget will be reduced by $280,000, resulting in staff reductions of three te achers, two support staff, larger classes , and program reductions. head : Orders of t he Day head : Government Bills and Orders head: Committee of the Whole [Mr. Shariff in the chair] The Deputy Chair: Hon. members, I’ll call the committee to order, but prior to calling the bill, may we briefly revert to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head : Introduction of G uests (reversion) The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It’s a pleasure to rise and introduce to y ou and through y ou to all hon. m embers of this Assembly a gentleman who is present in the public ga llery. Mr. Lionel Laverdiere is visiting the Assembly this afternoon, and he is a business manager with Operating Engineers, local 955. I would now a sk him to please rise and re ceive the warm and tradit ional welcome of this Assembly. Bill 19 Gas Utilities Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 The Deputy Chair: Are there any comments, questions, or amend- ments to be offered with respect to this bill? The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms C arlson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I’m happy to have an opportunity to speak once again to Bill 19, Gas Utilities Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, i n committee. W e have m any conc erns about this bill, and we are waiting for some of the answers from the government and some explanation of why it will ha ppen that with this bill, while we are going to see the ability for people to enter into the signing of contracts, it will put many people at a disadvantage. What happens when you sign those contracts? Companies aren’t foolish.

They’re in this to make a profi t, so they’re going to make sure that any contracts signed are at a price that’s going to guarantee them a flow of income, which means that consumers are going to be paying a higher price. Who is it, Mr. Chairman, that’s going to be forced into a position where they ha ve to ente r into th ese long-term contracts? It’s the people who don’t have the available cash ready to be able to follow the spot prices of the market.

So most of the people in this Assem- bly won’t have any problem having a reserve of money within their households so that they can ride out the high pri ces but tak e full advantage of price s when the y’re lower in the marketplace. T hat opportunity isn ’t available to eve rybody in this provi nce. Many people, first of all, don’t under stand the w hole process, and they don’t understand th at th ere are going to be some hi ghs in the marketplace and some lows in the marketplace.

They’re just going to believe what the y’re told by, as we hav e already heard in this Assembly today, what are often high-pressure salespeople trying to lock them into a lo ng-term cont ract that i s going to gi ve the m stability in prices, yes, but it’s also going to give them a long-term increase in prices without any options out.

566 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 For instance, we heard about th e case today of the w oman who was 89 years old who was talked into signing a long-term contract, a five-year contract, in fact. What are the chances, Mr. Chairman, that a woman of that age is going to remain in that home for the next five years? I wo uld say th at there’s a very h igh c hance that she wouldn’t be there for the full time, and in that case how does she get out of that contract? In fact, if you take a look at the fine print that’s listed there, it’s going to be very difficult for her to do that without paying high premiums.

Nobody is telling these people out there that these are the risks that they’re entering into by doing this. Nobody is telling them that it’s those who can least afford it who are going to be bearing the bigge st brunt of t he burden for leveling out t he prices in the future. They’re going to pay a premium. Why?

Not because they don’t work ha rd and aren’t committed t o tr ying to lower the overall costs of their house but because they can’t afford to do anything else, and that’s a real disadvantage. 2:50 What I talked about the last time I was in the Assembly and which I wou ld like to g o back to in a little bi t more de tail today , Mr. Chairman, is something that leads into these earlier comments, and that’s consume r education. We found that people r eally don’t understand what’s going on out there. Many people in the market- place don’t understand.

In fact, it has come to our attention that many people in the Department of Energ y, including some of the communications staff, don’t understand what’s going on here an d have had to go to outside sources, including us as the Official Opposition, to get a handle on exactly what the conse quences of actions can be. So how do we expect the average consumer out there to really know what’s occurring here and to understand what their options are and to understand how they can best take advantage of low prices? They don’t. We need consumer education.

This has been borne out in other jurisdictions who have taken a serious look at focusing on en ergy, focusing on energy ef ficiency options, and focus ing on consum er educat ion. I would l ike the Assembly to have the opportunit y to se e what t hey are doing in Wisconsin in this regard, in the States. Now, we hear lots of times that this government holds up various states as real role mode ls for de livering se rvice a nd for being efficient and effective and being low-cost providers and separating the state f rom busine ss op portunities. W e hear tha t often, Mr .

Chairman, so this afternoon I’m going to walk us through a few of those states who do have differ ent incentiv e programs and good consumer education programs, hoping that some of these great ideas may rub off on this particular government and that they may be able to incorpora te them in their dow nstream planning as this bill unravels and we see the kinds of problems it’s going to be facing in regulations. If we take a look at the state of Wisc onsin, they ha ve a ve ry interesting benefits program for provi ding supp orts for c lean, affordable, and reliabl e energy.

First of all, I’d like to review the focus on energy outline they have of how their staff is delineated, in fact what turns out t o be an organizational chart, which gives us a perspective on how important they see education and training being as a part of what happens when they roll out information to their shareholders or their c itizens. This information com es from the Wisconsin Energy Bureau. They have administrative advisers and the Department of Administration, division of energy, and the Public Benefits Council at the top.

From the department of energy come compliance agents, an evaluation team and technical advisory group. Then rolling out of t hat, they have low -income program s. So imagine a state that has low-income programs for energy efficiency. Haven’t we asked for that in this province, and wouldn’t it have been a good part to put into this parti cular bill? Wouldn’t it be a great idea for a follow-through bill so that we see in legislation that this government is actually committed to making sure that people on low incomes in this province don’t freeze in the dark?

So they’ve got the low-income programs directly underneath that. They have energy services and a weatherization program which is particularly focusing on energy-efficient measures and a stream of information that just educates that group of citizens. Those are low- income programs f or peop le who appropriately qualify for th em. The next phase of the program is residential administrators.

So, once again, within their department they have a whole stream dedicated to low-incom e program s, and then the y have a w hole stream dedicated to residential administrators, which is quite different than this government, which has a whole stream dedicated to big business and nothing dedicated to anybody else. Under the residential administrators what they have are the single- family, multifamily programs, so exactly what we’ve been asking for.

Those who own t heir own hom es, those w ho live in m ultiple residences, those w ho rent are all covered under this particular program, and then they have another whole area that just focuses on education, training. So exactly what we’ve been a sking for here : let’s tell these people who don’t understand the program what’s available, what’s out there, what really is in their long-term benefit, the risks t hat they’re taking, the kinds of forecasts that we can believe they’re going to be paying as prices in the future. Then they have a whole

section designated to technology research and development. Then they have another whole sector dedicated to major markets administration. This is where the only focus of this government has been, on major markets administration. That talks about industrial and commercial programs. Now, so far what we see are just industrial and commercial pricing schemes in this govern- ment. We don’t see actual programs that focus on what Wisconsin does, whi ch has anothe r departm ent that ta lks about e ducation, training and then another department that talks ab out tech nology research and development.

Well, isn’t that exactly w hat sm all businesses and medium-sized businesses are looking for now? They need to know what’s available out there. They need to know how they can access technology research and development so that, in fact, they can take a look at stabilizing their prices. It isn’t enough to say that they’re going to be able to enter into long-term contracts. Long-term contracts with whom and with what kind of energy sources? That information isn’t available right now.

What we have are a lot of companies that are under a lot of pressure to just maintain their daily functionality with increased gas costs, as we see coming through with this bill, not wholly as a result of this bill, but certai nly this bill is a c ontributing factor to a gr eater or lesser degree. We see that debated in this Legislature, but certainly this bill is a contributing factor.

So now with them having to increase their output just to be able to cover their operational costs at a business level, who has time to go out there a nd start se arching, on a cold basi s, for re search and development opportunities and educating themselves on what their other options can be and figuring out who the low-cost providers are and what the y can a ccess? It’s an imposs ible task to ask these people. So what’s going to happen is we’re going to have businesses with very low or no profit showing. We’ll see reduced incomes for business owners.

We’ll see an incr ease in de bt being carried by these businesses. Ul timately wha t we’ll see is a n increase in bankruptcies. Why? Because this government couldn’t figure out how to do dereg ulation properl y in the first place and str eamline electricity and gas together. What we see, once again, is this kind of ad hoc bill come in, like Bill 19, instead of what the market needed. It isn’t like they weren’t told that the market needed th is. We’ve

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 567 been telling them for at least five years, and they haven’t listened, but this is what Wisconsin has done. They’ve got a whole stream just dedicated to education and technology research and deve lop- ment for industrial and commercial programs. Then, Mr. Chairman, looking forward, w hat else do they have? They’ve got a renewable administrator. So this is something that the minister of science and technology should’ve been taking a look at in terms of building this into the program because it’s really forward- thinking what Wisconsin has done.

They’ve taken and developed a market barrier program. Excellent. Exactly what we need here when it comes to energy costs. 3:00 It never used to be a problem in Alberta. Before deregulation we would never consider gas prices or electricity prices to be a market barrier. In fact, it was an advantage for us because this province has always been a low-cost provider, a nd in fact the low cost that was available to busines ses an d individuals was a large i ncentive for many head offices and other kinds of businesses to locate here in this province because the cost of operations were low.

Low overall costs for lifestyle choices were a very positive factor for people relocating their families here. Not anymore. Now we have the same problem that some of those other states and other countries have had in the past, and those are market barriers. Wisconsin recognizes this, and they have put in place a mark et barrier program

section under their renewable administrator so that they can identify what they are, and they can start to problem solve on solutions. Light y ears ahead of where this government is, Mr. Chairman, but something certainly that could’ve been rolled into this particular bill. Under the market barrier program they have education training, so once they have identified the barriers, they can do some training on how to get around them, get over them, get through them, or develop new alternatives, and the new alternatives come within the next field that they have here, which is technology, research, and development.

So, now, what do we see? We see under the residential administra- tor technology, research, and development and education training. Under the major markets administrator we see technology, research, and d evelopment and education tr aining. Unde r the rene wable administrator we see technolog y, research, and developm ent and education training. Obviously, this state considers this to be a very high priority, and this in a state that doesn’t have the severe kind of weather that we have in this province.

All of those also have a single integrated marketing firm that helps them in term s of m eshing all of these great i deas they ha ve: th e programs, the training , the technol ogy dev elopment, a ll of the research that’s being done. They have a single marketing arm that helps to integrate all of those ideas back into the marketplace. So we have the best of all worlds. We have a flat kind of an organization targeted specifically to the are as where we need inf ormation, and when there are some benefits for them to have joint programming, they do it.

Exactly where we should be economically when we look at the market. Then they also have an environmental research administrator and an environmental research forum which, of course, is very important as they take a look at the te chnology, research, and developments and other applications that they use, and it’s very good that this goes through an environmental kind of a screen so that they can ensure that they are being environmentally friendly everywhere they go in the future and that they tie into the overall state and federal plans for hitting specific targets.

So this is a really good program that we see here. Here are so me det ails on this particular program. It’s called a public benefits program, and it encom passes energy conservation, renewable energy development, low-income services . T his was started back in 1999, Mr. Chairman, and it was part of the Reliability 2000 package that w as promoted by a governor at that date an d adopted by the Wisconsin Legislature. I’ll be tabling this document when I’m finished my comments so that this g overnment can a lso take a look at it.

I’d be happy to bring in a great idea like this in a private member’s bill, but we know how far that would get. When people from this side of the House bring in that kind of legislation, it goes nowhere. Generally speaking, it’s defeated at second reading. But I’m looking for solutions here in the shortest time possible, and I would be quite happy if some brigh t light on the gove rnment s ide of priv ate members were prepared to take this forward because that would be the course of action that normally sees a bill passing through this Legislature.

It’s passed as a private member’s statement, and then the government will not generally proclaim it, but what will happen is they’ll come in with a government bill w ithin a year or tw o of having first ha d that idea brought forw ard, a nd th en we see it adopted. That would be very good because it would help us move into the place we need to be as future costs continue to escalate in this province and we continue to see instability of prices.

Wisconsin, who we don’t really think of as a very liberal-minded state generally, I think – certainly, I haven’t in the past – established a public benefits f und so t hat t hey cou ld su pport lo w-income advocacy organizations and environmental organizations but also consumer and business groups and senior citizens and labour unions and retirees. Who could imagine that they could be this forward- thinking? But there they are. Good ideas for this Legislature to take a look at too. So what happened? Where did they get the money from? Because this government always says: oh, you tax-and-spend Liberals.

Well, here is a sta te that generally is not considered to be hugely liberal who has public benefit funds managed by the Wisconsin department of administration. So they get some of the moneys from the different transition fu nds, generally speaking previously spent by utilities internally for energy-efficient programs – some of that money has come into this program – and they have developed it. So what happens here is that there are many participating utilities in this program, and the public benefits directly go to low-income, weatherization, and bill ass istance. G o f igure.

T hey gi ve their citizens rebates, Mr. Chairman, something this government promised to do but hasn’t been able to follow through on. Even better than that, they talk about low-income weatherization, which means giving those people on low income access to the ability to lower the cost of their bills by retrofitting their homes. Exactly w hat we have been asking for in te rms of a retrof it pro gram and someth ing th at we haven’t seen h appen yet. I ’m sure hoping that we see t hat come through in this particular budget.

We’ve heard now the Minister of Environment and a couple of other ministers talk about this program potentially being looked at and promoted by Climate Change Central. I d on’t think Climate Change Central has the money to put it in place. Maybe they do. Maybe there’s a nice surprise coming for us in this particular budget, but I’d be surpri sed at tha t. What I think . . . [Ms Carlson’s speaking time expired] Oh, Mr. Chairman, I’ll have to come back. I’m not even done on this program. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu : Thank you, Mr. Ch airman.

I’d like to make some general observations on Bill 19 as we enter de bate on this bi ll in committee. The bill deals with some matters which are at the heart

568 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 of the concerns of Alberta consumers, particularly small consumers, small businesses, household consumers who are currently suffering from the spike i n gas pric es and hav ing to pay huge bills to keep their homes he ated, their business places warm, and to keep the ir water heaters going. I’ve been looking at some bills that have been coming through. We’ve been getting these bills from our municipal governments, from schools, from universities, from small businesses all across the province, public and private institutions and organiza- tions, as well as individual families.

The growth in the dollars that is indicated i n these bil ls that al l these entities have to pay on a monthly basis is truly shocking. So when I approach my comments on this bill, when I think about this bill, I ask mys elf: i s this bill a n instrume nt? Is this bill a statement of a strategy that will deliver lower bills to the consumers I’ve just spoken about? Will it guarantee them lower bills? Will it reduce the cost to them of buying this utility, which is not a luxury? It’s a necessity.

I can’t find any evidence in th is bill that will give me even a weak assurance that if this bill is passed by this House it will put in place those arrangements which will take away the sting that these spikes result in and that it will reduce the overall costs of the gas at the very tail end of the process w here it rea ches the consumer. 3:10 Consumers don ’t care who d elivers it t o the m, who o wns the pipelines, who provide s the ser vices. All they’re interested in is looking at the bill at the end of the month or the m iddle of the month. Mine came just yes terday, and I’m frankly quite shocked.

When I looked at the amount , and when I compared it with what I paid in January and February, even this yea r, the increase was just quite shocking. So why is this bill, then, being brought in? I think that what the bill really promises is a so-called choice to consumers. We already have had in this province two retailers, and now we are told that we need more.

But we’re not given any assurance, and there’s no evidence that’s produ ced to show tha t if w e add a thir d one, a company by the na me of Direct E nergy – and t hat’s what the bill seems to be designed for; that is, to facilitate the entry of Direct Energy into th e Alberta con sumer gas mar ket – our b ills will go down. No such indic ation. I ca n’t draw those conclusions from reading the bill. I can’t draw any conclusions based on the previous experience of deregulation. So while the bill offers c hoice, Albertans want rebates.

While Albertans are calling for this government to introduce rebates so that they could at least get some relief as they receive their bills and head to the bank to pay their monthly heating costs, and cooking costs in some cases, this bill simply offers choice without any evidence that if the choice is increased – that is, among the retailers; that’s the only choice that’s av ailable – i t will imp act in a pos itive w ay, in a constructive way, the size of the bills that they hav e to pay, a size that has really grown enormously thanks to the deregulation policies of this gove rnment.

So the gover nment is frantically looking for some way in which to confuse the consumer further in order to cover up its own f ailure and its responsibility for the dramatic increases that Albertans are experiencing with respect to their home heating costs right now and the small b usinesses are ex periencing with respect to the bills that they have to pay. Just yesterday I was talking to a person that I take my laundry to, the owner of this laundry business, and she w as ve ry s eriously concerned that given these increases, what does she do? Does she pass on the increase in costs to her customers?

Does she cut back the wages that she pays to her employees? And the third thing that she’s concerned about is that if she does the second – that is, in order to reduce cost s, she tries to cut the wages – what happens to her employees who have t o pay these increased costs of home heating themselves? So the effect of deregulation is wide-ranging. It affects a number of people, and it certainly affects the costs of everything – the cost of services, the cost of goods that are produced using energy – and this fuels inf lation as a result.

The cumulative impact of those increasing prices which are resulting from the speculative markets created by dere gulation that’s a policy of this g overnment is very negative, very bad. It will fuel inflation; it will hurt jobs; it will lead to businesses, small businesses in particular, finding it a challenge to survive in the tightening marketplace. So why this bill is being pushed is something that’s beyond my comprehension at this stage, and the only argument I hear is: the markets will take care of all of us in the long run.

This faith in the market is very much like faith in some supernatura l power that all we need to do is to assume that someone up there will take care of all of us, and in the same way the market will take care of us. Well, Mr. Chairman, we know that that’s not how markets work. Markets left to themselves cre ate all kinds o f ser ious problems, particularly when it comes to the basic needs t hat all of us have as human beings that must be met regardless. So long as we can afford to pay f or those thing s, we w ill pay for those thing s, but ma rkets don’t reduce the costs.

They don’t make those basic needs related usables any cheaper. In fact, they made them more expensive, as we have learned from the deregulation of the electricity market and of the gas markets. One organization that sp eaks on behalf of these residential consumers in particular is the Consumers’ Coalition of Alberta, and I have their assessment of this bill in my hand here. First of all, let me put on record for Albertans who may happen to read the debate in Hansard as to what this Consumer’s Coalition of Alberta does. It is a residential utility ratepayer advocate. The CCA . . .

That is, the Consumers’ Coalition of Alberta. . . . has provided comment to the various government departments regarding issues of concern to utilit y customers. The CCA inter- venes in utility rate hearings where the outcome of the process may impact residential utility rates. The pro posed am endments as set out in this bill, B ill 19, are supposed to sort of set a framework for the structure of the natural gas utility industry in Alberta.

The com ments that I find here are made by this consumer advocate i n rel ation to Bill 19 and the amendments that it seeks to make in the existing piece of legislation dealing with natural gas utility services. The CCA is very concerned that the proposed changes will result in more problems, very serious problems. T he first one to draw attention to, of cours e, is the “inc reased c osts to cust omers a nd exposure of customers to new costs or c osts previously not i n the utility syste m.” I w ant to underline , Mr.

Chairm an, that in th e judgment of the Co nsumers’ Coalition of Alberta, CCA for short, one negative impact that the bil l when it becomes law is going to have is an increase in costs to customers and their exposure to new costs that they previously have not had to pay.

The question is then: why bring into being a law that will result in new costs to consum- ers? 3:20 The second negative impact that this organization draws attention to is about the “increased confusi on to customers of natural gas distribution utilities and natural gas retailers.” The confusion over the kinds of services for w hich they have t o pay is t he second concern that CCA expresses about this bill. So two key neg ative features of this bill w ill either add to the

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 569 confusion of customers or add to the costs that they have to pay to get the same utility that they were getting at a lower cost in the past. Generally the CCA views the proposed changes as paving the way for the en try of retailers to re place the sal es function of exist ing integrated natural gas utilities. This is a change made rather than insure low cost uti lity ser vices and stabl e rates to re sidential and other customers. The CCA submits t hat customers have not been and are not likely to be the principal driver of the proposed changes.

Rather [the CCA sees] the industry driving the need to make these proposed changes so as to allow p articipants in the i ndustry, operating as commercial ventures, to add costs to the system at the expense of customers. Mr. Chairman, let there be no doubt here that the bill is designed to facilitate the entry of new industry players into the market, not in any way designed to limit or lower the costs for consumers. Quite the contrary. The expenses of the consumers will go up as a result of the measures proposed in this bill.

This statement that I just referred to above concludes with how existing costs in this industry will be increased. The exposure to new costs takes place when new entities or strata of entities, such as retailers, enter a market that was previously served by integrated utilities delivering and selling natural gas to consumers. Each new player or ne w str ata [the CCA ar gues] w ill s eek it s retu rn, and this . . . will add new costs to the whole system. Mr. Chairman, my tim e seems to h ave run out, so I’ll sit down then. Thank you. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky. Mr.

Knight: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today to join in the debate here w ith re spect to Bill 19, the Gas Utilities Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, in committee. I found it rather inter esting that the debate appears to wander a bit all over the map. It doesn’t seem to contain itself an awful lot to the issues addressed particularly by Bill 19.

Some interesting comments and certainly one w ith respect t o consumer edu cation th at I thin k has been ad dressed, althou gh perhaps peripherally, by certain ministers in this government, and we do recognize that consumer education will be an extremely important part of the whole restructuring of energy in the province of Alberta as we move ahead not only, Mr. Chairman, with Bill 19 and changes to the ma rketing of natural gas but a lso oth er issues that affect energy in the province.

The comments that surround things that different states are doing with respect to their energy programs are also interesting, and some things come to mind when individuals discuss places like Wisconsin or other states in the U.S. One of the things that came to my mind is a question that has to do with renewable energy and the fact that some states have administrators or sections in their energy depart- ments that are responsible for renewable energy. Certainly, Alberta doesn’t take a backseat to any place in North America with respect to those issues. I believe that it was the hon.

Minister of Infrastruc- ture that stood in t he House recently and in dicated to all who had even a modicum of atte ntion being pai d to his com ments that the largest single wind farm generating facility will be built where, Mr. Chairman? In the province of Alberta within the next three to five years onstream. And the energy produced from that development will be used by whom? The government of Alberta. So, certainly, comments with respect to renewables – I’m glad to see that other folks are also interested in them, but Alberta is doing. W e’re not talking; we’re doing.

Another thing that I ’d like to jus t touch on mom entarily is the misconception, Mr. Chairman, that the minute you bring new players into a marketplace, it automatically, full stop, will increase the cost to consumers. That is a misconception. The truth of th e matter is that if you allow a single retailer to go into the marketplace and offer to custome rs a num ber of dif ferent s ervices – and they may be related or unrelated to the energy business.

They m ay be utilities, and they may be o ther h omeowner requirements such as perha ps cable, perhaps telephones, perhaps high-speed Internet connection, perhaps things like homeowner insurance. It could be a thing l ike automobile recover y if you have a break down on th e hig hway. There are a numb er of dif ferent s ervices that ca n be off ered to consumers, and the truth of the ma tter is tha t when a retailer is allowed to offer multiple services under one retail package, the price of the package is lower than the sum of the individual contracts with respect to the retailing portion.

So those are some comments that I have with respect to some of the concerns that have been raised. Further to that, I think it bears looking into Bill 19 – to get back to what we are really discussing in committee here, Bill 19 – and the idea, Mr. Chairm an, that this bill will somehow put consumers at risk and that what the bill does is pave the way f or some large multinational corporat ions to come t o Alberta and rip off small Albertans and homeowners, et cetera. I think that if we look through Bill 19, we certainly see that the EUB does have a way to establish rules and regulations.

There are appeal mechanisms, and certainly the protection to the consumers in the province of Alberta under this legislation will be at least as string ent or more so than what has happened in the past in the province where, lo and behold, who is it that protects consumers now, Mr. Chairman? I would suggest it’s still the same group. We’re not getting rid of them. In some cases we enhance their ability to protect consumers in the province. So, Mr. Chairman, I’ll leave my comments at that and thank you very much for the opportunity this afternoon. 3:30 The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre.

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. I’m grateful for the opportunity t o finally be able to g et s ome comments on the record with this bill. I’ve been eag erly anticipating being able to debate it a number of times, and somehow it’s always adjourned just before I get a chance to speak. I’m not taking that personally. Mr. Rathgeber: Let’s adjourn now. Ms Blakeman: Well, the Member for Edmonton-Calder would like to adjourn now, but I gather that that is actually so mething that’s discussed by his caucus.

I don’t know that the sponsoring member is quite ready to adjourn, but perhaps he could discuss that with his colleague. So starting from the beginning of this proces s, then – and I did listen carefully to the remarks from Grande Prairie-Smoky, and I will try and return to them at the end of my remarks – ostensibly this Bill 19, the Gas Utilities Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, is a mending three different acts: the Gas Utilities Act, the Gas Distribution Act, and the Rural Utilities Act.

Now, it’s a sister bill to Bill 3 because it’s trying to align the natural gas retail mark et with the electrical retail market. So it is changing the structure of the natural gas retail marketplace to a llow for more c ompetition, or in the gov ernment’s words, t o encourage more competition. Part of that is prov iding consumers with the choice of signing a contract that’s available over a longer period of time or floating on a natural gas spot market price.

A big part of that is about who’s t aking the r isk, where the c onsumer is taking all of the risk or where through regulation or other choices the risk is carried by other entities, and part of my concern on behalf of

570 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 my constituents is not to see them placed in the position where they carry all the risk and are not reaping an equivalent benefit as a result of that. That’s part of what’s the expected outcome of this bill and why it’s problematic for my constituents. Part of that is allowing for this flow-through price of natural gas. We’re seeing problems with that right now with ATCO Electric and its pilot project that’s being carried on as we speak.

So what this bill is intended to provide for us – there’s already a pilot project running that we can examine and see if in fact it’s going to work very well, and it doesn’t appear to be. At this point it looks like it will result in on the electricity side an additional deferral. We’re trying to align these two so that a consumer would purchase from one seller. That becomes problematic. It is changing the rule s of the marketplace again to try and attract the competition.

Finally, it’s affecting the operation of the gas co-ops beca use i t does allow their members to purcha se from other supplie rs if the choice is approved by two-thirds of the members. So that’s chang- ing their bylaws in how they operate things. Now, I think it ’s interesting at thi s time to loo k at some of the history of gas deregulation in this province, its history as a publ ic utility and then not, becau se we ar e seeing, essentially, a f urther deregulation in this marketplace.

There are a number of consumers out there who, b ecause ther e’s discussion go ing on in both the natural gas marketplace and the electricity marketplace, have just joined those two together and don’t understand that the natural gas marketplace utility was deregulated some time ago, in 1985, in fact. The province and the feds si gned a deal at that point to de regulate the wholesale price of Alberta gas. Before that point, the province set the sale price f or the gas producers. When Ottawa ended the national energy program, then the province and the feds also ended the made-in-Alberta gas pr ice.

So th at was the beginning of this process that we’re now looking at some 18 years later. Not much happened around this until we started to have changes in the ’90s, par ticularly with the Alliance pipeline. In my mind that’s what re ally s tarted to c hange a num ber of thing s, mostl y because more gas started to leave Alberta, and the price started to rise, as well. Certainly we gained from that. There’s no question. We benefited greatly from the royalties, and that was used to build schools and put infrastructure in place and a number of other things. Dr. Taft: Not since the Alliance. Ms Blakeman: No.

Prior to that. Sorry. At that time we still had protection for the con sumers, although the small businesses and householders bought gas through regulated monopolies. So we’ve had a series of step-up changes in the way gas works here in Alberta. One of the things that I keep noting from this government is this full speed ahead, full frontal move to deregulate along the lines of: if we deregulate, more competition will come.

So we’ve deregulated and deregulated, but more competition didn’t come, and all I see is the government with increasingly gritted teeth saying: we need more competition; we need more competition. And the competition isn’t coming. I mean, let’s face it. Direct Energy, which seems to be the great saviour on t he horizon, w hich is an int ernational company based in England, won’t come here – and they’ve made it quite clear – u nless this bill is pas sed. Who’s kidd ing wh o? You know, international companies don’t come into Alberta unless they think they’re going to make a stink of a lot of money.

And who are they going to make all of that money from? Albertans. Coming out of the pockets of the citizens of Alberta. So to somehow try and gloss over this and say, “oh, no, you know, everybody’s going to be nefit greatly from this,” that just isn’t the case. It’s just not supported by what we’ve got in front of us.

That great sort of free ma rket drive, that privat e enterprise nirvana that this government keeps trying to achieve has not played out in either the natural gas market or the electricity market, yet they keep driving forward, insisting that somehow if we got more competition in here, it would all work better. Well, we’re deregulating and deregulating, and they are not coming. Mr. Rathgeber: What about Direct Energy? Ms Blakeman: Well, the Member for Edmonton-Calder is asking about Direct Energy, which tells me he hasn’t been listening to what I just said.

I’ve just talked about how they’re only going to come here if this bill passes and they can expect to make a lot of money out of the pockets of Albertans. Frankly, one competitor does not free market competition make, with the greatest of respect. 3:40 An Hon. Member: What about three? Ms Blakeman: Oh, I’m sorry. I’m being corrected. Three. The existing two we had plus Direct. My goodness. That’ll just knock them down from the competition.

You know, w e’ve had two all the w ay along, and now we ar e doing everything we can to entice a third one into place, including passing l egislation to attrac t a com pany from anothe r country to come in. So this is not working. At what point does the government go, “okay; despite our best wishes that this would happen, it’s not happening” and look at something else? I don’t know. B ut it’s certainly upsetting the government’s ideological applecart that they must deregulate everything and privatize everything, and tha t will make it all better. Well, it’s not making it better.

So what can they do to make this worth the while to entice new retailers in? Well, you know, as I’ve just been saying, we had a series of moves made by the government to deregulate and open up the marketplace and make it m ore attractive. It didn’t happen, so now they’re just going to throw a b ig bomb into it – I think a columnist in the Edmonton Journal was using that same analogy – to just blow the thing up in the hopes that somehow something will happen here and that it’ll work the way they want it to, to get people to turn towar ds something new. Albert ans don’t want to d o that .

Albertans seem to be quite happy with the two companies that they had and have not really been demanding that they get a lot of other choice. That brings m e to a dif ferent part of this , and tha t is the w hole concept of choice, because it’s interesting that in Alberta anyway I think you’d be hard-pressed to argue with success that there is a lot of choice. It’s not as though people could say: nah, don’t think I’ll have any na tural gas ; I’ll – I don’t know – have an in-home fire- burning stove to heat my home in downtown Edmonton or Calgary or Fort McMurray. It’s not really viable here.

I know of people I’ve visited in the States; some of them do that. They still have a furnace in which they’re using heating oil, actually, but they really only use that to sort of keep the pipes from freezing. They really do heat their homes. When y ou go to th e local pub, i t’s heated with a w ood- burning stove, and they’re very focused on that as a way to get heat. But we’re not focused around that here. We really are focused on natural gas. So to talk about the very first layer of choice, which is “don’t buy it a t all, and the n it’s not a pr oblem,” that’s not really viable here in Alberta.

We t hink t hat choice assumes informed consent. It’s not that people can’t learn how to figure out how to buy at the right price and when to buy it, but, you know, it is pretty complicated, and prior to now we ha d ver y l arge companies buying long-term contracts,

March 18, 2003 Alberta Hansard 571 allowing t hem to hedge price s. We ha d the m with th eir own reserves, which were able to be pulled into use if the y needed it. There were a l ot of other components in place that allowed those companies to take the risk instead of Alberta citizens taking the risk.

The concept now that we’re going to have s omeone show up a t our door saying, “buy a contract from me; I’m with Direct Energy,” for example, or “buy y our el ectricity fr om me on a long-te rm contract; buy your gas from me on a long-term contract” – and this is not to say that Albertans are incapable of doing this. They are, but it is very complicated and requires that we set everything else aside in our lives and pay attention to this in order to g et all the ins and outs of it. I don’t have the time to do that, and I’m sure that lots of other people don’t have the t ime or the inclination to do that.

But that’s the situation that we’re being forced into. We’re supposed to somehow become experts in spot prices for purchase of natural gas, and somehow this competition out there in the marketplace is going to make this easier for us. Well, having one mo re into the mix on top of the ori ginal two I don’t think is going to make it that much easier. An Hon. Member: It gives you som ething to think about whe n you’re working a casino for your kid’s school. Ms Blakeman: It does give you something t o think about when you’re working a casino for your kid’s school.

Now, what’s interesti ng is that in a numbe r of other areas the government has been ver y pr oactive in recogniz ing the nee d to educate and protect the consumer. There are a variety of consumer protection laws that are in place, and in fact they continue to be put in place. Ev ery couple of y ears ther e’s something new t hat we discover needs a law, and it’s usually about complicated information being out there and a requirement that the compan ies put forward information. You know, there are even quite complex rules about door-to-door fund-raising. I was thi nking about t hat when I h eard the hon.

Mem ber for Edmonton-Gold Bar’s question in question period today about an elderly constituent that he had be ing approac hed at her door to purchase a long-term contract.

In fact, if that person had been at that door soliciting funds for a charitable activity or agency, they would have been required to be wearing visible ID, to provide information on the spot, mind you, not “I’ll get back to you in a week or two” or “I’ll put it in the m ail” but on-the -spot inform ation abou t the organization, financial, the board members, and also an information sheet about t he process of that kind of charitable fund-raising and solicitation at the door and what the person could be asked to do and not asked to do.

So it’s pretty thorough, and we recognize it in a number of sectors, but we don’t seem to be recognizing it in this one. I’m interested in the change in attitude, and I haven’t heard an explanation as to why we get that deficiency, so maybe the sponsor of the bill will be able to answer that for me. I wanted to speak very briefly, and on my next chance to speak, I’ll expand upon this. It is the position that the condominiums in my constituency have been put in with these fluctuating prices and the effect that that ha s on the people that are t he owners or who are living in these c ondominiums.

Of c ourse, they ’re a nonp rofit society. They’re required to present their budget to their members in advance. These people are working folks. They are not for the most part accountants or bankers. They have m any different jobs, and they are struggling in many cases to be able to understand how all of this w orks, understand how to get the best possibl e deal on behalf of the people living in the condom inium, and t o be able to forecast all of this in advance to put it into their budget.

They’re required by law to put forward what the fees are going to be for the upcoming year by a certain date, and I hear from a number of the t reasurers of condominiums just before that due date about their frustration about not being able to nail a lot of this down. I’m now hearing from some that are quite frustrated that in fact they did sign l ong-term contracts when all of this s tarted to g o wacko on them, and they know now that they’ve signed too high.

There was quite a scare at the time a bout how high things could go, so when they signed in at a certain level, they thought that they were doing a pretty good deal. These people are very conscientious. They’re all volunteers, but they’re very conscientious that they’re doing this on behalf of their neighbours and in some cases their family and friends. They’re trying really hard but wi thout a lot of educ ation bei ng provided by anybody or any help to make fa irly monumental decisions. So that’s part of what I’ve looked for in this act, and what I’m not seeing is the consumer protection.

I look forward to my next opportunity. Thank you. 3:50 The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Innisfail-Sylvan Lake. Mr. Ouellette: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ve spoken on this bill three times already, so I think that I probably have said enough, but there’re a few statements that were made today that I’d like to clarify again. Everybody seems to be talking deregulation here, and the y should understand tha t gas has been dere gulated for 17 yea rs. It seems like most of the hon. members are straying so far off Bill 19, that is stating that, yes, it’s the best of both worlds.

They’re going to have the choice of having a long-term contract, or they can stay on the spot market exactly the way it is today. I have to disagree with some of the hon. members that say: long- term contracts just cost you more money. Even today the way the market has gone, the EPCOR and Enmax customers are happy to be on contracts. They’re paying $5 per gigajoule when the rest of us are paying $9. So why would we say, “No, we’re not going allow our constituents to go out and sign a contract and be on a budget that is affordable to them”? That’s one thing that you don’t have to be rocket scientist for.

You don’t have to sit back like that little mouse voice in corner over there saying: oh, it sounds dumb, dumb, dumb. Ms Blakeman: That mouse voice? Mr. Ouellette: No. Over in that corner. Where was I? They should be allowed to go out and get a long- term contract and afford the budget that they sign the contract for. Mr. Chairman, I’m not saying that there won’t be some overly aggressive direct salesmen, but the way some of the members have been speaking from next door, you shoul dn’t be allowing them to your door. So ma ybe the y should jus t bring a bil l forw ard to disallow direct salesmen.

The biggest thing of t his bill – and I just have to keep s tressing that – is that they’re going to have a choice of signing a contract to be able to afford the same m onthly charge 12 months of the year instead of having the high spikes. If they want to play the market, if they believe the market is going to be low, then they have that choice to stay on the spot market and purchase their natural gas exactly like they’re doing today. The one exce ption to that is the rural gas co- ops, and we’re protec ting t he rural g as co-ops t o stay in their franchised area.

The only way that their customers can have a choice is by p assing an extraordinary resolution, and tw o-thirds of their membership have to ask for that choice. Otherwise they stay on the contracts that the gas co-ops have now. You know, I ha ve to re but a little bi t the hon. Mem ber for

572 Alberta Hansard March 18, 2003 Edmonton-Ellerslie when she was saying that long-term contracts weren’t a good deal, but I remember QP today. I’m sure it was that hon. mem ber that as ked why the EU B was r ecommending . . . [interjection] Now you lost me again. She was asking why the EUB was recommending that they didn’t have to hedge. Well, if you want people to be able to hedge, then you also should want people to be a ble to have a contract because they go hand in hand. I can’t think of any other questi ons that ca me up toda y that I didn’t answer, so thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Ms Blakeman: Well, the member was just talking about hedging. Hedging was available to us before, but the risk was assumed by the company, and n ow you’re looking for risk to be assum ed by the consumer. So I don’t agree with what’s being put forward here. Look; par t of this is being sold by the sponsor of the bill an d others with, “W ell, you’ll have a consistent bill. You’ll k now exactly what you’re going to pay.” Well, guess what? I can do that now. It’s called an averaging out. Every company has a different name for it, but, you know . . . Mr.

Ouellette: But you’ve got to p ay the piper here right soon, because the averaging out isn’t going to have worked out. Ms Blakeman: Well, I can organize with – and they make it easy for me – my natural gas provider to have an averaged out price across the year. I know ex actly what I’m going to pay ev ery month. So that convenienc e as suc h is alrea dy ava ilable to m e witho ut me having to go out and figure out whether I’m getting a great contract or not. [interjection] Well, he’s saying that I’m going to get a bill that’s going to try and level that out.

The truth of the matter is that the company that I’ve worke d with has worke d alon g with me . When they knew that the price was g oing up substa ntially and I could end up with a large lump sum payment at the end of the period of time, t hey contacted me and we worked out a higher price pe r month. I was okay and kept going on that. The truth is that the only people that will really be abl e to take advantage of working the spot market are people that can have, you know, whatever, a thousand bucks sit in their bank account so that if the bill comes in at $200 that month, great; fine. Two hundred bucks.

If it comes in at 800 bucks, okay; fine too. But you have to have enough disposable income to be able to just let that money sit there and to be able to r eplenish tha t pot ever y day. There are Albertans that can do that quite co mfortably, but the re also a re Albertans who can’t do that and for whom it is most uncomfortable. Lots of people live paycheque to paycheque, and we should maybe chide ourselves because that’s not the way we’ve been told by our accountants to do it. [interjection] You and I are a very bad combo because we talk to each other too much.

So a lot of what’s being promoted in this bill is already available to me without having to go through what’s being proposed here, and it strikes me that most of what we’re actually talking about here or what I see happening is a phil osophy over what thi s government feels it should be providing to its citizens and what it shouldn’t be. It has an ideological bent towards the private sector and a free market. You know, that invisible hand seems to interfere in a lot of places and then sometimes needs a lot of help. I’ll be quite frank. I think that any time we’re looking at provision of a service that if a prof