Province of Alberta The 27th Legislature Second Session Alberta Hansard Wednesday, June 3, 2009 Issue 48 The Honourable Kenneth R. Kowalski, Speaker

Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 27th Legislature Second Session Kowalski, Hon. Ken, Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock, Speaker Cao, Wayne C.N., Calgary-Fort, Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees Mitzel, Len, Cypress-Medicine Hat, Deputy Chair of Committees Ady, Hon. Cindy, Calgary-Shaw (PC), Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation Allred, Ken, St.

Albert (PC) Amery, Moe, Calgary-East (PC) Anderson, Rob, Airdrie-Chestermere (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Solicitor General and Public Security Benito, Carl, Edmonton-Mill Woods (PC) Berger, Evan, Livingstone-Macleod (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Sustainable Resource Development Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC) Bhullar, Manmeet Singh, Calgary-Montrose (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Advanced Education and Technology Blackett, Hon.

Lindsay, Calgary-North West (PC), Minister of Culture and Community Spirit Blakeman, Laurie, Edmonton-Centre (AL), Deputy Leader of the Official Opposition Official Opposition House Leader Boutilier, Guy C., Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo (PC) Brown, Dr. Neil, QC, Calgary-Nose Hill (PC) Calahasen, Pearl, Lesser Slave Lake (PC) Campbell, Robin, West Yellowhead (PC), Deputy Government Whip Chase, Harry B., Calgary-Varsity (AL), Official Opposition Whip Dallas, Cal, Red Deer-South (PC) Danyluk, Hon. Ray, Lac La Biche-St.

Paul (PC), Minister of Municipal Affairs DeLong, Alana, Calgary-Bow (PC) Denis, Jonathan, Calgary-Egmont (PC) Doerksen, Arno, Strathmore-Brooks (PC) Drysdale, Wayne, Grande Prairie-Wapiti (PC) Elniski, Doug, Edmonton-Calder (PC) Evans, Hon. Iris, Sherwood Park (PC), Minister of Finance and Enterprise Fawcett, Kyle, Calgary-North Hill (PC) Forsyth, Heather, Calgary-Fish Creek (PC) Fritz, Hon. Yvonne, Calgary-Cross (PC), Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs Goudreau, Hon.

Hector G., Dunvegan-Central Peace (PC), Minister of Employment and Immigration Griffiths, Doug, Battle River-Wainwright (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Agriculture and Rural Development Groeneveld, Hon. George, Highwood (PC), Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Hancock, Hon. Dave, QC, Edmonton-Whitemud (PC), Minister of Education, Government House Leader Hayden, Hon. Jack, Drumheller-Stettler (PC), Minister of Infrastructure Hehr, Kent, Calgary-Buffalo (AL) Horne, Fred, Edmonton-Rutherford (PC) Horner, Hon. Doug, Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St.

Albert (PC), Minister of Advanced Education and Technology Jablonski, Hon. Mary Anne, Red Deer-North (PC), Minister of Seniors and Community Supports Jacobs, Broyce, Cardston-Taber-Warner (PC) Johnson, Jeff, Athabasca-Redwater (PC) Johnston, Art, Calgary-Hays (PC) Kang, Darshan S., Calgary-McCall (AL) Klimchuk, Hon. Heather, Edmonton-Glenora (PC), Minister of Service Alberta Knight, Hon. Mel, Grande Prairie-Smoky (PC), Minister of Energy Leskiw, Genia, Bonnyville-Cold Lake (PC) Liepert, Hon. Ron, Calgary-West (PC), Minister of Health and Wellness Lindsay, Hon.

Fred, Stony Plain (PC), Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Lukaszuk, Thomas A., Edmonton-Castle Downs (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Municipal Affairs Lund, Ty, Rocky Mountain House (PC) MacDonald, Hugh, Edmonton-Gold Bar (AL) Marz, Richard, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills (PC) Mason, Brian, Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood (NDP), Leader of the NDP Opposition McFarland, Barry, Little Bow (PC) McQueen, Diana, Drayton Valley-Calmar (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Environment Morton, Hon.

F.L., Foothills-Rocky View (PC), Minister of Sustainable Resource Development Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (NDP), Deputy Leader of the NDP Opposition, NDP Opposition House Leader Oberle, Frank, Peace River (PC), Government Whip Olson, Verlyn, QC, Wetaskiwin-Camrose (PC) Ouellette, Hon. Luke, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake (PC), Minister of Transportation Pastoor, Bridget Brennan, Lethbridge-East (AL), Deputy Official Opposition Whip Prins, Ray, Lacombe-Ponoka (PC) Quest, Dave, Strathcona (PC) Redford, Hon. Alison M., QC, Calgary-Elbow (PC), Minister of Justice and Attorney General Renner, Hon.

Rob, Medicine Hat (PC), Minister of Environment, Deputy Government House Leader Rodney, Dave, Calgary-Lougheed (PC) Rogers, George, Leduc-Beaumont-Devon (PC) Sandhu, Peter, Edmonton-Manning (PC) Sarich, Janice, Edmonton-Decore (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Education Sherman, Dr. Raj, Edmonton-Meadowlark (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Health and Wellness Snelgrove, Hon. Lloyd, Vermilion-Lloydminster (PC), President of the Treasury Board Stelmach, Hon. Ed, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville (PC), Premier, President of Executive Council Swann, Dr.

David, Calgary-Mountain View (AL), Leader of the Official Opposition Taft, Dr. Kevin, Edmonton-Riverview (AL) Tarchuk, Hon. Janis, Banff-Cochrane (PC), Minister of Children and Youth Services Taylor, Dave, Calgary-Currie (AL) VanderBurg, George, Whitecourt-Ste. Anne (PC) Vandermeer, Tony, Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview (PC) Weadick, Greg, Lethbridge-West (PC) Webber, Len, Calgary-Foothills (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Energy Woo-Paw, Teresa, Calgary-Mackay (PC) Xiao, David H., Edmonton-McClung (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Employment and Immigration Zwozdesky, Hon.

Gene, Edmonton-Mill Creek (PC), Minister of Aboriginal Relations, Deputy Government House Leader Officers and Officials of the Legislative Assembly Clerk W.J. David McNeil Clerk Assistant/ Director of House Services Louise J. Kamuchik Clerk of Journals/Table Research Micheline S. Gravel Senior Parliamentary Counsel Robert H. Reynolds, QC Senior Parliamentary Counsel Shannon Dean Sergeant-at-Arms Brian G. Hodgson Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms J. Ed Richard Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms William C. Semple Managing Editor of Alberta Hansard Liz Sim

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1511 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Wednesday, June 3, 2009 1:30 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 3, 2009 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon and welcome. Let us pray. Let us keep ever mindful of the special and unique opportunity we have to work for our constituents and our province, and in that work let us find strength and wisdom. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Visitors The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Technology. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to introduce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly the ambassador of the People’s Republic of China, His Excellency Lan Lijun. Accompa- nying the ambassador today are Mr. Jiang Shan, minister-counsellor, embassy of the People’s Republic of China; Mr. Tian Yuzhen, second secretary, embassy of the People’s Republic of China; and Mr. Wu Xinjian, the consul general in Calgary. This is the ambassa- dor’s first official visit to Alberta. I had the pleasure of hosting a lunch for him earlier today. Mr.

Speaker, Alberta and China have a rich history of co-opera- tion, including a twinning relationship between Alberta and the province of Heilongjiang that dates back to 1981. Alberta also has international offices in Beijing and Hong Kong, which have helped to strengthen our trade relations, and China is Alberta’s second- largest export market. Looking to the future, I believe there is tremendous potential for greater collaboration between Alberta and China.

I would ask His Excellency the ambassador and his delegation to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly three bright young Albertans seated in the mem- bers’ gallery. Their names are Miss Madeleine Gauthier, Mr. Rory Dumelie, and Miss Danielle Bailey-Heelan. Rory, Danielle, and Madeleine are accompanied today by their unsung supporters, their parents: Mr.

Patrick and Stephanie Dumelie, Mr. James Heelan, and Mr. Denis Gauthier. This is truly a group of outstanding Albertans whose generosity and caring for this province is unparalleled. I would ask now that they rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of our Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Hayden: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a visiting group of 63 folks from my constituency and the Greentree school from Drumheller made up of students and parents and teachers.

It’s such a pleasure to introduce these wonderful young people. I had an opportunity to have my picture taken with them and had them up to the office. They truly, truly are a bright bunch of kids that I know are going to make us proud. With them today are their teachers Lesley Smith and Kirstin Sutcliffe. They’re also accompanied by parent volunteers Jacquie Lemal, Michelle Olsen, Jim Brown, Norm Fournier, Donna Weiss, Koren McDougald, Brad McDougald, and Lenore Rowbottom. I would now ask them if they would please rise and receive the warm and traditional welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Environment. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s with great pleasure that I rise today to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly some of Alberta’s environmental leaders who are seated in the public gallery this afternoon. Today Miss Georgia Turcott of Canmore is Alberta’s honorary Environment minister. Georgia is one of approximately 1,400 students who participated in this year’s minister for the day program. Earlier today she along with her deputy ministers did an excellent job of briefing me on their environmental concerns. Mr.

Speaker, Georgia is joined by her 11 deputy ministers in the public gallery, and I would be pleased if I could introduce them at this time. They are Alyssa Ermineskin of Wetaskiwin, Asma Azad of Calgary, Abby Cardinal of Westerose, Dharma Ozsust of Ardrossan, Ethan Wagner of Airdrie, Tosin Odugbemi of Stony Plain, Aqila Walji of Calgary, Dylan Yanke of Medicine Hat, Maria Ayala of Calgary, Julie McIntosh of Edmonton, and Georgenea Senetza of Smoky Lake, along with the minister for the day, Georgia Turcott. I ask that they all rise and receive the recognition of the House. Mr.

Speaker, I just want to acknowledge that they are joined by a number of teachers and parents, who have done an excellent job of bringing these young people into a true leadership position, and I congratulate them all. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathmore-Brooks. Mr. Doerksen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure this afternoon to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a group of bright and friendly grades 5 and 6 students from Standard elementary school in my constituency. They are accompanied today by teachers Mrs. Susan Moncks and Mrs.

Dora Will and one of their parents, Mrs. Michelle Lomond. I believe they shared the coach with the Greentree school, that was just introduced to you. They are seated in the public gallery, and I’d ask them to rise and enjoy the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Legislative Assembly of Alberta is a host site for the annual Historica Fair and initiated an award to recognize participants who demonstrate outstanding achievement in celebrating an aspect of Canadian parliamentary democracy, governance, and political history with a specific focus on Alberta. It is now my pleasure to introduce to the Assembly the winner of this year’s award, a grade 7 student who presented an enthusiastic representation of the life and work of Louise McKinney. Please join me in congratulating Moira Wyton from the Victoria School of Performing and Visual Arts in Edmonton.

Moira is seated in the Speaker’s gallery with her parents, sister, and grandparents. I would ask our guests to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Service Alberta.

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091512 Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two introductions today. The first is of my summer STEP student in my constituency office, Alyssa Brotto. Alyssa has proven to be a very smart and hard-working addition to the office, dedicated to helping my constituents. In addition to working in the constituency office this summer, Alyssa gives swimming lessons and is a lifeguard as well.

Come September, Alyssa will be returning to th e University of Alberta, where she will continue her bachelor of arts degree and her bachelor of education and become a high school social studies and English teacher. Could I ask everyone to join me in welcoming Alyssa to the Legislative Assembly. My second introduction, Mr. Speaker, is of my constituency assistant, Josie Jason. Josie ha s been my assistant since I was elected. I know my office would not be running smoothly if I didn’t have her.

Josie approaches each day with enthusiasm and a sense of humour that allows her to overcome and deal with the many challenges she has every day. Please join me in welcoming Josie Jason. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. 1:40 Mr. Vandermeer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my honour to present to you two guests today. Judy Lytton is a long-time resident of the constituency of Edmonton-Manning. Judy has just completed her book called The Orphan Wild Rose, a personal biography.

Accompanying Judy is Theresa Lightfoot, who has assisted Judy with photographs and compiling her words into book format. They are seated in the public gallery, and I’d ask them both to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills. Mr. Marz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure for me to rise today and introduce two good friends of mine from Three Hills that are here today. They actually drove up all those great students from the Greentree school. They are seated in the public gallery: Mr. Scott Morrison and Mr. Alex Cunningham.

Alex and I served together formerly on the Three H ills hospital board. If Alex and Scott would rise and please receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Member for Peace River. Mr. Oberle: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just need to point out that we’re joined in the gallery today by Brady Whittaker, executive director of the Alberta Forest Products Association, who’s working so hard on behalf of his industry in these tough times. Welcome, Brady, to the Legislature.

Privilege Ethics Commissioner Advice on Conflicts of Interest The Speaker: Hon. members, yesterday there was in this Assembly a petition for a question of privilege, and I’m prepared to make my ruling with respect to this matter now. This purported question of privilege was raised by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview yesterday, June 2, 2009.

To summarize, the member’s purported question of privilege was that the Ethics Commissioner interfered with the member’s ability to perform his functions by providing conflicting advice as to whether the member could participate in debate on Bill 43, the Marketing of Agricultural Products Amendment Act, 2009 (No. 2).

In documents provided to the Speaker in support of this purported question of privilege, the member included letters from the Ethics Commissioner dated May 26, 2009, advising him that as a result of the holdings of the member’s father-in-law he had to recuse himself from participation in debate on the bill and from voting, and a letter dated June 1, 2009, where the Ethics Commissioner apologized for his earlier advice and informed the member he could participate in further debate and vote on Bill 43.

Under Standing Order 15(6) the Speaker’s role in the question of privilege is to determine whether the matter was raised at the earliest opportunity and whether it constitutes a prima facie question of privilege. With respect to the formalities the member indicated yesterday that he’d received the Ethics Commissioner’s letter after the proceedings in the Assembly had commenced on June 1. He provided notice to the Speaker’s office at 10:55 a.m. on June 2, which the chair finds to be in compliance with Standing Order 15(2), and the chair finds that the matter was raised at the earliest opportu- nity.

At the outset the chair notes that it was clear from the Member for Edmonton-Riverview’s comments yesterday that he was driven by a desire to comply with the rule s that the members have set for themselves in the Conflicts of Interest Act while wanting to participate in debate on a matter for which he had prepared exten- sively. His justified frustration was apparent. While this matter was raised by one particular member, it reflects a sentiment that is found throughout the Assembly of members being dedicated to observing the rules while wanting to represent their constituents.

In this case there is no doubt that the member was prevented from participating in the debate at committee stage on Bill 43. However, any obstruction that occurred was because of advice from an officer of the Legislature whose mandate and functions are set out in the Conflicts of Interest Act. The member did not suggest that there was any malicious intent on the part of the commissioner or that the commissioner was acting outside the scope of his duties.

The Ethics Commissioner occupies a unique position as the Assembly has delegated to that individual the ability to know a member’s and his or her family’s most intimate financial details and to apply the Conflicts of Interest Act in a fair and even-handed manner. It is a position of ultim ate trust. While the position and duties are defined by a statute, his recommendations are subject to debate and approval by the Assembly when he proposes a sanction against a member.

Just as the commissioner must expect members to be forthright in their disclosures, members have the right to expect that the decisions and advice from the commissioner are rigorous and consistent. In this case the commissioner admitted to having made a mistake which deprived the member of his ability to participate in a critical phase of the legislative process. In conducting research on this matter, the chair discovered that on October 6, 2005, Speaker Milliken of the Canadian House of Commons found that there was a prima facie question of privilege involving the actions of the then Ethics Commissioner, Dr.

Bernard Shapiro, which can be found at House of Commons Debates pages 8473-8474. The matter was referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, which found that the commissioner was in contempt of the House but did not recommend any sanctions or penalty. That report was presented in the House of Commons on November 18, 2005. In that case the issue was that the commis- sioner discussed a complaint against a member with the media in violation of his duty of confidentiality and that the member was not provided with written notice of the investigation and the charges against him.

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1513 In this case the Ethics Commissioner was fulfilling his duty to provide advice to a member. The essence of the complaint is that the advice was wrong, which was admitted by the commissioner, and that the error deprived the member of his ability to participate in debate. The Assembly is not without recourse against officers. For instance, under

section 36 of the Conflicts of Interest Act the Ethics Commissioner may be suspended or removed from office for cause or incapacity by the Lieutenant Governor in Council on the recom- mendation of the Assembly. If the Assembly is not sitting, the Standing Committee on Legislative Offices may recommend suspension, but that suspension is only effective until the end of the next sitting of the Assembly. The Conflicts of Interest Act is a code for members. It does not provide for an appeal of advice provided by the commissioner.

The chair is reluctant to find that there is a prima facie question of privilege as that could be interpreted as providing an avenue for appeal for members from advice from the Ethics Commissioner. The chair would as well like to make a comment on something said by another member during his participation in the debate on this purported question of privilege. It is this chair’s view, and one supported by the Conflicts of Interest Act, that members must act in accordance with advice from the Ethics Commissioner. Under

section 43(5) of the act no proceeding can be taken against a member “by reason only of the facts so communicated and the compliance of the Member, former Minister or former . . . staff member with the recommendations.” In short, members should not engage in opinion shopping as they are only protected if they comply with the Ethics Commissioner’s advice. At this time the chair is of the view that there is no prima facie question of privilege but does not want to end the matter there. In the chair’s view the member was most gracious in speaking to the issue of remedy.

He was not seeking a proverbial pound of flesh but wanted to ensure that there were measures undertaken to review what constitutes a conflict of interest so that members could perform their functions while not furthering their private interests. In the chair’s view there is much merit to this suggestion. Even prior to this question of privilege discussions were under way to ensure that caucuses and officials could provide their views to the Ethics Commissioner so that there was harmony between the intent of members in enacting the legislation and the commissioner in interpreting it.

Towards that end, there are some actions that the chair would like to advise members of that will or, in the chair’s view, should occur. Number one, the Ethics Commissioner has agreed to meet with caucuses to discuss and receive i nput on the application of the Conflicts of Interest Act. This invitation must be taken up. Number two, Parliamentary Counsel and c ounsel from the Department of Justice and Attorney General are to meet with the Ethics Commissioner to discuss the background to the act, previous reviews of the act, and approaches to

interpretation. Number three, the Speaker and Minister of Justice and Attorney General are to be available to discuss any issues that the Ethics Commissioner might have concerning the application of the act. Number four, the Ethics Commissioner is to provide prior to the commencement of the fall sitting a general overview of the interpre- tation of the act with respect to what might constitute a private interest of such a nature to require a member to absent himself or herself from the proceedings of the Assembly, committee, or other forum.

The chair reminds members that a special select committee of the Assembly under the able chairmanship of the Member for Calgary- Nose Hill reviewed the Conflicts of Interest Act a few years ago. The committee issued its report in May of 2006. The bill resulting from that review was introduced in the Assembly on April 18, 2007, considered by a policy field committee, and given royal assent on December 7, 2007. It came into effect on April 1, 2008. The chair points this out as there was a great deal of background material on this subject found in the report and the proceedings of the commit- tee.

Research should be done, in fact, with the historical records of that committee. 1:50 While it is hoped that any consultations are productive, the chair would like to offer a comment as he is not a disinterested observer in the proceedings of this Assembly. In fact, it is the chair who witnesses and deals directly with the impact that the Ethics Commis- sioner’s rulings and advice have on the deliberations in this Assem- bly. As the discussions move forward, the chair hopes that all are mindful that constituents often expect that their elected representa- tive’s experience will play a

part in the decision-making process. Of course, no one is disputing that if, for example, a member or a direct associate would derive a real and tangible benefit from a contract or such, the member should recuse himself or herself from the delibera- tions. The issue is where to draw the line between private interest and public duty. One of the recommendations of the select special committee that reviewed the act in 2005-06 was that the

preamble be expanded to include provisions such as: • The Assembly as a whole can represent the people of Alberta most effectively if its Members have experience and knowl- edge in relation to many aspects of life of Alberta and if they can continue to be active in their own communities, whether in business, in the practice of a profession, or otherwise. • A Member’s duty to represent his or her constituents includes broadly representing his or her constituents’ interests in the Assembly and to the Government of Alberta. Bill 2 amended the Conflicts of Interest Act to add a new recital to the

preamble, which reads:

Whereas Members of the Legislative Assembly can serve Albertans most effectively if they come from a spectrum of occupations and continue to participate actively in the community. In the chair’s view these principles are a good basis on which to guide discussion on the

interpretation of the act. Thank you. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Government Communications Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. From fiscal ’07-08 to fiscal ’09-10 this administration’s total communications budget increased 55 per cent. The ministries that had the largest budgets or received the largest increases are those that have the worst image problems.

Alberta Environment, Energy, Health and Wellness, Sustainable Resource Development are among the big spenders, and of course the Premier’s Executive Council has received a considerable increase in the communications budget. To the Premier: if the government needs to cut program spending in order to reduce its budget, will the Premier commit to communications being the first area audited and considered before cutting core social programs? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, a couple of things. One, with respect to the overall programs that we hold dear – health, education – we

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091514 continued increases in the budget for education, advanced education, health, and social services. That is coming from our sustainability fund, that we’ve put together to deal with particular situations. With respect to the Public Affairs budget, that budget was debated here in the House. The hon. member will recall the fact that for the budget that was allocated to Public Affairs, we actually did not spend all that money in Public Affairs, and it was part of the 250 some-odd million dollars that went into savings at the end of the year to balance our budget. Dr.

Swann: Well, the Premier in his own ministry, Executive Council, spent $11 million on policy development and $25 million on communications through the Public Affairs Bureau and the new rebranding scheme. What is the Premier’s rationale for spending more on spin than on trying to improve government services? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I believe the member is referring to a three-year budget, the business plan. We are continuing with promoting Alberta to a global marketplace. It is very, very impor- tant that we do that. We get the message to the American decision- makers.

We have done some work, obviously, in Europe, and we’ll continue to do that because we do depend on exports of our com- modities to markets, and that is what creates the wealth in Alberta that supports many of the social programs that the hon. member is talking about. Dr. Swann: Well, given that some of his own ministers can’t remember the new million-dollar slogan, would the minister say to Albertans that this is a responsible way to spend 25 million public dollars? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, yes, it is.

Just coming back from Europe and listening to the questions that were asked by investors – and I believe there was a few trillion dollars collectively that investors held to look at investment around the world. The fact that we were there and talked about some of the misinformation that was delivered to those investors by other groups dealing with the misinformation, giving them the correct information and inviting them to invest some of that money in the province of Alberta is integral if we’re going to keep our economy growing and support all of the programs that we enjoy.

The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Provincial Health Facilities Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Albertans find it concerning that the Premier only hears about important decisions occurring in one of the most critical ministries through internal documents we tabled in the House. Yesterday I asked the Premier questions regarding talks that H ealth Services is having with doctors’ groups for leasing public health facilities. The Premier did not know what I was referring to and said he would find out.

Again to the Premier: will the Premier give the reason that Fort Saskatche- wan hospital and the urology centre at the Rockyview are under consideration for being turned over to doctors’ groups? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’ll make it very clear. I don’t care what kind of information he has. I can assure people living in the constituency of Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville that the hospital will remain as a publicly funded institution in the province of Alberta. No question about it. Dr.

Swann: Will the Premier now confirm that this is the reason why the Fort Saskatchewan hospital is under review and repurposing of the facility may happen? Mr. Stelmach: I don’t know where he’s going. I just drove – actually, I stopped by to pick up some potted plants for Marie at the Home Depot. The hospital is being built just a bit south of the Home Depot and the other centre. Construction is proceeding. It looks like they’ve got the elevator shaft poured.

This is, of course, a replace- ment facility for the Fort Saskatchewan facility that does a lot of work, a good partnership with the hospital in Lamont and other physicians in the city of Edmonton. It’s part of the ever-growing partnership and collaboration of our doctors and specialists that are doing good work in the province of Alberta, and they’ll have a brand new facility to work in. Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, Albertans, including professional groups, are really unclear what this government is concealing about the plans for the health care system.

Could the Premier talk about what other facilities are under consideration for professional groups, including doctors’ groups, to have a role in? Be open. Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, you know, a little angel is saying, “Don’t say this,” and a little devil is over here. He just questioned me about the cost of communication in the province of Alberta, and now we’re saying how we’re going to communicate to Albertans. We’re going to keep communicating with Albertans.

Just, again, to all Albertans: we’re working very, very hard to ensure that our system, this good health system that we have, remains publicly funded, that it remains there for future generations, and we’re going to do whatever we can to improve the effectiveness and the quality of care in our province. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Electricity Transmission System Upgrades Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In May 2003 the government behind closed doors overruled a regulatory process and shifted all the costs of transmission upgrades onto the monthly electricity bills of Alberta consumers. Six years later we now know that this decision, made behind closed doors, shifted over $7 billion from the power generators to electricity consumers, who have already seen the full effects of electricity deregulation as it was implemented by this government.

To the Premier: why did the government make the decision behind closed doors to overrule the regulatory process and shift an additional $7 billion onto the monthly bills of consumers and not leave it where it belonged, with the power generators? 2:00 Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the little devil is getting ahead of me, but I won’t listen to him. I don’t know. Maybe there was a window behind these closed doors that the hon. member was peeking into and could see who was around the table. I don’t know. Let’s be honest. Let’s be honest with all Albertans, all Canadians, and all Americans.

One of the biggest issues we’re facing on this North American continent is an aging, very inefficient transmission system. At the end of the day it’s the consumer that pays the cost. If anybody says that some company pays the cost, that is bunk. That’s absolutely not true. Now, here’s the thing. The other day we heard some comments with respect to carbon. Okay? Well, today b ecause of this aging

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1515 and inefficient system – can I just compare it to a water pipe? This water pipe has some holes. If you’re sending, let’s say, 10 gallons of water through that water pipe, you’re losing an X amount of water. Well, when somebody turns on their hair dryer or plugs in their car, all of a sudden we have to send more electricity down the line. Guess what? We lose more. This is not only adding to the carbon footprint, but we’re also burning more coal to make more electricity to lose more in the line getting to where the consumer is. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier.

The Premier knows full well – and he doesn’t have to get his little devil to tell him this – that the generators of electricity are the big winners in electricity deregulation and consumers again are the big losers. Now, given the fact that we need an additional $2 billion plus to upgrade our provincial interties, will the Premier guarantee here this afternoon in the Assembly to cons umers that they will not have to foot the bill for the $2 billion in intertie upgrades that are needed? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, what I was referring to is a good transmission system within the prov ince of Alberta.

Here’s the issue. In southern Alberta we have a potential of generating a considerable amount of wind energy. That’s where the wind blows, except the consumer doesn’t live where the wind blows. Okay? They live in Calgary. They live in Edmonton. We have to tie that wind energy, green energy, to a good transmission line, that we add the extra energy to, to get it to where the consumer is. We have tremendous potential in the future for more green energy. It could be even in-stream generation, power generation. It could also be more biomass. I mean, there’s a huge movement towards biomass.

It’s the future, really, for Alberta. Wherever we’re creating that biomass energy, we have to also transmit those electrons to where the consumer lives. This is the discussion; this is where we’re going. The other thing is that there are all kinds of costs attached. You know, one paper says $14 billion; one paper says $8 billion. We’ll know what the cost is when we actually get to the design stage. All I know is that we have to replace those transmission systems. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier.

This report which was issued yesterday indicates the total cost will be over $16 billion, and I would strongly urge the hon. Premier to read that. Now, speaking of costs – again to the Premier – how can inflation be blamed for the skyrocketing costs for these transmission up- grades, which have increased from 3 and a half billion dollars to over $14 billion, plus the $2 billion for the intertie? How can inflation be blamed now for this dramatic increase when we see other construction projects in the province with a reduction in costs up to 40 per cent? Mr. Stelmach: First of all, with respect to the intertie. Mr.

MacDonald: Did you read the report? Mr. Stelmach: Can you give me time to answer? You asked the question. Mr. MacDonald: It won’t matter. Mr. Stelmach: Well, I guess if it won’t matter, why are you asking the question? One of the things on the intertie is that it’s clear that the Alberta consumer won’t be paying the cost. However, to deal with this issue of aging lines and this cost of inflation, we were living in inflation- ary times, obviously, in the last number of years. All of these costs that we have that are quoted by the opposition and by one of the newspapers vary from $8 billion to $14 billion.

All I’m saying is that we have to make the decisions. Let’s identify where the transmission line is going to go, number one. Number two, let’s get on with the design and getting them con- structed because four to five years from now there may be areas of this province of Alberta that are actually going to be short of electricity. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Children in Care Ms Notley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is with great sadness that Albertans learned of a horrible tragedy in Strathcona county on Monday.

A man’s and a woman’s bodies were discovered following a police investigation into the alleged theft of a pickup truck. Now, the two 14-year-old boys that were charged with that crime were in the care of the Minister of Children and Youth Services. To that minister: will she now launch a full public inquiry into the crisis within child intervention services in Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is an absolutely tragic incident, and my condolences go to the family and the friends of the victims.

Now, obviously, because we will have legal proceedings, I can’t say too much, but I can tell you that these two youths are in our care. They also have been placed in a residential treatment facility. We have taken an initial look at the decisions that surrounded that pl acement and f ound that they were appropriate. We also have confirmed that the protocols surrounding the reporting of AWOL youth were also followed by that facility.

There was never any indication that either of these youths was ever a risk to themselves or others, but obviously as we move forward with more information, we will continue to look at the situation. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Notley: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Under this minister’s watch we have seen the death of two children in care, the traumatic injury and hospitalization of another, and now two teenagers in care are accused of murder and accessory after the fact. It is clear that there is something very seriously wrong with the entire system.

So will the minister announce today a public inquiry into child protec- tion services in Alberta in an effort to find solutions to a system that is so obviously in crisis? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The system is not in crisis. I would like to remind everyone here that we have 9,000 children in care receiving services from thousands and thousands of volunteers, staff members, and foster parents, and they do an awfully good job. We also know that across the country, b ecause of our Alberta response model, we are seen as a leader in child welfare.

We know that our Alberta Foster Parent Association is considered one of the top in the country. We had a full foster care review last year that considered our system a good one. They said we weren’t perfect, had recommendations, and we’ve adopted them. As well, the Auditor General has fully audited our ministry and said that it was a very well-designed system.

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091516 Ms Notley: Well, Mr. Speaker, this minister’s inability to fix the problems with the foster and the group home system has had tragic results. Residents and community representatives in Strathcona county have expressed concerns to the ministry in the past about the particular facility in question. It is not enough to simply express sympathy and concern after the fact without addressing the circum- stances that led to the tragedy. Why won’t the minister initiate a public inquiry? Why isn’t she interested in fixing a broken system? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, this situation has been absolutely shocking and devastating for everyone, includ- ing the other residents of that facility, the staff, and the community that the member refers to. Our immediate focus is to make sure that we get support to those people. I can tell you that as early as tomorrow we do have CFSA and the RCMP meeting with the county out there to address any issues. In fact, they were all together this morning for the sharing of the information on the circumstances here.

Back to the comment about looking into circumstances, we have taken a look at the two most important things, decisions around the placement of these youth as well as protocols being followed in the facility, and like I said, they have been. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Clean Energy Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Right now, as we sit here, in Ottawa and in Washington and later at an international conference in Copenhagen discussions are being had and decisions are being made on clean energy production at the highest levels of govern- ment.

These decisions will have a direct impact on Alberta’s economy for all Albertans as energy consumers and also those who make their living in the energy industry and from related spinoff industries. My question is to the Premier. What will the Premier do over the coming months to make sure that Alberta’s interests are clearly and forcefully represented? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, there’s no doubt that as a growing energy producer and, of course, the engine of the Canadian econ- omy, a lot of the eyes of the world are on this province.

We’re going to have to manage our relationship with Ottawa, with Washington, and with some of our other partners around the world very carefully. Decisions made elsewhere have a direct impact on the province of Alberta, a direct impact on our global competitiveness, and they also will have at the end of the day an impact on our quality of life and standard of living.

I will undertake this summer to again meet with the western governors in Utah and the Western Premier’s Confer- ence and continue to work with federal officials with the Minister of Energy and also the Minister of Environment to make sure that we are at the table for all of these discussions. 2:10 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you. Clearly, our federal government is a huge player in these discussions on these issues.

My second question again to the Premier: have you spoken to the Prime Minister on this issue, and if so, has he offered anything by way of assurance that Alberta’s interests will be protected? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I did write to the hon. Prime Minister outlining Alberta’s concerns as we enter into the clean energy dialogue. If climate change is the new national priority, we have to make sure that at the end of the day there is balance, that Albertans alone won’t be singled out as having to absorb the total cost, burden, of any policy that’s implemented.

Our concern, of course, is over coal-fired electricity generation – that is the largest carbon footprint that we have in Alberta – followed by transportation and, thirdly, by the oil sands. The discussions have been fruitful. All I’m saying is that I don’t want to have Albertans burdened with the cost of something in national policy that should be shared across the country. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question is again to the Premier. You know, this could have huge, huge implications for all Albertans and Canada. What really is at stake here for Alberta and Canada? Mr.

Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, there’s no doubt that Alberta has taken a leadership role, knowing the fact that as we produce energy, we need to transition to cleaner barrels of oil and a lower carbon footprint and electrical generation. The problem is that if the cost of energy really increased rapidly, then it will have an impact on our economy, but because we are the engine of the Canadian economy, it’ll have an impact across Canada.

My concern is that if it is a policy that places a further burden – I made it very clear to the Prime Minister that the net contribution to Ottawa over the last 10 years, just the last 10 years, from Alberta was $117 billion. So if there are further interregional wealth transfers, we’d better look at what Alberta has already contributed to Canada and find a solution so that, again, we find a balance that treats everyone fairly across Canada and doesn’t focus on the province of Alberta. That will be my top priority over the summer. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon.

Member for Livingstone-Macleod. Workforce Employment Services Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. Given that the unem- ployment rate for Albertans in the construction industry is 13 per cent, for manufacturing it’s 8.7 per cent, for mining and gas it’s 8.5 per cent, and for youth in this province it’s over 12 per cent, what is this government doing to retrain these individuals so that they can get back in the workforce? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, we’ve got quite a number of initia- tives to make sure that unemployed Albertans get to work or have the ability to work. Inasmuch as the member quotes numbers, we need to keep in mind that the unemployment level overall in the province of Alberta is more like 6 per cent rather than some of the numbers that he is identifying. He leads us to believe that our numbers are considerably higher. That means that we’ve got 94 per cent of Albertans working, that there are still some sectors that are short of employees. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can’t believe that this hon. member has very little sympathy for unemployed construction

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1517 workers and for youth in this province between the ages of 16 and 24 who cannot find a job. Again to the same minister: given that only 25 per cent of unemployed Albertans are receiving EI benefits, when is the Minister of Employment and Immigration finally going to stick up for and defend the interests of the unemployed in this province? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, we’re very actively engaged in offering additional training and upgrading to individuals that are looking for work. I’m very, very sympathetic to those who don’t have any jobs.

Any time somebody loses their job, it’s very disconcerting for them, and I’m, again, very sympathetic to them. We also do job matching. We’re making sure that we are continu- ously posting those jobs that are available. We’ve got thousands, as a matter of fact probably between 4,000 and 5,000 jobs that are posted on our website that are available. We do take a very active role in matching individuals to those particular jobs. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister.

We know you’re very actively engaged in recruiting temporary foreign workers – that’s the truth – but for the unemployed people, you’re just leaving them out in the cold. Now, I personally wrote on behalf of our caucus to the federal government in February urging them to make EI payments more fair for unemployed Albertans and to make the same rules apply across the entire country. Why haven’t this minister and this government put more pressure on the federal government to make sure that the unemployment insurance rules are fair regardless of where the unemployed live, whether in Alberta or Ontario? Mr.

Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, there still is a good role for temporary foreign workers in the province of Alberta. Having said that, our priority is still to make sure that Albertans are first, that those individuals that the hon. member indicates – our youth, our aging population, or those from the aboriginal community or the disabled community – have opportunities to work when they can. We’re going to do everything for that to happen. As well, Mr. Speaker, the Premier has talked to the federal government concerning EI reforms. I, too, have written to the minister.

I have a scheduled phone call with the hon. minister tomorrow morning, as a matter of fact, to talk specifically on that. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Livingstone-Macleod, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Federal Economic Stimulus Funding Mr. Berger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the federal budget announced earlier this year, a number of economic stimulus funds were announced along with it.

I’m hearing from many municipal leaders that the initially welcome news that the federal government would finally be participating in infrastructure spending has not been accompanied by project announcements and the money that was originally expected. My questions are to the President of the Treasury Board. Can you update this Assembly on the status of the federal stimulus spending on infrastructure in the province of Alberta? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr.

Speaker, it has been an interesting discussion with the federal government with regard to the stimulus spending on top of the many different funds that the federal government has brought forward through the building Canada fund. However, we have agreed to and have signed off on the stimulus funding frame- work as well as the knowledge infrastructure program, that they have signed with the province. It has flowed.

Just as recently as two weeks ago the Minister of Transportation announced $227 million for 73 projects around Alberta, and on May 4 the minister of advanced education announced 348 million joint dollars on 28 projects around the province. We are certainly continuing to work with our federal counterparts to bring forward the money. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Berger: Thank you. Again to the President of the Treasury Board: do these previous announcements represent all of the federal monies available, or can we expect additional announcements in the near future? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr.

Speaker, we haven’t announced even all of the projects that are currently under some of the project funding as we are working off our capital plan and from our priorities. We would expect that probably in the area of another $350 million will flow to Alberta communities and projects through this. We also are anticipating the regulations around the RINC fund, which could see another $150 million, potentially, go to recreation projects through- out the province of Alberta.

While we have not been part of talks of an Ecofund or a community adjustment fund around environmental issues, we expect that that’s on the way, too. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Berger: Thank you. Once again to the President of the Treasury Board. While it appears that there’s a lot of effort under way, my understanding is that these federal stimulus funds and the projects they fund have to be completed by March 2011. That’s not a lot of time that we’re talking about to complete significant infrastructure projects.

What is the holdup in getting all of the projects announced and the federal money into the province of Alberta? 2:20 Mr. Snelgrove: The hon. member is correct. It was a bit of a problem when the federal government talked about shovel-ready projects, Mr. Speaker, but then they wanted new projects. It’s very difficult for the province to set aside their current capital plans – we have a very thorough capital plan – and go to meet some of the criteria, so we’ve been working ve ry carefully to get that to the funding. It can be a problem for some. This program is based on a reimbursement.

Approximately 25 per cent of the funds will be at the start of the project, and then the communities in the province need to complete these projects before they’re eligible to receive the rest. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we have to assume total financial responsibility to ensure that the funds are expended in the two years, and we need to be very careful that these projects fit that criteria so that we’re not in a position to reimburse the funds. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Egmont. Income Support for Housing Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, as the buck passes between ministers, people are losing their homes while others can’t get off the street. Worse yet, the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs thinks cancelling the HEP fund program was a good-news story, and the Minister of Employment and Immigration doesn’t

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091518 understand that $350 for a damage deposit, even for a single person, isn’t enough given rents for apartments in this province. Both ministers seem clearly out of touch with what’s happening on the street. To the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs: what support, other than going to a shelter, is available for someone who is unable to qualify for emergency funding and can’t wait the two years to get a rent supplement? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can tell you that I’m very in touch with what’s happening out on the street, hon. member.

I visit often with the organizations and the agencies in a number of municipalities across Alberta, and I know exactly what they’re looking for for services. What you’re referring to right now, emergent funding, is with Employment and Immigration, and I’ll ask the minister to respond. Mr. Taylor: As I said before, the buck passes. Since the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs is no longer in charge of eviction prevention funding and likes to make that clear every time I ask a question, even dancing around the edges of that, the next questions are to the Minister of Employment and Immigra- tion.

How much money did that minister’s department receive to handle the other minister’s caseload of people who are looking for emergency funding for housing and used to look to her for it before they dropped the program? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I think the important thing to recognize is that individuals that require help will get the help on a timely basis and get the amount of help that they require to be able to find the proper accommodations.

We know that in this province there is more available housing than there was a year ago, and we also know that rents in a lot of communities have gone down, so it is making it a lot easier for those with lower incomes to access accommodations or housing. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, no, it isn’t. Trying to keep or get into an apartment is a bureaucratic nightmare now that eviction prevention funding is under the Minister of Employment and Immigration’s responsibility.

What is that minister doing to make the process easier to access, I mean, other than saying that it’s easy and other than saying that he’s got a big heart and that he’s going to look after everybody eventually? Or is the goal, ultimately, to save money by pushing people off the system and into a cardboard box in the river valley? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, our goal and our role is to provide a hand up for those particular individuals, and we want to ensure that they get proper accommodations.

We do work with individuals, and those that need emergency assi stance will receive that type of assistance, and those that require regular housing help will r eceive that help. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Egmont, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-McCall. Vehicle Vicarious Liability Mr. Denis: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday I was truly outraged to hear in this House unduly caustic and self-serving allegations from the leader of the third party regarding so-called backroom Tory deals on the issue of vicarious lia bility. My question is to the Minister of Transportation.

Can you please clarify for this House the intention behind the changes to the rental car industry and vicarious liability? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight. The hon. leader of the third party made some terrible, misinformed comments yesterday in this Assembly. The hon. member alleged that a so- called Tory insider acted on behalf of the truck renting and leasing association in regard to Bill 30. What this individual did is what most other stakeholders do on countless issues.

He wrote a letter, for a completely different group than the one cited by the hon. member, to myself and the finance minister proposing amendments to a piece of legislation that was passed in this Assembly last year. If the member had done his research, he would have seen that none – none – of the proposals lobbied for were accepted. I’m happy to clarify this for him. Mr. Denis: Well, Mr. Speaker, again to the same minister: is it the intention behind this policy to limit what an insured person can get in compensation for a traffic accident? Mr. Ouellette: Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker.

What this legislation does is harmonize with other Canadian provinces the provisions on vicarious liability, where the rental car companies are not held responsible for the actions of those who actually drive the vehicle. It’s about doing what’s right. Why should someone who gets hit by a rental car be treated differently than someone who is involved in an accident not involving a rental car? That is the issue. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Denis: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question is to the Minister of Transportation. Why is this being brought forward now and not before? Mr. Ouellette: Mr.

Speaker, this bill has been in front of the House since March 16. Further, the hon. member and his colleague in the third party spoke in favour of the bill they now seem to be trashing. I refer you to Hansard of May 26, 2009, on page 1273. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood says, “Mr. Speaker, I just want to indicate that we’re prepared to support this piece of legislation and would like to see the changes contained in it enacted because we think they’re in the best interests of the community.” That’s a bit confusing.

Has the hon. member suddenly changed his mind, or did he not actually read the bill before he spoke on it? The Speaker: Well, just as I thought everybody was falling asleep, that was quite a wake-up call. I would like to remind, as I’ve just been reminded by Parliamentary Counsel, that the point of question period isn’t usually to hold the opposition to account. The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood. Mortgage Fraud Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With the slowing of the economy, the widespread mortgage fraud that occurred during the boom is beginning to become apparent. Cases of mortgage fraud are on the rise, and Service Alberta’s investigative unit assisted police on more than a thousand cases of mortgage fraud last year alone. To the Minister of Service Alberta: what steps are being taken to address the rising number of cases of mortgage fraud in Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1519 Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With respect to families facing tough times, mortgage fraud and those kinds of things, I know that our department is made aware of incidents that occur when people contact our department. On an ongoing basis we are aware of situations that go on, and we are looking at those, but again it’s about making sure that consumers know where to ask the questions and know where they can get support. Mr.

Kang: To the minister again: how is the minister increasing the enforcement ability of industry, such as the Real Estate Council of Alberta, to help deter these crimes? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have regular meetings with the Real Estate Council of Alberta and with the organizations based in Edmonton and in Calgary.

They have a great emphasis on consumer education, consumer awareness when purchasers are looking at getting mortgages and on making sure that they assist with making good decisions that they can afford as well as making sure that they are working with the right individuals and are protected. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How is the minister working with the banks to investigate these crimes and prosecute the criminals involved? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to the role of the banks with the federal government, again, we are aware of those situations that are going on. For Service Alberta, from the consumer education point of view, it is our department’s responsibil- ity to make sure we give the consumers the tools and the information and to make sure they are accessing the information with respect to the federal banks and the banks here in Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood, followed by the hon. Member for Strathcona. Electricity Transmission System Upgrades (continued) Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, this govern- ment intends to spend $16 billion to upgrade Alberta’s electricity transmission system and have ratepayers pay the bill. As a result, Albertans are going to see large increases to their electrical bills, but power producers get off scot-free. My question is to the Premier: why isn’t this government forcing electrical companies to share the costs of transmission upgrades? 2:30 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, the leader of the third party’s understanding of economics is just as weak as the Leader of the Opposition’s.

Do they think Santa Claus is going to come down and pay? What are your alternatives? Our electrical system has not been upgraded for two decades. It’s old. It’s overloaded: $75 million line loss a year because of overcrowding. Do you want to wait till the brownout? We don’t. We need transmission now, and that’s what this party is going to do. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, the minister needs a little economics lesson about his beloved free enterprise system. It’s clear in a free market that the producers sell for whatever the market will bear.

If they have increased costs, they can’t necessarily pass them on because the people will buy less of the product. It’s basic economics 101. They might have to take a cut in profits, something this minister doesn’t want to see happen. My question is: why don’t these companies have to share as they once did in the cost of these very, very expensive upgrades? Why are you going to let consum- ers’ power bills go through the roof, Mr. Minister? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, let’s stay on the subject of economics. Obviously, the hon. member has something to learn here. Electrical energy powers this province.

That’s what runs it. It creates jobs. You’re the head of a party that claims to represent working families. I haven’t seen much evidence of it this week in other debates. Maybe that’s why they typically get less than 10 per cent of the vote. This party wants Albertans to have the jobs tomorrow that we have today. We need transmission now. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, so do we. He’s setting up a straw dog. The question is: who’s going to pay for these lines?

He and his government are going to have the consumers of this province shell out hundreds of dollars more every year, maybe even every month, for power bills because they won’t go after their friends in the power industry and make them share in the cost of these lines. Why not? Dr. Morton: Okay. Mr. Speaker, economics lesson 3: repeat, $75 million a year already being lost in line loss. That needs to be corrected. You’d be interested to know that this province actually imports more electricity right now than we export. We actually export at a low cost and import it back in at a high cost.

Better transmission will save Albertans money and will put them back to work. We want Albertans to work. I don’t know what you guys are thinking. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Payday Loans Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Minister of Service Alberta announced that the government of Alberta will be regulating payday lenders, and it’s my understanding that the minister settled on a maximum cost of borrowing of $23 per $100 borrowed. My question is for the minister.

How did you decide that $23 was an appropriate maximum amount for payday lenders to charge? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Service Alberta reviewed research on the business of costs for the Canadian payday loan industry from a number of sources, including independent research information prepared for payday lenders. We wanted to strike a balance between the interests of industry and the need to protect consumers and ensure they are borrowing at a reasonable cost. Keep in mind that that is a maximum cost of borrowing.

Since we have introduced rules for disclosure of information to consumers and prohibitions on practices such as rollovers and discounting, Alberta consumers will know exactly what they’re paying for and be able to shop around for the best rate. The Speaker: The hon. member.

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091520 Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First supplemental to the same minister: why does the federal government have to approve the cost of borrowing amount? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Yes. Mr. Speaker, the federal government delegated the responsibility of regulating payday loan lenders to the provinces; however, federal legislation still requires that they approve the maximum cost of borrowing. We’ll be working very closely with them on that. In the meantime, this regulation will still come into effect on September 1, 2009.

This will give businesses an opportunity to become licensed. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Quest: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Last supplemental to the same minister: how will you enforce these regulations, and what kind of penalties will be in place for those who break these new rules? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To make sure payday lenders comply with our regulations, we will be conducting random audits of payday lenders and will investigate consumer complaints.

We can use a wide range of enforcement actions, including suspend- ing or cancelling a lender’s licence or prosecuting them in court. Also, payday lenders must forfeit any interest or fees owed on a loan if they do not comply with the regulation, giving them a strong incentive to follow rules. For those payday lenders who completely ignore the rules, the Fair Trading Act includes fines up to $100,000 or up to two years in jail or both. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. Teachers’ Salaries Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government has claimed that they will follow through on their promise to pay the unantici- pated increase to teachers’ salaries due to changes to the average weekly earning index. Unfortunately, their promise has not been so far followed up with the necessary dollars to cover the salary increase. As a result, school boards have had to cut programs, reduce supplies, and raid their piggy banks to cover a promise the province made but has yet to deliver on.

To the Minister of Education: what progress has there been in determining where the money is going to come from, and what is the timeline for school boards to receive these much-needed funds? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, the first assumption that the hon. member makes is wrong. There has been no determination of what the actual amount of the average weekly earnings increase for Albertans has been. StatsCan had a process by which they deter- mined it, which would have driven out an increase of 4.83 per cent. They changed their process, which under their new process drives out a 5.99 per cent.

Our agreement with teachers is that their salaries will increase by the amount that the average weekly earnings of Albertans increases, and we need to determine in discussions with the Teachers’ Association and the School Boards Association and, of course, across government how to appropriately measure that. The fact that StatsCan has changed the way they measure it causes us a problem, and that’s the problem we need to resolve. What we’ve said is that we will fund whatever the appropriate amount is, and we will do that. Mr.

Chase: Unfortunately, as Alberta burns, you appear to be fiddling, and school boards can’t be waiting for that fiddling to end. You haven’t answered where it’s coming from, but maybe you will in the follow-up. Luckily, due to its frugality the Calgary school board will not have to lay teachers off this year in order to afford the salary increase promised by this government, whatever that should be. How does the minister expect other school boards who aren’t as financially secure to find the money to pay for teachers’ salary increases? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we have made it very clear to school boards that whatever the amount is, we will fund it. So there’s no reason for any school board in this province – and I’ve had that discussion with them directly on the phone to the board chairs and superintendents on budget day. I was down at the ASBA on Monday speaking to the School Boards Association, making it very clear that whatever the average weekly earning increase for Albertans is that we need to pay in accordance with the agreement with teachers, we will fund that. He doesn’t need to worry about that piece, nor do school boards.

They s hould budget on the basis that they will have the money for their teachers’ increase. They don’t need to cut teachers to solve that problem. What I have also said to them is that they should not prejudge that that average weekly earnings index is 5.99 per cent because if they prejudge that, they may put themselves in a very difficult position. So they should hold their budgets open. They should budget on the basis of 4.83 per cent for average weekly earnings until we deter- mine what the actual number is with all those affected. When we do, if it’s more, they’ll get the funds for the more. Mr.

Chase: And in the meantime they’ll be forced to rehire young teachers, who they were forced to let go because of the intransigency of this government. The ASBA is looking for the government to act ASAP. It’s not happening. Given that public school boards have been forced to make cuts within their operating budgets to fulfill this province’s salary grid promise, why has the minister not proportion- ally reduced private school funding to last year’s levels to help make up for the public school funding shortfall? Spread the pain. Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, he obviously didn’t hear the first two answers.

Let me say it again. We have said to school boards – and they have a very clear message from us – that they should budget for average weekly earnings at 4.83 per cent. There’s no need to cut back. We’ve provided the funds to support that for teachers. We provided funds at 3 per cent, which should cover their other wage increases, and there’s no need for them to cut back on teachers or let young teachers go on that basis. If they have to budget for more money at a later date because the average weekly earnings are higher, they will have the money to do that.

We’ve made that clear to school boards, and I hope now that I’ve made it clear to the hon. member. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne, followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. 2:40 Industrial Site Remediation Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Brownfield sites are vacant and underused properties that have been contaminated. In my community of Whitecourt old bulk fuel stations remain contami-

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1521 nated. They are eyesores, and they tie up valuable land. These sites are owned by major oil companies that operate in this province. My questions are all to the Minister of Environment. What’s this government doing to encourage remediation of these contaminated sites? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The member has identified a very serious problem. As you know and I’m sure other members of the House know, in rural Alberta in particular but throughout Alberta abandoned retail gas station sites are a real scourge for small towns.

We need to do something about that. We need to get something moving. One of the th ings that discourages the owners of those sites, apart from the costs of remediation, is that they don’t completely eliminate the risk that they have associated with those cleanups. So today we announced a remediation certificate program that will remove that risk, that will once and for all give some assurance to the landowner that they w ill no longer be responsible for the liability on that site once they’ve cleaned it up to appropriate standards. Mr. VanderBurg: Mr.

Speaker, that assurance is fine, but what happens when the provincial or federal government changes the targets, which always seems to happen? Again back to the minister: what about this issue of moving the targets continually? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, we are assured at this point in time that the standards that we have in place in 2009 are appropriate standards that will ensure that on an ongoing basis there is no risk to further development on those sites, provided that they meet the standards that we have in place today.

By participating in this voluntary program, the owner of the site will remove that uncertainty that is associated with future governments changing standards because once they have the certificate in hand, they will be relieved of any need to adhere to new standards should they arise in the future. Mr. VanderBurg: To the same minister. Again, these sites have been contaminated for 25, 35 years in my community, and it’s an expensive and time-consuming endeavour. To the minister: who’s going to pay for this? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr.

Speaker, there’s a long-standing principle in Alberta, and that principle will not change with the introduction of this new program. In Alberta the polluter pays. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on what side of the equation you’re looking at, this program does not absolve anyone from paying the legitimate and true costs of remediation of contaminated soil. What it does do is bring certainty into it. It removes some contingent liabilities that may be there, and we believe that this will be sufficient incentive to get a lot of work done on a lot of those vacant properties throughout the province.

The Speaker: Hon. members, that was 84 questions and responses today. There’s a rumour going around that this may very well be the last day of the spring session. A number of pages will be retiring, so I’m going to call on the hon. Deputy Speaker to make some comments. Page Recognition Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As Deputy Speaker I would like to draw to the attention of all hon. members that we will have to send off four of our wonderful pages at the end of this spring session. They are Michael Molzan, the Speaker’s page; Andrew Ralstin; Hyun-Soo Lim; Maryna Muzychenko.

I ask you to join me in recognizing the great efforts of our pages, who daily show patience and understanding of our many demands. They carry out their tasks with attention to duty and in good humour and suffer some very late nights of work with us. On behalf of all members I present to each of the departing pages our memento gift. These gifts are from the personal contributions of all members of this Assembly, and along with these gifts are our best wishes.

I would like now to ask our Deputy Chair of Committees to present the four gifts to the Speaker’s page, Michael Molzan, representing the four pages. [applause] The Speaker: Their work is not yet done. I think tonight they have the speaking contest. Is it tonight? Last week. Sorry. Okay. One day we’ll have the awards announced for that as well. Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Seniors and Community Supports. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I have the pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly a few priceless volunteers whom I will have the pleasure of presenting a minister’s senior s’ service award tonight. The awards honour Albertans for outstanding volunteer service to seniors. Individual Albertans who will receive an award are – and if they could stand as I call their name – Eric Longeway from Calgary, Dorothy Carleton from Banff, Dorothy Hodgkinson from Mayerthorpe, Irene Nordean from Picture Butte, and William Butterwick from Foremost.

I also have the pleasure of recognizing two organizations for their service to seniors with a minister’s seniors’ service award. Repre- senting the New Horizon Drop In Centre in Grimshaw are Anne Toker and Irene Foster, and representing the Seniors Outreach Network Society in Edmonton are Fran Matthews and Sylvia Galbraith. Mr. Speaker, I know I speak for all members when I say we truly appreciate the contribution they make in enriching seniors’ lives across the province. I would ask the award recipients to now receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr.

Speaker, I’m also pleased to welcome numerous guests accompanying the recipients: Don and Jean Ingwersen, Terry Carleton, Mike Carleton, Sylvia Carleton, Darla Morrison, Kyrstyn Morrison, Tori Morrison, Lyndon Nordean, Ardis Branch, Vernon and Elaine King, Delores Butterwick, Helen Diebert, and Mona Flett. Also here with our recipients are Laura Paradowski and Leslie Sorenson from my ministry. I would ask them to all stand and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. Minister’s Seniors’ Service Awards Mr.

VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To follow up from the minister of seniors, today I rise to recognize the recipients of the

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091522 12th annual minister’s seniors’ service awards. Tonight I’ll have the pleasure of joining the hon. Minister of Seniors and Community Supports to honour six individuals and two organizations for their exceptional service to Alberta seniors. These individuals and organizations demonstrate how volunteering enriches our communi- ties. In doing so, they set an important example for all Albertans. By giving so generously of their time and their talent, the award recipients enrich and support seniors in communities across Alberta.

This year the award recipients were selected from a list of more than 70 nominees, Mr. Speaker. The selection criteria for the recipients was based on positive impact on seniors and the commu- nity, the need for the service they support, and the quality, original- ity, and diversity of their service. Please join me in congratulating the six individual recipients who will be honoured tonight: Joe and Vernie Bruder of Pincher Creek, William Butterwick of Foremost, Dorothy Carleton of Banff, Dorothy Hodgkinson of Mayerthorpe, Eric Longeway of Calgary, and Irene Nordean of Picture Butte.

As well, please join me in congratulating the two organizations who will be honoured tonight: the New Horizon Drop In Centre in Grimshaw and the Seniors Outreach Network Society in Edmonton. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Seniors’ Week Mr. Xiao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to rise to recognize Seniors’ Week, which reminds us of the important contributions Alberta’s seniors continue to make to our society and our families. Their efforts have helped to build and shape Alberta into the wonderful province it is today.

As the Member for Edmonton-McClung I’m pleased to recognize the many special seniors in my constituency, where almost 8 per cent of the popula- tion are seniors. This government continues to be dedicated to providing strong support for our seniors. In fact the 2009-2010 budget increases its level of commitment by increasing the budget for Seniors and Community Supports to nearly $2 billion. 2:50 I would like to highlight two seniors’ facilities within my constituency of Edmonton-McClung.

Touchmark at Wedgewood and Caleb Manor on the west side of the Anthony Henday freeway are home to many seniors, and I am proud to say that such excellent facilities are available in our province. Mr. Speaker, I would again like to thank our seniors for making Alberta a wonderful place to live. I will continue to work hard with my colleagues to represent seniors’ interests and to make sure that they will have the quality of life that they deserve. Thank you very much. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. World Elder Abuse Awareness Day Mrs. Sarich: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

June 15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, a day when communities across Alberta and around the world engage citizens about how to learn about the signs of elder abuse and the steps that they can take to prevent it. Unfortunately, there are many forms of elder abuse, and any senior can be a victim. Two of the more common forms are financial and psychological abuse, and in some cases seniors experience more than one form of abuse at the same time. The good news, Mr. Speaker, is that we can do something about this.

We can be part of the solution by helping to identify elder abuse by watching for common signs of abuse like unexplained injuries, financial irregularities, low self-esteem, and social with- drawal, to name a few. As part of World Elder Abuse Awareness Day the province is working with the Alberta elder abuse awareness network to distribute a new screening guide, a guide designed to help front-line service providers and caregivers identify situations where abuse may be occurring and to suggest steps to take to assist seniors in these situations.

The screening guide, along with fact sheets, posters, and other materials, has been sent out to more than 2,400 organizations across the province. More information on elder abuse is available on the Seniors and Community Supports website at www.seniors.alberta.ca or by calling the seniors’ information line at 1.800.642.3853. In recognition of World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, I encourage all members of this Assembly to wear the purple ribbon you received today on your desk to help raise awareness of this very important issue. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall.

Calgary Airport Runway Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last weekend I had the pleasure to attend a large and lively yes-tunnel committee meeting. Several individuals representing various committees spanning the entire city of Calgary attended the meeting to support the airport tunnel. They support the tunnel because they want to maintain the good quality of life they currently enjoy. Without the tunnel there will be severe costs to the economy and the environment. Without the tunnel Calgarians will face increased delays, reduced productiv- ity, and more business closures.

The airport needs this new runway, apparently, because airplanes are too often idling on the tarmac waiting for an open runway. Idling airplanes waste fuel and emit carbon into the atmosphere, so if a new runway can alleviate that problem, that is terrific. However, the same problem applies to thousands of cars and trucks idling on our roads if the airport tunnel isn’t built. Doing nothing comes with a steep environmental and economic price. Upgrading Deerfoot Trail is not an option.

That won’t solve the problem of accessing the airport from the east side, and upgrading Deerfoot is far more costly than building the tunnel. Clearly, the tunnel is the best option, but my frugal constituents are mindful of the costs of building a new tunnel. We understand that options for either a segmented tunnel or a continuous tunnel would cost $200 million. In response to the overwhelming demand from the citizens of Calgary, federal officials are meeting in Calgary to get funding in pl ace to build this t unnel. It is time for the provincial government to step forward and fund their share of the tunnel now.

Doing so will keep traffic and commerce flowing in northeast Calgary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. CAPP Steward of Excellence Awards Ms DeLong: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Last week I had the privilege along with the Minister of Environment and my colleague from Leduc-Beaumont-Devon to attend the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers stewardship of excellence awards dinner. The evening was a celebration of the efforts of Alberta petroleum producers to go above and beyond the call of duty.

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1523 Mr. Speaker, oil companies are a competitive lot, so we should not be surprised that as true Albertans they compete for superiority regarding a clean environment, safety, and social leadership. For example, Canadian Natural Resources was recognized for building the first fisheries compensation lake in the oil sands. Imperial Oil’s contractor safety program was identified for its commitment to worker health. BP Canada’s A+ for energy program has helped teachers across Alberta discuss energy and energy conservation education in their classroom.

Nexen corporation was recognized for their extensive and effective community consultation on their Balzac Crossfield expansion project. Devon Energy received the presti- gious president’s award for their new pipeline technique that reduces right-of-way impact by 50 per cent. Mr. Speaker, Alberta companies are showing environmental, safety, and social leadership day in and day out. This year’s winners represent just a snapshot of this commitment to our province.

The goal of the steward of excellence awards is to take today’s best practices within the oil and gas sector in Alberta and turn them into tomorrow’s standard, and these five projects demonstrate that we are well on our way. Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this Assembly to join me in congratulating all the award winners for their efforts. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-West. University of Lethbridge Strategic Plan Mr. Weadick: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In May the University of Lethbridge presented its new five-year strategic plan to the Lethbridge community, promising to stay true to what has made the university and its students so successful for the last 42 years: fostering a personal, supportive learning community; ensuring that professors are inspired scholars who include research and creativity in their classes; and delivering programs relevant to today’s world. The plan also charts an exciting new path for the U of L to expand its graduate program, a mandate encouraged by this government. Significant progress has already been made on this. For example, Mr.

Speaker, I’m sure that all members remember the announcement made last year in Lethbridge when the U of L became the inaugural recipient of the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research’s Polaris award, that brought $20 million in research funding and helped attract Dr. Bruce McNaughton. The U of L has also become a world leader in water research, and the Alberta Water and Environmental Science Building opened last year. This project was possible because this government recognized that great discoveries will be made there, thanks in large part to our $22 million contribution to this project.

A third example is the creation of the Prentice Institute for Global Population and Economy and the appointment of Dr. Susan Mc- Daniel to lead this important initiative. The policy work that will be done by the Prentice institute will help the private sector and government to make prudent policy decisions by taking into account demographic and economic shifts. Finally, Mr. Speaker, the U of L will introduce exciting new programs this fall, including a master of fine arts and a master of music and, a first in western Canada, a bachelor of music degree in digital audio arts.

The university will also offer a new bachelor of nursing after-degree program in collaboration with Lethbridge College and a land agent bachelor of management degree in conjunction with Olds College. I would like to congratulate the U of L for its forward thinking in this strategic plan. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security. Mr. Lindsay: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to table five copies of an e-mail I received from Nate Gartke, who is a grade 10 student in my constituency.

Nate wrote to me to convey his support for Bill 44 and applaud the good work this government is doing to ensure that children can be educated in the best wishes of those who know them best, their parents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Sandhu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling five copies of two different books written by Mr. Harpreet Singh Sandhu. The first book is called Canada in Brief, and the other is an issue of Guru’s Word, which is a religious book for Sikhs. Thank you very much.

The Speaker: Hon. members, we’ve now arrived at 3 o’clock, and according to our standing orders, rule 7(7), I must advise the House that there is at least one member who wishes to do some tablings. We will need unanimous consent to continue. Is any member opposed to going beyond the 3 o’clock standing order item? If so, say no. [Unanimous consent denied] 3:00head: Orders of the Day head: Government Bills and Orders Third Reading Bill 45 Electoral Boundaries Commission Amendment Act, 2009 [Adjourned debate June 2: Mr. Oberle] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity to participate. Mr.

Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. A brief backgrounder. The shortest political sp eech I ever gave was to a group of children about to open a playground at a Catholic school in Calgary-Varsity, and my speech was: “Children, the only thing keeping you from enjoying this playground is me. Thank you very much.” My speeches today will be of a similarly short nature. Concern has been raised with regard to electoral boundaries. The Liberal opposition does not believe that we need more constituen- cies; in fact, we believe we could do with considerably less.

We also recognize the need for rural MLAs to adequately represent their constituents, but in the balance we also recognize the need, as in all democracies in this world, for representation by population. So a delicate balance that all constituen ts of this great province are recognized has to be struck, and we don’t believe that will be struck by increasing boundaries. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Additional speakers? Shall I call the question? Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 45 read a third time]

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091524 Bill 32 Alberta Public Agencies Governance Act The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a privilege to move on behalf of the hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford Bill 32, the Alberta Public Agencies Governance Act. This act puts into effect the work of a commission that was established. There’s been discussion about that work and the benefits of having a very clear process and procedure for Alberta public agencies governance, and this act, I believe, will put that into effect very well for Alberta.

I would encourage all members to support it for third reading. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you. As the hon. mover of the bill, the MLA for Edmonton-Rutherford, pointed out yesterday, the whole point of Bill 32 dealing with agencies, boards, and commissions is to hire people based on their competency. That is, obviously, the most important factor, and the Liberal opposition supports the notion of competency. It’s what you know, not who you know, that should count. Thank you. The Speaker: Additional speakers? Hon.

Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 32 read a third time] Bill 34 Drug Program Act The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m privileged to move on behalf of the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness Bill 34, the Drug Program Act. With this act there will be an opportunity to make sure that our drug programs in Alberta are appropriately aligned and set up so that Albertans can have access to appropriate pharmaceuticals when they need them, and I would commend it to the House and ask for support for third reading. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity.

Mr. Chase: Thank you very much. The Alberta Liberal opposition cannot support this bill b ecause within it a solution has not been found for the 40 per cent of seniors whose Blue Cross individual coverage will be tripled as a result. It’s wonderful that 60 per cent of Albertan seniors are getting reduced prices, but the other 40 per cent are picking up the tab for this unfortunate circumstance. Their health care premiums have basically been traded for increased drug costs, and this is causing them great economic and physical hard- ship.

They have been forced to make choices between paying their mortgages, buying their groceries, or having the medication that will sustain them and provide them a quality of life. Therefore, we are not supportive of Bill 34. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, stand in opposition to this bill. One of the main reasons I’m in opposition to it is because I’ve had too many seniors come through my office with actual, hard numbers about how this is going to affect them and how their choices will be limited.

In fact, the conversations are: which drugs are they going to cut out? Which ones do they really need, and which ones don’t they? For that very, very hard, in-your-face example of how this is affecting many seniors, I could not support this bill. The Speaker: Other speakers? Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 34 read a third time] Bill 35 Gas Utilities Amendment Act, 2009 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Little Bow. Mr. McFarland: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure today to enter the final debate on Bill 35, the Gas Utilities Amendment Act, 2009, its third reading.

As mentioned in prior debates in this House, it’s an administrative bill to amend existing legislation and give force to the ruling of the NEB, the National Energy Board, keeping in mind that the NEB is a federal regulator whose decisions, like those of our Energy Resources Conservation Board, are quasi- judicial. There is a great future for Alberta in unlocking our vast pools of unconventional natural gas. Likewise, there is great potential for continued growth in Alberta’s value-added sector. This is something that we’ve all talked about and I believe everyone sees as a desirable outcome.

To achieve that, our Alberta-based petrochemical industry needs access to increasing volumes of ethane feedstock from natural gas. This will provide more jobs for Albertans. As we move forward, some of that feedstock will come from natural gas that’s transported across our borders into Alberta. The transportation of that gas must by necessity be federally regulated. Bill 35 speaks to that particular point and, in a broader sense, speaks to Alberta’s future success in using the NOVA gas system, which will further diversify our economy and add value to our natural resources.

I encourage all members to support passage of this bill, and I thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Hon. member . . . Mr. McFarland: I would like to move third reading. The Speaker: Thank you. That’s kind of important. The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Alberta Liberal opposition recognizes the administrative nature of this bill and is supportive of it. In previous debate I recognized the important role of the Alberta Gas Trunk Line, which later became NOVA, which has now had the pipeline authority taken over by TransCana- da.

It’s absolutely essential for our economy that this gas be moved, and therefore we support it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Others?

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1525 Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 35 read a third time] 3:10 Bill 42 Gaming and Liquor Amendment Act, 2009 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Airdrie-Chestermere. Mr. Anderson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to move third reading of Bill 42, the Gaming and Liquor Amendment Act, 2009. This amending legislation is intended to improve the safety of the law-abiding public in and around Alberta’s licensed premises. It does so by giving police and bar operators the authority they need to effectively address violence in bars and nightclubs.

Violence is too often related to gangs and problem patrons in these establishments. With the full support of the police and licensees Bill 42 helps make Alberta’s communities safer, more secure places in which to live, work, and play. Thank you. The Speaker: Others? The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much. The Alberta Liberal opposition does not support Bill 42. It does not believe that simply allowing bar owners to exchange the identities of potential patrons who may or may not be involved with gang activities is proactive.

We believe the emphasis, the energy, and the funding should go directly to police forces, as we have stated numerous times before. It’s feet on the beat as opposed to trading information that will have a strong influence on the reduction of gang violence. As I have mentioned before, as a teacher, the way to eliminate gangs is by providing a good education, involving community resource officers at the school level, providing kids with opportunities to do the right thing so they don’t end up as older individuals doing the wrong thing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon.

Member for Lethbridge- East. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just a few words on this in opposition. Certainly, there are some good parts, and I think that the intent is good. However, here we go again. The good guys pay. It’s the good people that we are asking to turn over their identity cards. Where is the privacy in this? Where is the trust when I turn over my identification because I want to go into a bar? I might be looking for one of my kids. Who knows? Why would I trust these people? The Speaker: It’s an age matter. Ms Pastoor: I’m sorry. I didn’t hear. The Speaker: Sorry, hon. member.

Really, for you it would be an age matter, just to be sure that you are 18. Ms Pastoor: Well, yes. The Speaker: Sorry. I know I’m out of order. Ms Pastoor: No, no. That’s very true, and it has been a long time since I was ID’d. However, young people going through should have the same concern that somebody has private information. Again, as I’ve said, it’s the good guys that pay. We should be helping our police to go after the bad guys, and the good guys should be able to walk into a bar and not have to trust that the information that they’re handing over to the bouncer at the door is going to be guarded safely.

For those very short reasons and the fact that it’s been a long time since I was ID’d, I probably won’t be involved with this. I’m still opposed to it. Thank you. The Speaker: Others? Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 42 read a third time] Bill 41 Protection for Persons in Care Act The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill. Dr. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to move third reading of Bill 41, the Protection for Persons in Care Act.

The act has been rewritten to include a number of substantive changes that will help protect more Albertans who receive government-funded care and support services. Bill 41 speaks to the responsibility of Albertans to report abuse and for service providers to take reasonable steps to protect clients from abuse while they are providing care or support services.

The Protection for Persons in Care act will expand the scope of the act to capture a broader group of service providers that deliver care and support services, include protection provisions for people who report abuse or assist in an investigation, improve the minister’s ability to fulfill a more preventative and protective role, and increase the offence provisions within the act and the fines. As well, the act now outlines duties of complaints officers, investigators, and the director so that they will have more flexibility and scope to fulfill their duties.

This is legislation that reflect s this government’s priority to protect our most vulnerable citizens, and I urge all hon. members to support this bill on third reading. The Speaker: Others? The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Ms Pastoor: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It does give me pleasure to stand up and support this bill. There has been a great deal of work done on this bill, and some of it has come from the work that was done in 2005 on the MLA task force, and certainly the Member for Calgary-Nose Hill has also done some really good work to bring this together.

It’s a new bill, and I know that there has been controversy around it based on many unfortunate incidents that were prior to this. I think that this bill will help address some of those issues of abuse and neglect that had been happening prior to this. One of the things that I’m happy to see is that there is an evalua- tion process in there. It also has a timeline, which is one of my big mantras. I like evaluation, and I like timelines so that we can look at things.

One of the other aspects to this that isn’t a part of this bill but that certainly goes adjunct to it is the fact that the government will be doing education on personal directives, which is actually an adjunct behaviour with this bill. The only other thing that I would like to say, that I’m still not happy about, is that I still would like to see “police officer” stated in here rather than “peace officer.” I think that police officers can move serious complaints through the system a lot faster than peace officers.

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091526 With those comments, I’m pleased to see this go forward. There’s been a lot of work done on it, and I know that many, many people, who we can’t even identify going forward, will be the beneficiaries of this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you. I, too, am rising in support of the intention and, hopefully, the resulting application of this bill. One thing that did not occur within Bill 41, which I hope will soon occur, is the establishment of a seniors’ advocate.

Whether it’s in assisted living or long-term care, a number of seniors are abused not by direct negligence, not by direct neglect but by understaffing. There is also abuse of the workers in terms of the low pay scale that they receive for the very important work they do in looking after seniors. Hopefully, as part of revisions of Bill 41 the seniors’ advocate, the treatment of individuals, both those that are giving the care and those in receipt of the care, will improve. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Are there others? Hon.

Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 41 read a third time] Bill 52 Health Information Amendment Act, 2009 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Leduc-Beaumont-Devon. Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today to move third reading of Bill 52, the Health Information Amendment Act, 2009. Mr. Speaker, Bill 52 was referred to the Standing Committee on Health by this House on November 27, 2008.

I would like to thank this all-party committee for its hard work in recommending amend- ments, which were passed in this House, that reflect a consensus of opinion in response to the many concerns raised by average Albertans, doctors, and the Privacy Commissioner to improve the effectiveness of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I would encourage all colleagues to support third reading of Bill 52. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

We also, the Liberal opposition, recognize the hard work of committee members to make the privacy associated with records that much more intact. A number of physicians and their patients still have reservations about how the information will be protected and with whom it will be shared. These remain still of great concern. Hopefully, working through Bill 52, that information will be held back from those who are not entitled to it and will be speedily accessed by those in need of it.

It’s also important to note that a person’s medical records belong equally to them as they do to their physicians. 3:20 One of the problems that has occurred to date is the passing on of records when a physician retires to the individual taking over that responsibility. It’s particularly difficult in rural Alberta, where there is a shortage of physicians. When one person retires, there are times when there’s not another person to take their place, and those records are basically frozen until that time.

Bill 52 moves towards correcting that problem, and hopefully physicians and patients and patient Albertans will have the opportunity to recognize that the government does hold their information in the securest format possible. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Others? Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 52 read a third time] Bill 33 Fiscal Responsibility Act Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Finance and Enterprise it’s, indeed, my pr ivilege to move third reading of Bill 33, the Fiscal Responsibility Act. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr.

Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Alberta Liberal opposi- tion is certainly not opposed to fiscal responsibility but considers this alignment of terminology an oxymoron in Alberta. We question the fiscal responsibility that led the government into the highest deficit historically in this province, $4.7 billion. As I’ve stated before, that is just part of the debt: $8.6 billion in terms of the unfunded t each- ers’ liability, well over $10 billion in defrayed infrastructure, at least $1.5 billion in other public service unfunded liabilities.

As I’ve stated before, we have exceeded the $23 billion that Premier Klein paid off on the backs of civil servants. So fiscal responsibility is something that has not yet arrived in Alberta. A savings plan has not arrived in Alberta.

The combined approximately $13 billion to $14 billion of the sustainability fund and the capital fund will be eaten through in rapid time unless this government comes up with a more substantial savings plan, that also recognizes the importance of doing things in a traditional manner when it comes to infrastructure, avoiding long-term 32-year P3 debt and taking advantage of our current recessional circumstance, where labour is less expensive and materials are less expensive and, therefore, we can accomplish a lot of catch-up in terms of public infrastructure.

As a former teacher I would like that money to be spent on school maintenance as well as construction. Of course, shelled-in hospitals are not able to serve patients, so we need the staffing in those hospitals and the construction completed. We cannot support the Fiscal Responsibility Act because it’s simply irresponsible. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Others? The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall. Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill 33, the Fiscal Responsi- bility Act.

I think the limit on the nonrenewable resource revenue that can be spent is gone, and there’s no legislation on annual spending increases, no commitment to savings other than a vague statement to top up the sustainability fund to $10 billion if surplus dollars become available – if they become available. This bill just lets the government spend every penny they have. This move makes them less fiscally responsible than they were before, you know, when we were swimming in money. If we couldn’t be fiscally responsible then, how are we going to be fiscally responsible now?

The only limit now on deficits and drawing from the sustainability fund is that the fund can’t be drawn below what is in the account, meaning that the government can spend every penny in the

June 3, 2009 Alberta Hansard 1527 sustainability fund and can spend every penny of nonrenewable resource revenue without any of it having to be put into the sustainability fund. While the Treasury Board had the authority to draw funds out of the sustainability fund, there was at least, in principle, a limitation on how that could be done. The justification used for this is to improve flexibility as the previous legislation was too complex. The Fiscal Responsibility Act is actually quite short and specific, so calling it complex seems like a bit of a reach.

There was a clause that stated that $2 and a half billion had to remain in the sustainability fund as a contingency for natural disasters, which has been removed. You know, this doesn’t seem like a fiscal responsibility act; this seems like a spend, spend, spend act. The Fiscal Responsibility Act was nothing more than a stunt in the first place since it was never actually effective. I don’t know how this government is being fair to future generations by removing any caps, or limits, on the amount of resource revenue and savings in the sustainability fund that it can spend. What is the plan if the money runs out?

I think this government made a big mistake spending this money very wildly. You know, they were spending more aggressively than the money was even coming in, spending 23 per cent more per capita, I believe, than other jurisdictions. The spending has been going up 10 per cent year over year, and $60 billion is just gone like that. Had we tied the spending down to inflation and population, I think our budget could have been a bout $27 billion instead of $37 billion. I think we have been spending like drunken sailors here. There was no plan to save for a rainy day.

Whatever money the government claims to be saying they have saved in the sustainability fund will, if this keeps up for another maybe two or three years, all be gone. What are we going to do then? We take into account the shortfall of teachers’ pensions. If, God forbid, there’s any other major disaster, you know, I think we are going to be in deep, deep trouble. We claim to be the richest jurisdiction in North America. Look what happened with laser surgery. You know, we couldn’t even afford to spend $100,000 on the machine. What happens if there is, like I said, some major disaster? What are we going to do?

Are we going to depend, maybe, on private business to bail us out? Are we going to go cap in hand to Ottawa? That’s what has been happening already. For those reasons, I’m going to oppose Bill 33. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I would like a few remarks on the record in opposition to this bill. A number of things have been taken from this bill. The previous legislation stated that any amount of the nonrenewable resource revenue over $5.3 billion was to be transferred to the sustainability fund. It’s been removed.

Previous legislation stated that $2.5 billion had to be retained in the sustainability fund for public emergencies, amounts payable under the Natural Gas Price Protection Act, expenses paid or payable for the capital account, and payments to the First Nations. That has been removed.

Section 3 states that the capital account is dissolved into the sustainability fund, which, as we’ve just heard, has basically disappeared. Any surpluses that may occur in subsequent years shall now be transferred into a sustainability fund.

Section 3(1) states that the purpose of this

section is to use the sustainability f und to fund deficit years “with a view to adding to or replenishing the Fund in years in which there are cash surpluses.” It’s vague and it’s really meaningless, when you see what else has gone on within this bill. 3:30 The only provision on fiscal responsibility in the whole b ill is

section 3(6), that simply states that the sustainability fund cannot be drawn below zero, effectively meaning that the government can now spend every penny available until there’s no money available, using the excuse that there’s no point in saving because there will always be money coming in. I think that’s a very weak argument. The

section legislating the contingency allowance equal to 1 per cent of the revenue for fiscal policy purposes, i.e. the $5.3 billion, has also now been eliminated. For those reasons stated, I cannot support this bill. The Speaker: Others? Shall I call the question? Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 33 read a third time] Bill 23 Municipal Government Amendment Act, 2009 The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Bill 23 is essentially a bill that is brought forward to improve assessment complaints and appeals processes with respect to municipal governments across the province. I would move it for third reading and ask the House to support it. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you. I find myself, as I frequently am, in support of the Minister of Education. Bill 23 is a bill that takes some of the laborious assessment process off the shoulders of the municipalities, which they are gratefully handing back to the province.

Considering that the assessments are based on provincial regulations, it does make sense, and it also opens up the opportunities for residential owners to appeal the process. What needs to be taken into account, and I hope that Bill 23 does, is the fact that just the geographic location of a residence should not be its prime consideration. There are a lot of seniors who are living in downtown areas where their property values have risen consider- ably higher than the value of the home in which they are currently trying to continue living.

Un til the assessment process recognizes not only the value of the property but the nature of the dwelling on that property, seniors will continue to pay exorbitant taxation rates. Of course, we all are waiting, and as we get closer to approaching seniors, we recognize the fact that the government took away the exemption that seniors had in paying the education portion of their property tax in 1993. Seniors are patiently waiting for that exemp- tion to be given back because taxes continue going up and their fixed allowances remain.

I would hope that maybe it will be Bill 24 in the fall that will address and finally give back to seniors that exemption for the educational portion of their property taxes. However, we are supportive. This is a step in the right direction, as the hon. Minister of Education pointed out. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Others? Shall I call the question?

Alberta Hansard June 3, 20091528 Hon. Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 23 read a third time] Bill 29 Family Law Amendment Act, 2009 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Egmont. Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. There are just a couple of comments that I want to get on the record in third reading, much to the chagrin of my friend from Airdrie-Chestermere.

The way that the law currently is on th is is that a parent that does not actually submit his or her financial information year over year is deemed to have a 10 per cent increase, and this would accelerate that increase after the first year. The one thing I would just like all hon. members to consider in this legislation is that many of these people just simply fall onto the social assistance or other government assistance rolls if it’s impossible for them to collect their child support. That is something to consider. This is in the best interests not only of parents and children but also of taxpayers.

With that, I move third reading of Bill 29. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much. The Alberta Liberal opposition supports the notion that the family – well, basically, that it takes a village to raise a family is the concept that’s put out there. It’s also very fortunate if you have two individuals involved in that raising, whether it be a mother and a father, two mothers, or two fathers. The love and support they provide for the child is absolutely important to their development.

Back in November of 2007 I put forward Motion 511, which was unanimously accepted by this House. It called for a unified family court process. This, unfortunately, has not occurred within the framework of Bill 29. But I and thousands of families across this province hope that there will be a simplification of the court process so that the interjurisdictional wranglings that occurred between the Court of Queen’s Bench and the provincial court are eliminated and families can be served more quick ly, efficiently, and without the heavy costs associated with court battles.

Taking children into custody as opposed to requiring larger support not only for the parents but in this case, as Bill 29 points out, from the parents is extremely important. That financial disclosure and the requirement of a parent to live up to the expectations of raising their child or, if not directly within the home, at least providing the support for the raising of that child is absolutely essential. That is one of the many reasons we support Bill 29. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Others? Hon.

Members: Question. [Motion carried; Bill 29 read a third time] Bill 30 Traffic Safety Amendment Act, 2009 Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, at this time I’d like to stand and move third reading of Bill 30, the Traffic Safety Amendment Act, 2009. I think it’s very important that we keep our roads and all of our other transportation issues in Alberta very safe. I think that there are a whole lot of things within this act that are needed today. I’d like to move it now. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you. We also are supportive of the intent of Bill 30.

One thing that remains unaddressed in this bill and, hopefully, will appear in the fall is the government’s distracted-driving legislation. The government to date has equated eating a hamburger and talking on a cellphone as equally distractive, the difference being that the hamburger doesn’t talk back, although for some members that may be the case. However, we are supportive of the intent of Bill 30. If you find yourself talking back to your ham- burger, then I suggest you get the appropriate psychological care required. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Others? The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall. Mr.

Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m also supportive of Bill 30. As well, I spoke in favour of that before, too. There were some concerns, issues we had. I think that verbally those issues have been addressed. You know, we were talking about an Alberta provincial police force, and those concerns have been addressed. 3:40 The concerns I had, as the Member for Calgary-Varsity raised, about cellphones being used when we are driving, hopefully, will be addressed in the future soon, too, so that we can make the streets, the roads safer for all Albertans. You know, it’s costing $4 billion a year f