Alberta Hansard — 12 March 1998, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 24, Session 2)

19980312

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 853 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, March 12, 1998 1:30 p.m. Date: 98/03/12 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers THE SPEAKER: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Our divine Father, as we conclude for this week our work in this Assembly, we renew our thanks and ask that we may continue our work under Y our guidance. Amen. Please be seated. head: Reading and Receiving Petitions THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. MS BLAKEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask at this time that the petitions I presented on Tuesday now be read and received. Thank you.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to examine and amend the Workers' Compensation Board Act to provide appro- priate benefits to those Albert ans whose spouses died in work- related accidents, and who subsequently lost their benefits due to remarriage. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. MS BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request that the petitions I introduced on Tuesday, the 10th of March, be now and read and received.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to examine and amend the Workers' Compensation Board Act to provide appro- priate benefits to those Albert ans whose spouses died in work- related accidents, and who subsequently lost their benefits due to remarriage. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. MR. BONNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request that the petition presented on Tuesday, March 10, regarding the Disen- franchised Widows Action Group now be read and received.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to examine and amend the Workers' Compensation Board Act to provide appro- priate benefits to those Albert ans whose spouses died in work- related accidents, and who subsequently lost their benefits due to remarriage. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. MS LEIBOVICI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would request that the petitions I presented on Tuesday be now read and received.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to examine and amend the Workers' Compensation Board Act to provide appropriate benefits to those Albertans whose spouses died in work-related accidents, and who s ubsequently lost their benefits due to remarriage. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. MR. DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd ask that the petition I presented the other day with respect to necessary changes to the Workers' Compensation Act be now read and received, please.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to examine and amend the Workers' Compensation Board Act to provide appropriate benefits to those Albertans whose spouses died in work-related accidents, and who subsequently lost their benefits due to remarriage. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. MS CARLSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask that the petition I presented on March 10 regarding the Workers' Compen- sation Act now be read and received.

THE CLERK: We the undersigned residents of Alberta petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to examine and amend the Workers' Compensation Board Act to provide appropriate benefits to those Albertans whose spouses died in work-related accidents, and who s ubsequently lost their benefits due to remarriage. head: Introduction of Bills THE SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Energy. Bill 27 Electric Utilities Amendment Act, 1998 DR. WEST: Y es, Mr. Speaker. Today I request leave to introduce Bill 27, the Electric Utilities Amendment Act, 1998.

This bill builds on the base established by the Electric Utilities Act introduced in 1995 and moves the restructuring of the electric industry forward by establishing the framework for deregulating existing generation, introducing customer choice, and increasing competition in the electric industry. [Leave granted; Bill 27 read a first time] head: Tabling Returns and Reports THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Livingstone-Macleod. MR. COUTTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm pleased today to present five copies of the wind power task force report, which helped set the stage for Bill 27, which was just presented in the House today. MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to file four documents today. The first is an information bulletin announcing Team Alberta North's participation in the 1998 Arctic Winter

854 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 Games in Y ellowknife, Northwest Territories, which run from March 15 to 21. I'm also filing a letter to the athletes and coaches of Team Alberta North wishing them much success. It's a pleasure to file copies of letters sent to Nagano regarding two more medal winners from Alberta at the Paralympics: a silver medal for Karolina Wisniewska of Calgary and a bronze medal for Ramona Hoh of Edmonton. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. MR. DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm tabling copies of a letter from Mr.

Duerr, mayor of the city of Calgary, dated March 9, 1998, addressed to the Minister of Energy, outlining concerns with the Electric Utilities Amendment Act, 1998. Thank you. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. MS CARLSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to table 12 letters expressing concerns about the environment from grade 6 students at Banded Peak school in Bragg Creek, Alberta. MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table answers to questions raised by opposition members in the subcommittee of supply on Monday, March 9, 1998. This is a package which covers the majority of questions.

We will follow up and complete the list as soon as possible. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Spruce Grove-Sturgeon- St. Albert. MRS. SOETAERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have five copies of a petition signed by almost 200 people from Nanton, Alberta. They are asking the government to help them with problem cougars that are killing their livestock. THE SPEAKER: The chair would like to table a memorandum from the hon.

Member for Calgary-Fish Creek requesting that Bill 206, the Human Tissue Donation Procedures Statutes Amendment Act, be brought to the Comm ittee of the Whole on Tuesday, March 17, 1998, as soon as House business will allow. head: Introduction of Guests THE SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs. MR. HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly Jeffery Chan and 50 other students, colleagues of his from Brander Gardens elementary school. They are accompanied by their teachers, Mrs.

Natalie Esteves and Mrs. Reva Martin, and parent helper Mrs. Wong. They are seated in the members' gallery, and I'd ask that they please rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. MRS. SLOAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to rise and introduce Brenda MacDonald. Brenda is a social worker, and this is her first time visiting the Legislature. I would ask her to rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. MR. WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Legislature 13 students from the Coralwood academy in the constituency of Edmonton-Calder. They are here today with their teacher, Linda Steinke, and with two helpers, parents Gloria Quintanilla and Carolyn Macomber. I'd like to ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. MR. SAPERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's my pleasure to introduce to you and to all me mbers of the Assembly this afternoon 32 visitors from the West Edmonton Christian school, which is located in the constituency of Edmonton-Glenora. I would like to have teacher Mrs. Darlene Eerkes, teacher aide Cynthia Caswell, student teacher Charlene VandeKraats, and parents René DeVries and Astrid Potvin please rise with the students and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Oral Question Period 1:40 Institutional Confinement and Sexual Sterilization Compensation Act MR.

MITCHELL: The Premier said that his mistake in bringing in Bill 26 along with the notwithstanding clause was that his political sense hadn't kicked into g ear. Proof of that is that the Premier only backed down when he realized that the political cost was going to be far too great. Well, this isn't about a political mistake, Mr. Speaker. This is about a Premier who was pre- pared, after being briefed along with his caucus on this bill, to deliberately trample the constitutional rights of some of the most vulnerable people in this province.

To the Premier: why is it that the Premier has focused only on his political misjudgment while failing to acknowledge that he was prepared to stomp on the rights of some of Alberta's most vulnerable people? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, we were not prepared to stomp on the rights of the province's most vulnerable people. As a matter of fact, we were trying to avoid having these people go through the costly exercise of very expensive and prolonged court actions.

It was explained to us by our lawyers with the advice of outside counsel that the notwithstanding clause was a tool that would give the legislation added weight, because they were sure that that legislation itself would be challenged on constitutional grounds, Mr. Speaker. Admittedly, we depended too much, I guess, on the advice of lawyers. If there's one thing for sure about this whole case, there are lawyers involved. There are lawyers involved with the unfortu- nate victims of that terrible legislation of many years ago. There are lawyers now involved on the ci vil rights side of this issue.

Many of these lawyers are probably members of the law firms we consulted. Certainly there are lawyers within the Department of Justice. Mr. Speaker, we acted on the advice of the lawyers, and when you get a whole bunch of lawyers together, they all have different opinions. But we acted on the best advice we were given by our lawyers, including the lawyer sitting beside me, who is the top lawyer in the provin ce, the Attorney General and the Minister of Justice. MR. MITCHELL: After being the Premier of this province for

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 855 over five years and having attended a multitude of national conferences including many on constitutional matters, how can the Premier say with any credibility whatsoever that he simply didn't understand himself what it meant to invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Constitution? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think I gave an explanation to that.

Certainly, relative to this case it was explained that this was a legal tool that could be used to avoid constitutional challenges that would further prolong the awards and the process that these unfortunate victims are entitled to. I'll have the hon. Minister of Justice supplement. MR. HAVELOCK: Y es. Thank you, Mr. Premier. As I explained over the last couple of days, the intent of the legislation was to balance the interests of the claimants with those of today's Albertans. Also, we were trying to promote settlement and resolve the same in a more timely and cost-effective manner. Mr.

Speaker, what I want to do is make it clear that the advice given to the Premier and to caucus was advice generated by my department and outside counsel for which I accept responsibility. I think it was good legal advice. The difficulty is that we did not weigh all the ramifications of that advice, including the political ramifications, and for that I am quite prepared to accept full responsibility. MR.

MITCHELL: Since the Premier and his caucus, as has now been confirmed by the Minister of Justice, are clearly unable to screen Justice legislation adequately, will the Premier set up an all-party committee of the Legislature to review Justice bills, as is done in many other Legislatures and the Parliament of Canada? MR. KLEIN: Politics is not a perfect science by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly if these people had been in the position we were in, they might have done something that could have been . . . [interjection] Well, are you telling me, hon. member . . . He's intervening, Mr.

Speaker, and basically what he's saying is that they're perfect. Can they guarantee the electorate of this province that for all time they will make absolutely perfect decisions? I hardly thing so. Mr. Speaker, there are times when, even as a caucus and even after careful and full review by lawyers and by politicians, poor decisions are made. We recognize that. We wanted to come up with something that contained these three Cs: compassion, compensation, and choice. The plan, I believe, was right; the process was wrong. But nobody in society is perfect.

People are vulnerable to not understanding the implications of things. I read from the transcript of the Code inquiry. The now hon. member of the Liberal oppos ition, the hon. leader, was on the stand testifying, and the question was relative to a letter that was sent to him that he was supposed to have read. The question was: Even if you read it quickly, it tells you that you are going to try and mislead the public by saying we no longer have assets equal to our liabilities. We are just required to. Then it ends there. Didn't that read that way to you? Answer, and this is Mr. Mitchell speaking: Y ou know, Mr.

Code, when I read that letter in my counsel's presence a week ago and I explained to him what it said to me, he will tell you that even then I didn't catch that particular implication. Mr. Speaker, thousands and thousands of Albertans were hurt by the actions of that company, and this person at that time didn't understand the implications. Thousands of people, Albertans, were hurt by that company. THE SPEAKER: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Norwood. MS OLSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Premier today.

When this Premier supported the Justice minis- ter's introduction of Bill 26 – and correct me if I'm wrong – did I not just hear you say that you ultimately relied on the legal advice you received from your Justice minister? MR. KLEIN: And many others. The Department of Justice sought the outside legal counsel, I understand, of two firms. There was a good discussion of this matter, as I said, at agenda and priorities committee. There was a g ood discussion of this issue certainly at caucus. Mr.

Speaker, a lot of research went into that particular piece of legislation involving, as I said, not only our own officials within the Department of Justice but outside counsel as well. Relative to the process, again I'll have the hon. minister supplement. MR. HAVELOCK: Well, the Premier basically covered it off. Outside counsel spent approximately a year reviewing similar case law across the country and came forward with the proposal which they felt was fair, would provide compensation, would provide the compassion that the Premier has spoken about.

Again, to answer the question that was put: based on all that input that came forward, I took the issue before caucus, explained it to caucus with their assistance, and supported the bill at that time. In light of the response from Albertans it was quite clear that while we had the compensation and compassion covered off, we had made a mistake with respect to the notwithstanding clause, which is why we decided yesterday to hold the bill back. I instructed counsel yesterday to move forward with settlements in accordance with the parameters of the legislation as quickly as possible.

Also, those who wish to go to court certainly can do so. MS OLSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My next question is to the Premier as well. Is the Premier telling us that the Justice minister, the man he defended vigorously in Tuesday's news conference, did not properly brief the government caucus on Bill 26? 1:50 MR. KLEIN: The hon. minister acted as the minister should have acted. He provided caucus with his best legal advice. He didn't provide caucus with political advice, nor is that his responsibility. We are all politicians. We are all politicians, everyone in this room.

As I said, my political sense didn't click into gear. It should have. MS OLSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since any Albertan who goes to a lawyer and gets bad legal advice would fire that lawyer, will this Premier now fire his lawyer, his House leader, and his right-hand man: the Minister of Justice? MR. KLEIN: Well, the Minister of Justice also happens to be a lawyer. Mr. Speaker, if we were to fire every lawyer who gives bad advice, there would be no lawyers. Maybe that might not be a bad thing.

856 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 THE SPEAKER: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Child Welfare MRS. SLOAN: Thank you. Generally, this government attempts to hide its cruelty by claiming some economic gain. In this case the government is just plain cruel. Brenda MacDonald is a social worker who cannot work because of a medical condition. She has a 13-year-old daughter. Currently living on $815 a month, she is in arrears for over $600 in utilities.

Already r eceiving in-home supports from child welfare, Brenda has been told by not one but two child welfare workers that when her utilities are cut off, her daughter w ill be apprehe nded by this government. To the Premier. February 24 your Minister of Family and Social Services stood in this Assembly and told Albertans: “Mr.

Speaker, the child welfare workers do not – I repeat: do not – apprehend children . . . simply because they are poor.” I am asking you to personally retract the statement made by your minister and acknowledge that families in this province are being torn apart by poverty and the rigid policies of this government. MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, this involves an individual case. I don't know what the caseload is of the Department of Family and Social Services. I would imagine there are thousands. I will take the question under notice and discuss this with the hon. minister. MRS.

SLOAN: Again to the Premier: could the Premier explain the economic and moral benefit for this government in apprehend- ing children from their families, safe environments, simply because their parents don't have enough money to pay their utilities? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, again, with respect to the specific case I will take this under notice and discuss it with the minister. Relative to the general policy, it is the policy of the department that professionals in the department will act in the best interests of the child. But I don't know the details relative to this specific case. MRS.

SLOAN: Is this rigidity and cruelty, Mr. Premier, not just another example of this government's desire to be the moral judges, helping those who are viewed as being deserving and penalizing victims, the vulnerable and disadvantaged? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, this member is alluding to highly trained professionals – and I mean professionals – who have to deal with these situations on a day-to-day basis. The policy of the department – and I assume the policy of the depart- ment is being followed – is that these professionals will act in the best interest of the children.

Institutional Confinement and Sexual Sterilization Compensation Act (continued) MS BARRETT: Y esterday the Justice minister said in his ministerial statement: “I have instructed counsel to endeavour to reach settlements with the claimants according to the parameters set out in Bill 26,” the official title being the Institutional Confinement and Sexual Sterilization Compensation Act.

I'd like to ask the Justice minister if in those instructions he means to retain the very tightly defined sexual assault as meaning an assault in the form of fellatio, cunnilingus, vaginal or anal intercourse, or digital penetration, notwithstanding all the Supreme Court decisions and the Criminal Code of Canada, that do not accept such a limited definition. MR. HAVELOCK: Well, actually, Mr. Speaker, the definition is based on the Criminal Code.

Nevertheless, counsel will certainly have some flexibility with respect to the settlement discussions, and if they feel there is a legitimate need to settle with an individual and there's good reason to deviate, they will certainly bring that forward for government to consider. What I was primarily referring to yesterday were the financial parameters. After a careful study of the case law across the country we had determined that the average payment that claim- ants had received for wrongful sterilization was approximately $65,000, and we had set a limit of a maximum of $150,000.

Counsel certainly has the flexibility to bring settlement forward for government to consider beyond the parameters of the bill. MS BARRETT: In his instruction to counsel yesterday, then, did the Justice minister also indicate whether or not the government will continue to deny liab ility for incidents that occurred in provincial institutions? MR. HAVELOCK: Well, Mr. Speaker, if we are not able to reach settlement with a particular claimant, that claimant has the option to go to court, and at that time we will be relying on any and all defences which ordinarily would be available to the government.

THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fish Creek, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Special-needs Education MRS. FORSYTH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Several of my constituents with special-needs ch ildren have become frustrated with the process they must go through at the Calgary board of education to get special education programs for their children. The process is bureaucratic, adversarial, and delays the delivery of services to their children. My question is to the Minister of Education. Why do parents have to go through this process to obtain the services their children need? MR. MAR: Mr.

Speaker, I do recognize the frustration that some parents experience in trying to get the best possible education for their special-needs children. The decisions for the types of programs and services that should be provided for those children in my view are best made at the local level and involve a number of different stakeholders working in consultation with each other, including parents, including the students, the teachers, the principals, and the boards who are responsible for providing those services. I think the reason, Mr.

Speaker, why this process becomes multilayered from time to time is because of the number of people who need to be involved in coming up with the proper assessment. Also, first assessments are made at the school level and might involve other staff members; for example, in Calgary at the CLC, or the collaborative learning centre level. The assessment tools that are used are also extensive, Mr. Speaker. They would involve tests, interviews with the teacher, interviews with the student, review of the student's work, and also observation of the student. If parents are not satisfied with the

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 857 program that is provided, they do have the ability to appeal that decision to the Calgary board of education. MRS. FORSYTH: My second question is: is anything being done to encourage a more co-operative approach to providing programs for special-needs children? MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, I think that to the credit of the Calgary board of education they are developing a more collaborative approach to providing services for special-needs students.

What they have done is they have conducted a review of their services for special-needs students and established a committee to look at the results of the review and to develop action plans to ensure that this process is perhaps made a little simpler. As part of that process they've set up a number of working groups that include parents, and I think this is an initiative at the local level that I'm pleased to see. I would encourage them to continue to work in partnership with their parents. MRS. FORSYTH: Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

Given that the minister said that the parents have the ability to appeal, is there anything we can do to shorten that process? MR. MAR: Well, Mr. Speaker, any parent that's dissatisfied with the decision of a school board on the education program that's being provided for a student with special needs does have the right to ask for a ministerial review of the decision. Review panels consist of three people: a representative from my department and also two independent specialists. The review committee will look at the assessment of the student and the services proposed for that student.

Again, in an effort to shorten the process we think that the Calgary board of education is doing a good job in reviewing its process currently and seeing if there's a better way to go about doing it. 2:00 Head Start Program MR. SAPERS: Last week I brought to this Assembly's attention the early Head Start program at Mayfield school and that that school was preparing to lose at least 15 percent of its budget.

The Minister of Family and Social Services responded: “I will commit that if it is a good program, if it is one that is helping children . . . it won't lose money.” The program was told that it's losing 17 percent of its budget. To the Premier: what has the Minister of Family and Social Services learned about this program in the last seven days that has convinced him that it's not good enough and it should lose funding? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, I'll have the hon. minister responsible for children's services respond. MS CALAHASEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, the early Head Start program was a program that came in on a kind of late basis, but basically it is a good program. What we're finding is that because we only had three years to be able to do programming for early intervention – when the Member for Athabasca-Wabasca was Minister of Family and Social Services, he indicated that three years was the way that we were going to go with early intervention.

The first year there were very limited dollars that were spent, the second year not as many as we thought were going to be were spent, and the third year we had other dollars that would go into it, and we only had used some- thing like about $19 million. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, the process that we thought was going to be happening throughout the whole planning process would take over, and then the authorities would assume responsi- bility for early intervention programs. That did not occur.

We have extended the planning process for another year, which has created the problem relative to determining who would then take over for early intervention. We found that the early Head Start, alt hough it is a good program, certainly is one of those that would be assessed in the overall program of early intervention. We are doing that now. We thought that we could do a number of wonderful of things with the $17 million that we have allocated. We are now having to assess every single project relative to whether or not the outcomes are going to meet, and if they do meet, we will be looking at that even more so.

Each individual program will be assessed accordingly. MR. SAPERS: Given that the Minister of Family and Social Services said that he wouldn't take money away from the program if it did what it was supposed to be doing and given that the junior minister has now said that these things are all going to be assessed, will the Premier please commit that he will not allow a single penny to be taken away from the Mayfield early interven- tion program until he is satisfied that that assessment has been done, until a complete review of that program is completed? Will you save the program, Mr. Premier? MR.

KLEIN: Well, again, I believe the hon. minister is more familiar with the Mayfield program, and I will have her respond. MS CALAHASEN: Mr. Speaker, first of all, the Mayfield early Head Start program – basically what we're trying to do is make sure that whatever we do in evaluating the project, we are going to be meeting the outcomes of what was stated. If it's in fact going to be able to be assessed in that review, we would look at what possibilities there are in terms of maintaining the present funding, and if they are not, then, yes, we will commit to the fact that we will look at it.

If it is meeting the outcomes to the full extent of what we expected it to, we will certainly see what can be done. Mr. Speaker, as the minister responsible for children's services, we have the early intervention, and early intervention is one of the areas we feel very strongly about. We're making sure that whatever has to be done in terms of assessments, we will continue to do so. If it does meet the strict program criteria that we have set out, as people have indicated, we will certainly look at that. MR.

SAPERS: Will the Premier confirm that this budget cutting has nothing to do with criteria and assessment whatsoever, that there was no intelligent program-by-program review, that this is simply an effort to save money? In fact, will the Premier confirm that the Minister of Family and Social Services directed his officials to simply cut any early intervention program with a budget of more than $50,000? MR. KLEIN: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, I'll have the hon. minister respond. MS CALAHASEN: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to correct a misrepresentation in terms of cutting all programs. We are not

858 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 cutting all programs. We are looking at what has to be done in terms of assessment and evaluation of all programs and to determine whether or not they are actually meeting the needs of the community and the outcomes that have been identified by the project and the people who will be evaluating those projects. Mr. Speaker, we are looking at every single one of those early intervention programs.

We will be doing an assessment in terms of which projects should go ahead on their merit, and at that point we will ensure that whatever outcomes are being met, we will look at all the programs and ensure that those that should be getting the funding will get the funding. Sexual Sterilization Act MR. SHARIFF: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. Some of my constituents have been left with the impression that the present government was responsible for the wrongful steriliza- tion and confinement in provincial institutions. Mr. Premier, would you clarify this for my constituents, please? MR. KLEIN: Well, Mr.

Speaker, it's not surprising. Two nights ago I was listening to a phone-in radio program, and certainly the host of that program left the impression that the Sexual Steriliza- tion Act was indeed

an act of this government. I heard on a television program last night the reporter alluding to the act being the Alberta government's legislation. Well, it was the legislation of the Alberta government, but it was legislation of 1928. I think it's so very, very unfair for the media to portray that it's this government's legislation. I welcome the opportunity to set the record straight. The Sexual Sterilization Act was passed in 1928 by the United Farmers of Alberta government.

It was designed to allow for the sterilization of mentally disabled people to prevent those individu- als from passing on mental disabilities to their children. The act reflected the social thinking of the day. It was supported in this province by many prominent doctors and activists in Alberta. The act remained in force throughout the era of Social Credit govern- ment in our province. In 1972 the newly elected Progressive Conservative government, as one of its first acts, repealed that legislation. That, in brief, Mr. Speaker, is the background of what happened then.

Now we are trying our best to resolve the matter of compensation for what took place from the late 1920s to the early '70s, before, long before, our government's time. MR. SHARIFF: Mr. Speaker, my first supplemental question is also to the Premier. Given the confusion surrounding this matter, who exactly were these prominent doctors and activists in Alberta who supported these types of measures? MR. KLEIN: Mr. Speaker, there's some very, very interesting history here, and I think this should be put on the record now.

These are people who certainly would have different thinking today, but nonetheless it's quite interesting to see who these people were. Again, I appreciate the opportunity to provide the facts. There was widespread support at the time. If you'll go back, you'll see that it included the medical community, academ- ics, and social activists. The principles were also supported by the general public at the time. They were all supported by the media. The media were totally onside at that particular time. I mentioned that it was

an act of the UFA government and continued through the Social Credit era. Nellie McClung and Emily Murphy were at the forefront of the campaign for eugenic sterilization. Louise McKinney publicly expressed support for this legislation. So did the United Farm Women of Alberta, the National Council of Women, and another name from the past, Tommy Douglas. They all supported this legislation. 2:10 MR. SHARIFF: Thank you for clarifying that. After all is said and done in trying to correct the sins of the past so to speak, where exactly does this government stand today? MR.

KLEIN: Certainly where we stand today is evident, and the ministerial statement of yesterday certainly presented the govern- ment's position. Our intention has always been to try and find a fair solution to a very complex, regretful situation. It was something that happened during past administrations. We want to do the right thing for individuals and for all Albertans. We have now put in place a mechanism that will allow claims to be settled out of court quickly and avoid lengthy and costly court actions.

Claimants have a clear choice to seek a settlement now or, if they wish, pursue their claims throughout the courts. They certainly can continue to go that route. As I said yesterday, this whole thing is about compassion, compensa- tion, choice, and doing the best we can for all concerned to make things right, to correct the wrongs of many, many years ago. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, followed by the hon. Member for West Y ellowhead. Private Schools DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Education.

With the 22 percent increase in public funding of private schools, can the minister tell us the distinction between private schools run by nonprofit societies and those run for profit like Calgary's Webber Academy? What's the differ- ence? MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, regardless of the differences between the two, I think the important thing to note is that in both cases they are educating children in accordance with the Alberta curriculum. Accordingly, this is a matter that has been taken into account by the task force that looked at private schooling.

I think that is the reason we provide some funding for these schools that are providing choices to parents. Mr. Speaker, it's not full funding. It's not a hundred percent of the instructional grant that we give to kids that would attend public or Catholic schools, but it is a portion. We believe that's part of providing choices for parents. and that's the reason that as long as the criteria are satisfied that they are teaching the Alberta curriculum and we can review it, we can in fact justify the continuation of funding going to either of those types of schools. DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Does this government not have a problem with subsidizing a private school business where the first priority is profit maximization? MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, I think it's got to be made very, very clear that these are choices made by parents of school children in the province of Alberta. Should a parent choose to send them, in the characterization of the member, to a private school run for profit or through a not-for-profit society, in either case this is a choice that is made by the parent. We believe that that choice should be funded in part.

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 859 Now again, Mr. Speaker, to make it clear, they do not receive moneys for transportation, for capital, for administration. They only get a portion for instruction. At the end of the day, making sure that these kids are learning the Alberta curriculum through whatever process these parents believe is most appropriate as an educational choice for their child is something this government supports. DR. MASSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta's public school boards must disclose their superintendents' salary and benefits.

Can taxpayers have access to similar information for the chief executive officers for all private schools? MR. MAR: Mr. Speaker, the suggestion is made, I think, by the hon. member who asked the question that somehow there's no element of accountability for private schools. In fact there is. Ultimately private schools would make a strong argument and I think a credible argument that they're the most accountable to the people who pay tuition.

Those parents make those choices on behalf of their kids, and it is their responsibility as a school to be accountable to the parents of kids that go to that school as well as to the government. We do have in place accountability features so that we are satisfied that the moneys granted to such schools are in fact being applied towards the education of children. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for West Y ellowhead, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Municipal Transportation Grants MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In this great province of ours there'll never be another new city despite the fact that towns such as Hinton in West Y ellowhead and Brooks in Strathmore-Brooks have reached the 10, 000 population plateau. They will not call themselves a city because of transportation grants. To the Minister of Transportation and Utilities: will he confirm that towns of 1 1,000 citizens r eceive more grant than cities of 1 1,000? MR. PASZKOWSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are a number of factors that enter into the response to this.

We have to measure the fact that the cities under the MGA are authorities and owners of all the roads. Towns basically have authority over their own roads. As far as primary highways are concerned, we maintain the responsibility and the authority for that,

whereas in the cities the city has the authority and the responsibility in total for primary roads as well as their own local roads. In towns the decisions are made by Alberta Transportation and Utilities regarding the primary roads. In the cities the city has full authority over making those decisions. The cities have been receiving a $25 per capita annual grant, and this past year they had a further $7.50 supplement to that $25 per capita annual grant. For towns, over a seven-year period it still works out to $25 per capita, but that money isn't an annual grant.

So in some cases they have to wait for that money to come forward, depend- ing on the priority of all of the towns. So there is a fundamental difference as to how that funding is disbursed. MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental question is: when will the Minister of Transportation and Utilities change the grant system to population-based systems for cities and towns? MR. PASZKOWSKI: In effect, Mr. Speaker, the population-based system is in effect for cities as well as for towns, so it is the population-based formula that is the final determination for funding. MR. STRANG: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. My second supplemen- tary is: for towns that have a primary highway such as the Trans- Canada, what help will be given to them if this town becomes a city, using a population-based system? MR. PASZKOWSKI: The situation regarding primary highways – of course, in the cities they get an annual grant of $1,959 per kilometre lane on an annual basis, so in that way that helps fund the costing of ongoing maintenance. Indeed what we try to do is provide funding formulas as neutral as possible for towns and cities.

Now, that doesn't always quite work out that way because indeed there are variable amounts of primary highways that go through cities or towns. Consequently one town may receive a certain amount of funding that's entirely different from that received by another community. So it isn't always exactly the same, but there is a formula, and we try to base the formula as neutrally as possible for cities or for towns. Utilities Deregulation MR. DICKSON: Mr.

Speaker, one of the principles the Minister of Energy has established for deregulation of the electricity industry in this province is that all Albertans, not just some, will share the benefits of that deregulation. That's a principle the Alberta Liberal caucus fully supports. However, in a March 9 letter to the Minister of Energy the mayor of the city of Calgary expresses concern that nearly $1 billion, or 20 percent, in benefits from deregulation may not be shared or returned to Albertans. My question is to the Minister of Energy.

Is the mayor of the city of Calgary correct when he claims that utility customers across this province will not share $1 billion in benefits that they would otherwise be entitled to under deregulation? 2:20 DR. WEST: Depending on the assumptions that you use. We've had people from around the world – London economics, those from Chicago and other areas where there's been deregulation – do all the assumptions they can and put it into the equation. We have come up with the most fair evaluation in the contract out to the year 2020. The answer to the questions is no, based on their assumptions. MR.

DICKSON: My supplementary question, then, to the minister: given the analysis that's been done by the city of Calgary, is this not a question of shifting approximately $1 billion of the costs of deregulation onto the backs of utility customers, not just in the city of Calgary but utility customers right across this province? DR. WEST: Mr. Speaker, absolutely not. MR. DICKSON: Well, I want to know, Mr. Speaker, what concrete steps this minister is going to take to address the obviously huge discrepancy in calculations done by the city of Calgary.

They arguably have as much expertise as this minister has in his department. How is he going to reconcile that chasm, that difference between the two estimates?

860 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 DR. WEST: Mr. Speaker, there will be continual, ongoing discussions with all parties. This is a very complex issue of the deregulation of the electrical industry. As we go forward in the debate on the bill, as it goes through second reading and commit- tee, we will bring out many of the factors that we've used to come to our targets, bringing a fair and prudent return to the people of Alberta as well as moving forward to a competitive market industry in the province getting ready for the next century. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for St. Albert, followed by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Seniors' Health Care Premiums MRS. O'NEILL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are about the health care premium subsidy program for seniors offered by our government. There have been some media reports regarding this program that have raised concerns among some seniors in my constituency. The concerns arise around Bill 22, which was introduced earlier in the Assembly. I do not wish to anticipate debate on this bill, but I do have some questions about the subsidy program itself. My first question is to the Minister of Health. Mr.

Minister, can you tell this Assembly whether you are intending to change the seniors' premium subsidy program in any way? MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, contrary to reports that may have some source with the opposition here in this Legislature, there is absolutely no intention to change the low-income subsidy or premium subsidy program for seniors in this province. I would like to emphatically emphasize that. Further, I would like to point out that in the province we have a very wide coverage in terms of the premium subsidy program.

According to my statistics, 58 percent of Albertan seniors pay no premiums whatsoever, and another 4 percent pay only partial premiums. It's certainly the intention to continue with that help to our senior population. MRS. O'NEILL: My supplementary question is again to the Minister of Health. Can the minister assure Alberta citizens that there is no plan by his ministry to raise the rates of premiums to seniors? MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, I think I can certainly confirm that once again. There is no plan to raise premiums either. I also want to put something else on the record, Mr. Speaker.

There was reference to the legislation that has been tabled with the Assembly. This piece of legislation, as the critics well know, is intended to benefit seniors by making it clear that the seniors' overall benefits program and the premium subsidy are synchro- nized and they start at the same date of qualifying for those programs: a very simple thing, beneficial to seniors. That's what it's intended to do. MRS. O'NEILL: Thank you. My second supplementary then. Given that I want the assurance, this question is to the Minister of Community Development, responsible for seniors.

Can the minister tell this Assembly whether she is proposing any changes to the Alberta seniors' benefit program that would affect the premium subsidy program available to Alberta seniors? MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr. Speaker, I can assure this Assembly and all Albertans that there are no plans or thoughts by this minister or this government to change the subsidy program for seniors. In fact I believe there is no legislation that would do that. There are two things, Mr. Speaker, that I will base that on.

One, I think I can stand on the record that there have been no changes made to seniors' programs in this province in the last two years since I've had the ministry that have been made without consultation directly with seniors in this province. I will say that, secondly, the only changes that have been made, with their advice through consultation, have been to enhance those programs. There will be no changes made to seniors' programs without consultation with the seniors in this province. THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, followed by the hon. Member for Red Deer South.

Well Site Reclamation MS CARLSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The departments of Agriculture and Environmental Protection are holding 10 work- shops across the province to get input on well site reclamation criteria and the proposed selective audit program. Although new well site reclamation criteria were circulated amongst the industry, landowners only received a brief guide and questionnaire. When this government chooses to share information, they share selec- tively.

Will the Minister of Environmental Protection tell us why landowners have not been provided with the full 36-page list of criteria that has circulated in the oil and gas industry instead of the six-page guide that went with the questionnaire? MR. LUND: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member indicated, the entire package of the criteria for well site – there are a lot of pages. There's a lot of very technical information in there. I know that there are a lot of farmers out there who would under- stand it completely, so if a farmer wants to get those criteria – it's a discussion paper.

The criteria have not been established at this point. But if the farmer wishes to get those, they will be avail- able. It wasn't that we were trying to hide anything, like the hon. member indicates. That's not the point at all, but when you have a huge number of farmers, where do you stop? Where do you start? The decision was made that they would be available on request. MS CARLSON: They've only circulated it to about 20 farmers so far, and you've never told them that they can get the full set of criteria, that it's even available, that there even are any, Mr. Speaker.

To the same minister: has he told the landowners that once released and certified the well site becomes the landowner's responsibility? Which is a fair cry from what you used to do before. No one has told these landowners that they're going to have the cost and the liability of any further environmental cleanup on these well sites. Why hasn't he told them that? MR. LUND: Well, Mr. Speaker, since there were two complete questions in that one, I guess I'll answer them both at once. The fact is that the hon. member is completely wrong again. The farmer has even a longer period under the proposal.

Currently, once a well site has been certified as being reclaimed, the landowner has one year in which to appeal that reclamation certificate. Under the proposal the landowner would have five years. In other words, the landowner will have the opportunity, if it's in a grain-growing area, to grow probably four crops. There is nothing that tells the story better than a crop on a piece

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 861 of ground that has been reclaimed. Y ou can easily compare, once there's the crop on the reclaimed area versus the crop adjacent to it. So I think that we are giving the landowner an opportunity to have a longer period of time and be more comfortable with reclamation. Mr. Speaker, as far as any contamination, the contamination will be the responsibility of the company that drilled the well or the owner of the well site at the time of the reclamation. If the company has gone into bankruptcy or is insolvent, then the government takes on that responsibility.

So I think that we are giving the landowners, the farmers, even more protection than they had before. 2:30 MS CARLSON: Mr. Speaker, given that the opportunity the minister is now giving the landowners is that they are going to be on the hook after five years for any future costs of cleanup, which is completely contrary to the policy you have now, is he going to tell the landowners this? A person in his own department said that it is not their responsibility to inform the landowners that this change is coming? MR. LUND: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I guess that the answer to the fourth question – I'll have to remind the hon. member that she obviously does not understand the difference between contamina- tion and reclamation. Because the fact is that if it is contami- nated, as I explained in my earlier answer, it's the responsibility of the company. If the company has gone broke or is insolvent, then it falls back to the government.

As far as the reclamation is concerned, I'm not going to go through that long explanation again of how we are actually giving the landowner a better deal under the proposal. head: Members' Statements THE SPEAKER: Three hon. members have indicated their interest today in providing a member's statement. We'll proceed in the following order: first of all the Member for Banff-Coch- rane, then the Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, then the Member for Calgary-McCall. Winter Paralympic Games MRS. TARCHUK: Mr.

Speaker, today I'd like to update the Assembly on the progress of nine Alberta athletes who are competing in the 1998 Winter Paralympic Games in Nagano. These exceptional athletes have already collected five of the 12 Canadian medals won to date. With two days left of competition the number may even rise higher. Canada sent 32 athletes to these games, and remarkably nine came from Alberta.

They are Ian Balfour of Pincher Creek, Dave Earner of Sherwood Park, Bill Harriot of Calgary, Ramona Hoh of Edmonton, Lorraine Kelly of Edmonton, Stacy Kohut of Banff, Warren Martin of Edmonton, Shauna Rauhanen of Cold Lake, and Karolina Wisniewska of Calgary. Two other Albertans, Pierre Shweda of Edmonton and Patrick Jarvis of Calgary, are participating as coach and chef de mission at the games.

As with the incredible number of Alberta medal winners at the earlier winter games, the successes of these Paralympic athletes is evidence of the legacy left behind from the world-class facilities built for the Calgary Winter Olympics in 1988. It is with great pride that I mention a medal-winning athlete from the constituency of Banff-Cochrane. Stacy Kohut of Banff is a Paralympic athlete in Naga no. He is a dual silver medal winner in the men's super G and giant slalom alpine skiing events.

Stacy is considered a world-class mono-skier, which is quite an accomplishment for someone who is only in the fifth year of international competition. Stacy gained this title in 1994 at the second ever Paralympic Winter Games held in Lillehammer, Norway. Since then, he has successfully competed in numerous international events, such as the world championships in Lech, Austria, where he placed first in both the downhill and super G and third in the giant slalom. Last year he placed second and third in Alpine events at the world cup held in France.

Stacy has faced adversity on many levels, yet has come out a winner. I call on all members of this Assembly to join me in congratu- lating Stacy and the rest of these extraordinary Alberta athletes and coaches on the Canadian Paralympic team. I wish them well and the rest of the competitors the very best during the final days of competition. Kananaskis Country MS CARLSON: Mr. Speaker, this private member's statement is made on behalf of grade 6 students at Banded Peak school in Bragg Creek, Alberta. Dear Mr. Klein: We are not very pleased with the provincial government's management of Kananaskis Country.

We live near Logan Ridge, in which you are allowing CL ranches to log. Logan Ridge has been a landmark for more than 1 10 years. In order to clear grazing areas, CL ranches is logging parts of this environmentally sensitive area, and we want it to stop. This is public land, so locals have a right to enjoy it. We think the company that is logging Logan Ridge should let their cows graze in Springbank, where there are open prairies. Development in Kananaskis is like chopping down your house for firewood. Y ou might stay warm for a while, but eventually you won't have a house or a fire.

Tree roots keep the soil stable, and if they log Logan's Ridge, the soil will become unstable, and that may cause a mud slide or erosion. This directly affects us here at Bragg Creek because our soil is very shallow. Much of the soil base is on a gravel bed. Kananaskis Country was put on this earth to provide hundreds of animals homes and for people to come and see the wilderness and not have to worry about it being destroyed. The forest plays a big

part in our everyday life. With all the carbon dioxide emissions we produce, the worst thing we can do is log exten- sively. The trees act as filters for our air. They breath in CO 2 and breath out oxygen. They fertilize the soil so other plants can grow. They are home to many wild animals, and selective logging destroys many animals' natural habitats and homes. Animals will start to get squished into tiny areas and will die of starvation because all their food will be gone. We have proof that the trees you cut down won't grow back.

This proof is from seismic lines that were cut a long time ago and still have no plant life on them. So this is why we are writing to you, Mr. Klein, because we are concerned about nature and trees. We really think you are making a big mistake. Mr. Speaker, the letter sent to the Premier, copied to the Minister of Environmental Protection and myself, came too late. In the short time it took these students to do their research and find their voice, Logan Ridge has been clear-cut and burned. O.S. Geiger Elementary School MR. SHARIFF: Mr. Speaker, literacy is a necessary tool for

862 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 success in life. In particular, possessing good English language skills is critical for all Albertans. Today I wish to recognize the efforts of one school in my riding, O.S. Geiger elementary school. This sc hool has the highest number of funded and nonfunded English as a Second Language students. The school has adopted a positive attitude towards literacy.

The staff members – whether they be in physical education, social studies, math, science, language arts, or administration – all collectively advocate for literacy and assist their student population to achieve excellence in reading and English language skills. I had the privilege of participating in the school's reading week initiative by reading to three grades 5 and 6 classes.

There were some 90 students in attendance who also had other guests read to them, including Wilma McQueen from the University of Calgary, Jamie Crysdale of the Calgary Stampeders, Ken Y oungberg from Alberta Theatre Projects, Karen Daniels from KISS FM, superin- tendent of schools Donna Michaels, just to name but a few. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to inform you that despite the high ratio of ESL students, the O.S. Geiger elementary school's philosophy translated into excellent test scores.

For the year '96- 97 the grade 6 class had 92.2 percent achieve acceptable and 15.6 percent achieve excellent test scores in writing. In reading 81.3 percent scored acceptable and 14.1 percent scored excellent. On behalf of the residents of Calgary-McCall I take this opportunity to congratulate the principal and staff of O.S. Geiger elementary school and the numerous volunteers who contribute to promoting literacy in their community. head: Projected Government Business MR.

SAPERS: Under Standing Orders I request that the Govern- ment House Leader please indicate the projected government business for the coming week. MR. HAVELOCK: Thank you. Notwithstanding the past events, Mr. Speaker, at 1:30 on March 16 we will be dealing with Bills 20, 22, 24, 25, 27 and as per the Order Paper. That evening we will be in Committee of Supply. Reporting will be science, research and information technology and designated supply subcommittees, Environmental Protection and Family and Social Services. That's day 19 of the main estimates.

March 17, 4:30, Government Bills and Orders, we w ill be dealing with messages presented in supplementary supply No. 2, general revenue fund. There are two motions for supplementary supply and lottery fund, two motions. We will also, hopefully, do second reading on Bills 20, 22, 24, 25, 27. That evening we have main estimates; lottery fund, day 1 of one; supplementary supply No. 2, general revenue fund; day 1 of two; and day 1 of one, supplementary supply, lottery fund. Mr.

Speaker, on Wednesday evening Committee of Supply, day 2 of 2, the supplementary supply estimates, No. 2, for the general revenue fund; the final estimates, day 20, reporting of Community Development, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs; and main appropriation and supplementary supply, No. 2, bills will be introduced. On Thursday, hopefully, second reading and/or Committee of the Whole for the main appropriation and the supplementary supply, No. 2, bills and that afternoon again bills 20, 22, 24, 25, and 27. 2:40 THE SPEAKER: Before calling Orders of the Day, a couple of items.

On a purported point of order, the hon. Member for Calgary- Buffalo. Point of Order Imputing Motives MR. DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm referencing Standing Orders 23(h), 23(i). In the exchange of questions put by the Member for St. Albert, the Minister of Health in his response to the first question said or intimated that the opposition had misled Albertans about Bill 22 and the government's intentions. The circumstances surrounding that bill are quite contrary to that allegation created by the minister in his response. When I saw Bill 22, I contacted the minister's office.

His office assured me there was no intention to make Alberta seniors' benefit recipients liable to pay the Alberta health care insurance premium. I then wrote the minister offering to attempt to draft an amendment that would still ensure Albertans have the statutory guarantee and that the administrative challenges confronting the minister could still be addressed. The reality is and the only thing I've ever said publicly about this has consistently been that if Bill 22 passes without more, seniors who receive the Alberta seniors' benefit will lose the current statutory guarantee they have.

I thought that what was an attempt to respond responsibly was to offer to work with the minister to remedy that problem. So the allegation that in some sense the purpose of the bill has been distorted by the opposition I think is (

a) unfair and (

b) unwar- ranted. Thank you. MR. JONSON: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's point is well taken in this sense, and that is that I should have been more specific as to which

section of the opposition I was referring to; that is, the leader of the third party opposition vis-à-vis a press release that seems to have been reported on. I agree that the Health critic for the Liberal opposition has been in conversation with me. I have, as he's indicated, indicated my willingness to sit down and look over possible amendments, and I would like to clarify that. THE SPEAKER: Well, it appears that this is more of a dispute over facts than a requirement for clarification here. There's no allegation against any individual member. Hon. members, might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests?

HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: Introduction of Guests (reversion) THE SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. MR. SAPERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity to intr oduce through you to all members of the Assembly Mr. John Day, a former Catholic school board trustee in the city of Edmonton and a well-known figure in Liberal political circles. I noticed Mr. Day come in during question period. I would ask that he and his guest please rise and receive the welcome of this Assembly. Speaker's Ruling Anticipation THE SPEAKER: Hon. members, just a point of clarification on

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 863 production in the question period this afternoon. Things moved along really, really well. There was one point in time that the Speaker chose not to interject, when there was a question from the hon. Member for St. Albert to the hon. Minister of Community Development, even though the estimates of the Minister of Community Development are this afternoon. The Speaker might have interjected on an anticipation rule. As a result of him not doing that, he was a bit more lenient than normal to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie in her questions to the hon.

Minister of Environmental Protection. There's just a little ebb and flow and a weave and bob that has to go on periodically. Twelve sets were accomplished today, which is good. head: Orders of the Day head: Committee of Supply [Mr. Tannas in the chair] THE CHAIRMAN: I'd like to call the committee to order. head: Main Estimates 1998-99 Community Development THE CHAIRMAN: To begin this afternoon's questions and answers and explanations, we'll call upon the hon. Minister of Community Development. MRS. McCLELLAN: Mr.

Chairman, under the ministry we have a number of areas, and I have four of my colleagues that have direct responsibilities in those areas. So with the Assembly's indulgence I would like to ask that those members give the opening remarks and use the time that is available to me. I would first ask if the hon. Member for Lacombe-Stettler, who is chair of the Community Lottery Program Secretariat, would make some comments. MRS. GORDON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, hon. minister. Just before I begin, I would like to give a little historical overview as to how community lottery boards came to be.

This program was developed as a direct result of the provincewide public consultation that took place in 1995. It was initiated by the Premier and myself along with nine other capable individuals and traveled this pr ovince as the Lotteries Review Committee.

The committee was charged with the task of consulting with Albertans about the future directions for lotteries and gaming, and one thing that came out of that consultation was that we heard repeatedly that communities and individuals and associations felt that some video lottery terminal money should be returned to their communities and that their commun ities themselves were in the best place to analyze and assess who indeed should get the money. So the whole development of the community lottery board program was a direct result of public consultation.

In establishing the program, it was felt that two other areas were talked about a great deal. Many people through the consultation and subsequent questionnaires sent out to some 6,000 organizations felt that it should be a new board, that the board should be community driven and have community volunteers on it, that it should not be a municipal board, nor should it be a provincially appointed board. They also felt that to put into place new boundaries would be confusing, so they said: a new board but use existing boundaries.

Initially, when I first started to work on this initiative, this program was under Alberta Gaming and Liquor Policy Secretariat, but it was transferred to Alberta Community Development in November of 1997. Actually Alberta Community Development is the place it should be because it is a grant distribution program and involves communities and community leaders. Over the last few weeks you have probably noticed in some of your daily papers as well as weekly papers that municipalities have been advertising for people to sit on the board.

One thing that we asked is for municipalities to take the lead role and form the nominating committee to go out and seek publicly volunteers – capable volunteers, interested volunteers – who would sit on this board. We are actually moving along very nicely. To date we have approximately 65 community lottery boards in place with their membership lists having come into the department, and those ones have been okayed and will be up and running April 1.

We are working diligently through the secretariat and Alberta Community Development to assist those other areas where we don't have their names yet, but we want them to definitely be up and running by April 1. 2:50 I'm very excited about this program because it has been such a long time in the making, and I really am very satisfied and pleased that it's finally taking shape. As I mentioned to you, this goes back to 1995 but even before that, because if you recall, the Premier met with mayors from northeastern Alberta in, I believe, 1994.

There they talked to him and said they wanted to see some video lottery terminal revenues returned to their communities. This program is indeed different from other granting programs that we presently have or had in the past. It puts the granting decisions in the hands of the community, and I think that's very, very important. This program is probably one of the broadest, most flexible granting programs I've ever seen in Alberta. Having served municipally, I know of quite a few, some that were very good and some that were very bad, such as the community tourism action plan.

It was one that I remember was not well received by communities or municipal leaders. But I believe this program will make a difference. In our consultation with Albertans going back to 1995, we heard repeatedly that fund-raising activities for smaller organiza- tions were being hurt by several factors. Certainly one was the government-sponsored gaming and lottery opportunities that are now available, and a second one was that a number of organiza- tions were going to larger projects such as the $100-a-ticket dream home and the larger type of prizes.

So the smaller organizations that needed to raise money were having problems. This is one thing that the community lottery board grant program is designed to help: these smaller organizations. We see this program as helping a small team that needs $500 for new uniforms or a gym group that might need $1,500 for new mats or a seniors' society that has a place to hold meetings but needs some new chairs. These are the kinds of things that we believe this program will be able to assist rather than those big-ticket items.

We already have a number of excellent granting foundations already operating, such as the Wild Rose Foundation, Alberta Historical Resources Foundation, the community facility enhance- ment grant program, which is a very successful program for larger capital expenditure items. It has been said over and over that municipalities are not part of this, but yes, they are. We believe they're very important partners in this entire process. As I mentioned earlier, we asked them to form the nominating committee and find eager, enthusias-

864 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 tic individuals to sit on this board. We believe that by this community lottery board working together with the municipality, they certainly will be able to identify community priorities and needs. Most of the municipalities have set out and done their work. We have some excellent names that have come forward to sit on these boards, and we will work with the remaining few areas over the next couple of weeks to try to get them up and running as soon as possible.

We also have asked the municipalities if they're willing to offer some support, whether that support be as simple as providing a meeting room, coffee, a photocopier, a fax machine, et cetera. We also know that in many municipalities they have staff on hand that have worked for a number of years in recreation departments or other departments where they understand and know the granting process and know the individuals seeking grants. We're hoping that these municipalities will make some of this expertise available to the board, but it will be entirely up to them.

Community Development will be handling two of the larger administrative duties. They will be cutting the cheques. Every- one knows that when you have a number of cheques that must be processed and then sent out, it does take time and money, and through Community Development that will be done. As well, Community Development will look after the postproject audit, and that is the follow-up after the organization has received the money.

We have had some very good response from many municipali- ties who are willing to partner with the community lottery board and provide a number of items, and we've had some very good ideas come forward over the last two or three weeks on how they will deal with this so it can be done in the most cost-effective and efficient manner.

For instance, when they were setting up their nominating committee and recruiting people for the board, one municipality phoned and asked if it would be possible that when someone was making application to the board, they could require more than one copy being made so that instead of the board having to photocopy the number of applicants needed for their membership, they would come in already processed to be handed out. It's things like that.

Through Community Development and John Pryde and the other employees that have been working so diligently on this, we are going to be putting out a newsletter in the next little while, once these boards are up and running by April 1, sort of a sharing of ideas so that one community lottery board will be able to garner some expertise and some sharing and networking with other community lottery boards. As well, the foundations that are presently operating and doing an exceptional job and that have been operating for a long time will also make themselves and their staff available to assist in any way.

Through Community Development we do have regional offices throughout the province, and these people working in these offices have been brought up to speed on this program, are excited about this program, and are there to help each and every community lottery board as they become established and sit down to set their own parameters and some of their own in-house bylaws that will need to be done. We've had several meetings to date, and there seems to be a common thread here: that people are waiting for April 1, that they know there are needs in their community.

Groups and associations are ready to make application, and now we just have to ensure that everyone is up to speed so that we can all come together and this can be done just as quickly as possible. Something that was difficult in the very beginning – and I know many members of this Assembly heard this – was that municipali- ties were very upset they were not asked to be the community lottery board.

As I've said many times in many places, whether it be at the AAMD and C or at the AUMA, the very groups and organizations, the very people that this grant program is intended for did not want municipalities to be the board. They wanted it removed from provincial politics, they wanted it removed from municipal politics, and they wanted the community as a whole to decide who and what should be funded. As I said when I spoke to the AUMA and the AAMD and C several months ago, we did receive a number of phone calls and letters from very disgruntled municipal councillors.

It would certainly have been easier for me and for the people that I've been working with to say: hey, we can make municipal councils the board; we can make them responsible. But that wouldn't have been doing my job, because that isn't what we heard in 1995. It isn't what we heard when we sent out numerous questionnaires asking people: how do you see a lottery board?

Today I can stand here and say that this model and what we're bringing forward is what people have told us for the last several years they want, and I'm hoping that we have given them the flexibility so that they are able to do in their own individual regions and communities what is best for them. We certainly do have some overall guidelines in place, that we're asking them to adhere to, but once those people on that board have made the decision, that decision will be theirs. The application will come to Edmonton, where the cheque will be cut and sent out to the recipient.

The authorization on that application form will not be changed. It will be the decision, and it rests with the members of that community lottery board. 3:00 I think, hon. minister, I will stop my comments now. Cer- tainly, members of the Assembly, as you get into debate and dialogue and discussion, I'll be very pleased to answer any of your questions. Many of you individually have certainly talked to me, and I hope I've been able to answer your questions to date. This is a new program.

We haven't had a program like this in Alberta before, so it will need constant evaluation and monitoring as we go along, and through my secretariat and with assistance from the minister, the minister's office, and certainly department people, we will evaluate and make recommendations as time proceeds. But right now I think it is imperative that these groups are organized and ready to go April 1, because $50 million has been designated in this year's budget to this program. I will be pleased to answer questions later on. Thank you very much. THE CHAIRMAN: The hon.

Member for Calgary-Currie, for the five and a half minutes remaining. MRS. BURGENER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll just highlight the 1998-99 AADAC estimates. We have had an increase of $2 million in our budget this year, and that represents a 6.8 percent increase overall. This revenue increase: $0.7 million comes from general revenues, which is to recognize our volume and the increased services which we're providing. We also have an increase of 33 percent, allowing us $0.75 million for our Alberta liquor and gaming services to deal with problem gambling. [Mrs.

Gordon in the chair] Finally, AADAC's own revenue generation has increased with

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 865 an addition of 43 percent, or $0.6 million, which are funds that we have secured through the United Nations drug control program for the delivery of a major international youth conference in Banff this spring. In addition, we have had major commitments for AADAC in this business plan to increase our services to problem gamblers, to maintain a priority focus on our youth, and to increase our support for community programs.

Just to highlight, Madam Chairman, the increased services to problem gamblers will supply us with additional funding for research and treatment to broaden our array of services that we already have developed. In addition, we will be implementing a specific women's program at the Villa Recovery Centre for Women in Calgary and will provide some in-patient and intensive nonresidential treatment programs that are available in the province, and we will enhance that.

We're also looking at developing on the prevention side some work on the Internet, awareness through the media on problem gambling and gambling-related youth issues. We are looking at developing an interactive CD-ROM for use in schools, and we have very much confidence in the process that we're looking at for our young people. We'll also be completing a replication of our 1993 adult prevalence study, and as I've mentioned before in the House, research on addiction issues is a priority for AADAC. We will also continue our training to provide advance direction for our addiction counselors in this particular field.

We're hosting an Alberta conference in 1998, cohosting with Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and we also continue to work with the hotel and restaurant association on early intervention issues and knowledge of problem gambling. Our significant focus on youth, Madam Chairman, is something that should not be underscored. I've mentioned the United Nations drug control program. We're hosting a conference in Banff with 22 countries, with young people representing a number of issues and programs with respect to youth addictions.

We are under contract with the United Nations for that, and we have in training 49 youth delegates, 10 adults drawn from across the province, and 35 youth being selected from within Alberta. I want to just focus on our fetal alcohol syndrome initiative, that we're doing together with the Minister of Family and Social Services, and AADAC's work with the co-ordination of children's services, shared with the minister without portfolio, the Hon. Pearl Calahasen. Lastly, I want to just acknowledge the increased support to our communities.

A major partner in our communities receive grants to about 25 percent community agencies, and I'm pleased that we were able to increase by 5 percent manpower funding announced earlier by government and effective January 1 of this year. I firmly support the work that AADAC has done, and I'll appreciate the support for our budget in estimates this afternoon. THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Calgary- West. MS KRYCZKA: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak about the Seniors Advisory Council for Alberta.

I've certainly enjoyed learning in the past 10 months about seniors' issues and the role that the c ouncil plays with seniors in the province. I have met with numerous seniors' groups across the province, and I certainly have appreciated the openness which seniors have demonstrated in sharing their issues and concerns. Especially I'd like to say that I enjoyed spending time at the Hinton Good Companions club, ably co-ordinated by the MLA for West Y ellowhead; also with the St. Albert Senior Citizens Club, co-ordinated through the MLA for St.

Albert; Calgary Jewish Family Services; and the Calgary Catholic Immigration Society and its services to immigrant seniors. Those are just a few of the many organizations that we've seen. Mainly I'm really happy to report that many of the concerns seniors have raised with the council have been acknowledged by the government and are currently under review. A significant number of these issues are currently being reviewed by the long- term care review committee, on which I am participating with my colleague the MLA for Redwater.

Issues such as concerns with early discharge and the linkage between health and housing are but a few of the issues that we're addressing. The results of this work will be presented to the Minister of Health in the fall of this year. Under the leadership of the Minister of Community Develop- ment the continuing review of and reinvestment in income support programs has definitely increased the number of people who receive benefits. This has definitely helped seniors across the province and has reduced the concerns presented to the council.

We've spent a lot of time this past year reviewing our mandate, developing a more focused approach, and listening to and gathering input from seniors. We have changed our structure so that we're more defined to include seven regions in the province. Council members are more responsible now for the interests and concerns of seniors from their region. The council . . . THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry to interrupt, but the 20 minutes is up. The way it w ill work: they will certainly be allowed, and we'll be able to come back to this side again. MS KRYCZKA: Thank you.

THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I won't say whose fault it is that all this happened. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. MR. BONNER: Y es. Thank you, Madam Chairman. To start today, I would like to thank the Minister of Community Develop- ment for her prompt reply to the questions that I did ask in estimates and also the thoroughness with which she supplied those answers. It was very much appreciated, and I thank you.

I left off in estimates, Madam Chairman, talking at that particular time on how skyrocketing rental rates in our fast- growing communities here in Alberta have put an incredible amount of pressure on our seniors. Continuing along the same lines, Albertans are going to be assessed the education tax, and it's going to be on the assessed value of their homes. Now, I do have a couple of examples here. These are from Jasper, which is in a unique position in the province, as are those homeowners in Banff.

Because of the limited growth in those communities and the great desire of people to live there, their homes are valued much higher than any others in the province. This particular example I have here is a house at 812 Tonquin Street in Jasper. It's a home I'm very familiar with; I spent many hours in this particular home as a youth. This year in taxes this senior is paying $1,380, and this is a senior in her 80s. Compara- ble taxes for the same size of home in Drayton Valley is $522, in Hinton $508, and so on.

So this is an example in Jasper where the education portion of their taxes, which certainly are going to

866 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 go up even more, will ultimately drive this senior out of her home. From your discussion with seniors, I would like to know if there is any consideration as to how these people in Banff and Jasper, the seniors in those communities, are going to have these issues addressed. 3:10 Here's another home in Jasper. Just so people can appreciate what these people have to go through, the estimated total tax on this home – and again, it's a 30-year-old, 1,300 square foot bungalow – in the year 2000 is $5,780.

If we look at Edson and Hinton, which are comparable communities apart from this being in a national park, their projected taxes are less than half, in the neighbourhood of $2,400. So there are just tremendous problems that our seniors in Banff and Jasper are going to be facing. I was wondering as well – I've brought this question up in the House before, and I've also had many phone calls from seniors – about the Premier's comments that he would rebate millions of dollars in taxes . . . MRS. McCLELLAN: Fourteen. MR. BONNER: Y eah, 14 per year.

It's now approximately three years, and I'm just wondering if you could provide us with an update on whether the Premier has indicated he will be giving those seniors a rebate or not, please. That is another question that I have. Another question I have came out of estimates. Y ou'd indi- cated, I believe, that the average age in our lodges has grown to 85. There's certainly a number of seniors in these lodges that are in extremely good shape and function very well at 85.

But some of the comments that I've been getting are that one of the reasons we've had this sudden increase from 75 to 85 in the lodges is that for many of these seniors there's no other place for them to go. Our nursing homes are filled, and there's just not enough long- term care. So our lodges are fulfilling a different role than they used to. The level of work they are doing, as far as long-term care, is certainly much greater than it was just a few years ago. Again, if you could indicate if that is indeed true and what is going to happen there.

Another question I do have for the minister is one in regards to assisted living. Are these seniors going to have more of an opportunity to live in facilities where there'll be more assisted living? It is a tremendous intermediate step. If it is going to be available, will there be government funding for it? If there is government funding for it, will it just be for construction, will it just be for operating, or would it be for both parts, as I've indicated in this particular example? Now then, when we were talking in estimates, I was looking at program 4, services to seniors.

I would like to continue with my questions, and this next

section will be on the business plan

summary. One goal of the business plan

summary was to ensure seniors have access to the supports they need to live in a secure and dignified way as independent and contributing members of society. I know that in the minister's travels around the province and her frequent meetings with seniors, she knows there is no group of people in this province that are more independent, that are proud, that have great desires to live independently. They certainly do enjoy their dignity.

Last year we had a goal: to ensure lower income senior s receive the income support for which they are eligible, and government policies effectively anticipate the needs of seniors. We have indicated that there are some pressure points presently. Are these goals being met? Particularly, one we've mentioned already, Madam Minister, is the rapid increases in rents and taxes that many of our seniors are facing. Another question, as well, on your business plan

summary: when you say that they “have access to the supports they need,” what other publicly funded supports are you referring to? Again, what does “secure and dignified” mean? When will seniors be able to live in provincially regulated and monitored private homes? Is this not one way of assuring those seniors that they will live with some security and dignity? Again, in the private group homes: what methods are we going to use or are there anticipated methods to supervise homes where seniors live where there are three or less of them?

My next question: what is being done to alleviate the shortage of long-term care facilities where they are needed? We all know that family, church, and friends are probably the most important supports for the well-being of a parent or a spouse or a grandpar- ent, yet more and more we see seniors being torn away from these supports because they don't have easy access to long-term care facilities. What are the plans to address this particular situation?

Under major strategies, one of the goals of the government was to “improve delivery of information, benefits and protection to seniors in a multi-stakeholder environment.” Again referring to last year's strategy: “coordinate the government-wide approach to planning for seniors' programs and policies.” Has this been done? Is this a fait accompli? Is it all done? Given the decen- tralization of services, we do require a great deal of co-ordination. I'm certain you are working on it. Could you tell us how that is progressing?

Now, I know that the federal and provincial governments are presently working on memorandums of understanding where we will have the sharing of a certain portion of tax claims between the various levels of government. When will this one-step process take place where u pon completion of their income tax you will have access or have permission to use the information on there to determine whether they get the ASB or whether they perhaps qualify for other provincial programs? How expansive is the regional access for seniors now? How many centres are up, in which communities, at what cost?

How many staff are they running with? Another question I had: what ex actly is “a multi-stakeholder environment”? Is this anticipating more privatization of the services for seniors like home care, seniors' boarding houses, or as I mentioned earlier, even other programs such as assisted living for seniors?

Continuing under major strategies, one of our major strategies here is to “improve delivery of information, benefits and protec- tion to seniors in a multi-stakeholder environment.” Again, we do have many, many comments which are taking place, and we do get phone calls about elder abuse, not only financial but physical abuse of these people. They are a very, very proud group of people. One of the hardest things that they would ever have to do is pick up the phone and call to indicate that one of their children or a spouse they've been married to for many years has abused them in any way.

Again, what programs or what increased number of programs are we doing to combat elder abuse? 3:20 Along the same lines, Madam Minister, a problem far too often associated with elder abuse are elders or seniors that turn to liquor, alcohol abuse, in order to try and hide from their prob- lems. Again, these are questions I would like answered. How is

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 867 information, first of all, going to get out to these people? How are they going to access it? What programs do we have in place to help them along these lines? Under your business plan

summary our goal was to “develop a government-wide response to deal with the effects of an aging population on provincial programs and services.” We certainly are having an increase in seniors in the province, somewhere in the neighbourhood of 9, 000 per year. These are not only our homegrown Albertans, but they also include a number of seniors that are moving in with their families, who are making a mass migration to Alberta because of the great benefits that our boom times have to all people. So we do have challenges of an ever increasing senior population.

I'm glad to see that there will be co-ordination of provincial programs and services. Specifically which departments will be involved with the provincial programs and services? Is there a time line when seniors will know of this co-ordination? Who other than provincial government officials will be involved? I do again have to compliment you on the work you're presently doing with the various stakeholders in our seniors population and the consultations you are having in regards to them. On which programs and services do you anticipate the greatest effects from an aging population?

Health care and the social housing compo- nents of Municipal Affairs seem the most obvious, but which others do you plan to involve? A further question on your business plan

summary. What has happened with respect to your seniors abuse initiative? We do have the development of a hot line. I know that everybody will agree that as we do get an increase in the senior population, there certainly will be an increase in the abuse to this particular group. If we do not provide the facilities to take care of these people, then of course family members will be forced to look after relatives because the government programs and supports will not be there. My last question as far as this particular goal in your business plan

summary is: how many calls are being received by the seniors' abuse hot line? What mechanisms are in place to ensure that the hot line is able to direct help and resources to those seniors who are being abused? Another goal in the business plan: Work with other provincial government departments to implement legislation that impacts seniors, including taking a lead role in the Protection for Persons in Care Act and assisting with the Personal Directives Act.

When will we be able to provide minimal provincial standards and inspection systems for those seniors who live in private group homes with fewer than four residents? There is a problem here in that there is presently no supervision. Do we have, again, a time line when we will be able to have some program in place to look after these types of private group homes or some type of inspection for these private group homes? A second question in regards to this particular goal: why have seniors been excluded from early drafts of the domestic violence legislation?

As money becomes tighter and as more and more seniors are forced to live with their children or their grandchildren or with brothers or sisters, will we not see more and more violence against seniors? Could the minister assure seniors that there will be protection for them with the domestic violence act when the act is finally put forward? Again to the minister. Two years ago we were going to “investigate options for the regulation of residential care.” That was a highlight. What has happened to this initiative? Is this no longer a priority for seniors?

Could you please give us an update in regards to investigation options for the regulation of residential care? Now, this again is a prio rity in that skyrocketing rental rates and property taxes are forcing seniors out of their homes, and the abdication of this government for responsibility to provide social housing is something that we certainly must turn around so that our seniors do have affordable and safe places to live. The Seniors Advisory Council had advocated regulation of residential care for years. When will these recommendations be acted on, and when will these voices be heard in regards to this?

Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. MRS. McCLELLAN: Madam Chairman, I'm going to just take a moment to answer a few of the questions. I'll ask my colleague the chairman of the Seniors Advisory Council to deal with a couple of areas that the member referred to. As I have committed to do in the past, for the areas that I'm not able to touch on, because we don't want to take up all of the time today, I will respond in detail in writing after. I know that I'll have to review Hansard to make sure that I didn't miss a number of the points anyway.

Some of the area of discussion around the costs to seniors, whether it's property tax, increased utility costs, those areas are of concern and interest to seniors. We must remember that the tax rebate that was in place before for seniors was rolled into the Alberta seniors' benefit program, so those dollars did go in there. In fact, I find that in sitting down with seniors and working through this, those seniors who have a lower income are today actually getting more dollars than they were under the old program. The difficulty is in the way it comes.

Of course, your tax bill comes once a year, and you really feel that impact. So we've been looking at that and working with seniors and with some communities and saying: let's look at monthly payments and setting up schedules for people to alleviate that. 3:30 One of the areas, though, that I think is important for me to comment on, as I've said to the hon. member, is that we are going to be doing a review of the overall impact of our aging population on government programs and policies. We hope to announce just how that process will work very shortly.

The area of housing, long-term care, that the member alluded to, is part of that, and the hon. Minister of Health has initiated that part of the review under the leadership of the Member for Redwater, and of course that will feed into the process. The same with the housing issues that are there. Much of the housing is in the Department of Municipal Affairs, so that will be a part of it. So it's really important that we look at this overall impact. Today the way we can respond to seniors – and I think we have responded very su ccessfully to seniors – is through the special needs assistance program.

I will say again today that this is one of the most positive, successful programs that we have initiated. Why? Because it was developed in consultation with seniors. We sat down with the interagency council, and many times when we were looking at the cumulative impact of changes to seniors' programs, a number of the leaders in the seniors areas – and I hesitate to mention any because there are many, but Mr. Neil Reimer has worked very hard in this area, Dave Conroy, Jerry Pitts, Hazel Wilson.

There are just so many of them that have reached out to their communities; the folks at the Kerby Centre, Noreen Mahoney there. They've all talked to seniors and fed the information back to us. They said there was a real concern that a senior might have an emergency that they couldn't respond to. I mentioned in estimates the other evening – and I think it bears

868 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 repeating – that when we were designing the program, I chal- lenged my department to answer this question for me: if there is a senior whose furnace goes down at 4 o'clock in the afternoon on the 23rd of December, on a Friday, and it's 40 below, what do they do? Well, the answer was that they could apply to the special needs assistance program. My question was then: when would they get a response? The answer was: it could be as long as six to eight weeks to process an application. My department and I all realized that this simply wouldn't do.

So we put in place a process through that program where our regional people, our staff people, can respond right now. In fact, as I mentioned the other night, we had something like that happen almost to a T. The dates were different, but it actually happened, and within – I believe it was two hours; do I see some nods up there? Within two hours that was responded to. That's the way a program for special needs for seniors has to work, and that's the way it is working. I'm sure you've had letters and calls and comments. I know I sure have, and it makes me feel good that we listened to seniors.

They told us their concerns, and we were able to respond. We're doing the same thing with our regional offices or our seniors' centres. Again I have to look for a nod. I think we have 1 1 up and running. I might be wrong; maybe it's 12. But it's right around there. They're around the province, and I have to tell you that the seniors really like them. They can come in and sit down with our staff. I get very good comments about my regional staff from the seniors: they're kind, they're compassion- ate, they're understanding, they take the time to listen, and they can do it privately.

Seniors are no different than any of us in this Assembly. We do not want to stand at a counter and explain our private and personal concerns to somebody with everyone else looking on. That's what I talk about: being treated with dignity and with compassion. So it's working extremely well. I've had an opportunity to visit a number of them, and I hope to get to them all. What seniors don't like is phoning and getting an automated – and I don't like it either.

Y ou know, I don't like, “Push 1 if you want this, or push 2 if you want that.” By the time you get through the menu, you have forgotten what you really wanted, and then you have to go back through it all. So we said: no, that is not going to happen with Alberta seniors. Our 1-800 line is answered by real people. If you ever get a chance, maybe talk to them a little bit ahead if you want to see that actual operation.

I was over to take the 500,000th call on that line, and I can tell you it was a surprised senior. “This is the minister.” It was sort of like, “Right.” When I said, “If you'd stay on the line, my staff would want to talk to you after,” then there was really a “Right,” from the sound of it. I did receive a letter from that senior afterwards. It was really quite a unique experience. If you could witness the people actually in action – you have to remember, if you visit there, that it would be kind of monitored because these are private calls.

But you should just see how that centre works and how kind and thoughtful the people are who work in that area. If you ever want to give some accolades to people who are public servants – and they should get some once in awhile – find some for the seniors' division, because they're w onderful over there. They really are. I want to tell you about a number of new housing initiatives, but a bunch of them . . . MR. MITCHELL: Teachers should get accolades too. MRS. McCLELLAN: Sure, they should. MR. MITCHELL: And nurses. MRS. McCLELLAN: Absolutely. MR. MITCHELL: And lawyers. MRS. McCLELLAN: The odd one.

I want to talk about some new housing initiatives. Y ou know, you have a lot of them in Edmonton, and I can tell you that Alberta is in the leadership position of new housing and innovative housing initiatives. There is a new one that is just going to open in Edmonton in the next months, and I can't remember if it's Kensington – I got it right: Kensington Village. There's Canter- bury Court; of course it's in existence. There's Wedman House, which is a type of assisted living.

I can tell you that when Wedman House opened, which is operated by the Good Samari- tans, it was a first in Alberta and, as far as I know, a first in Canada. So really we are leading in that area. It doesn't mean we can't do better, learn more. Do you know how those things are happening? They are actually sitting down with seniors or to-be seniors, like some of us, and saying, “What kind of housing is appropriate and meets your needs?” Then you design it for that. Isn't that clever, that you would actually design it for the person who's going to live in it?

I thought it a novel and new idea, and we should do that. It is happening, and it's really happening through some of our very good nonprofit groups and it's happening with the private sector. Medicine Hat is another area that has a very high seniors population, and the choices in housing there now are incredible. But we have to look at our own housing and talk about how appropriate it is for today.

I think the important thing is that we continue to dialogue with seniors and that we continue to improve our programs for seniors to meet the seniors' needs of today and tomorrow, and that's what I think we're moving into now.

I want to ask the Member for Calgary-West, the chairman of the Seniors Advisory Council, just to comment a little bit about that consultation, because some of the areas that you have mentioned are areas that have been identified to me through the interagency council – we're going to have a new name there, but I'll use that name for now – and what the Seniors Advisory Council initiatives are for consulting with seniors in those really important areas. I know you have a lot of other questions, but I want my colleague to make a few comments, and I want to make sure other members can get in.

THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Calgary- West. 3:40 MS KRYCZKA: Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to carry on from my little talk earlier. I certainly benefited from the questions that were posed from across the way a few minutes ago. I certainly agree with the minister that dialogue and communi- cation with seniors is very important.

I also have realized that we should not only ask for their issues and concerns, but we should be asking them for input – what works well, what new ideas they have, or what new programs they have tried or seen – ask in a proactive sense, and be willing to incorporate these ideas. I know that in the work that I have been doing now with the hon. Member for Redwater with the long-term care review, we have been doing that. We're just starting, really, on this process. I

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 869 think we should invite seniors to be involved in a more innova- tive, creative way. Everything is not only driven by concerns and issues. We know basically what some of these issues are. I want to just make one comment on information and then get on to some issues that we will be looking at. I would say that at the annual information workers' workshop, the one that we held in '97, we had over 170 participants, and they were frontline workers with seniors. They benefited by up-to-date, accurate information on programs on issues for seniors.

So I think, again, that the continual information and availability of information for seniors is very important. We are also going to be embracing, all of us, I hope, the International Y ear of Older Persons in 1999. With Senior Citizens' Week coming up, and going on into '99, we definitely have identified a number of areas that we're going to do research in, and there may be some partnership programs on some of this. Definitely a few of the ministers touched on housing. Again, with the long-term care review we're looking at options in housing for seniors. Y ou mentioned assisted living, hon. member.

I have to say that I feel the best experiences in life are the ones that are personal, that we've lived ourselves. I think the maximum learning comes from those. Tomorrow I'm going to be in Calgary moving my mother into a new assisted-living home, and I've gone through the multitude of steps that it takes when you find out your rented building has been sold to be condomin- iumized, the trauma that you go through. Where do you go? Can you finance it, and how? I think there are probably a number of senior citizens out there similar to her. Y ou know how their beliefs are: “I pocket this all away.

This is for my family; it's not for me to touch. I might take some interest earned.” But you can make that money work for you, and if you have to purchase your own assisted-living environment and home, this will provide you with a better lifestyle. Do you maybe know what I'm saying with that approach? I think that private industry should be encouraged to develop more of these types of accommodations for seniors that can afford them. I know there's a concern with seniors who are living in their own homes and want to stay there and are living on a fixed income.

As property values increase, they have a problem with paying their taxes. But they also have other concerns such as regular maintenance. I'm not talking about emergency mainte- nance but regular. I know that in this committee we are talking about community-based approaches to help seniors stay in their own homes as long as they possibly can. Aging in place or, as I've mentioned, assisted living. I think there are some partnerships out there, in Edmonton and Calgary in particular, but we are looking for models around the province that are successful, and those are the ones that we will encourage in the future.

There are many other issues, and I look to next year studying a number of seniors' issues: financial advice to seniors; transpor- tation has been identified as another concern. Again, that more affects the home-based or the seniors that are living in rental facilities. I also look to encouraging seniors to help us come up with some creative solutions. Last night I was reading about NEST. Have you heard of that in Edmonton, the North Edmonton Seniors Transportation? They were given some seed money from the Capital health authority. It's seniors working together but also with the community. I know that Mrs.

McClellan referred to the impact on aging study, which I think will be very important on a long-range basis. The federal seniors' benefit – the legislation isn't introduced. The Seniors Advisory Council plans to do research material on that and then from there advise seniors as to the choices that they will have to make, in particular – we call them soon-to-be seniors – the baby boomers. Basically, for the Seniors Advisory Council we have decided that next year we really need to focus on moving around the province, increasing the groups of seniors that we meet with.

Again, as I've mentioned, I think we should be asking them to give us their ideas as to what to do. Just for information, for the other side probably more than anyone, our budget is unchanged from the current year's budget. We plan to continue, as I said, with moving around the province, with educational initiatives. For instance, last year we funded the first National Aboriginal Symposium on Aging here in Edmonton, and we were certainly happy with the results of that.

Before I leave, I would like to thank Dave Arsenault, who is the general manager for the Seniors Advisory Council of Alberta, and Carole Ching, the co-ordinator, who gives us a lot of support. I know that for me as an MLA I have many other responsibilities, so I certainly appreciate that and also the department's seniors' programs. I would also like to publicly thank the members of the Seniors Advisory Council. These members are people of our province who live throughout the province. MR. CARDINAL: Like Glen Clegg. MS KRYCZKA: Like Glen Clegg, yes.

Some are almost as far away as Glen Clegg, but they travel to wherever the meetings are. They're very committed to their jobs and concerned about seniors' issues. I just want to again state that I look forward to working next year with this group and to studying seniors' issues in more depth and coming up with some solutions along with my MLA friend here from Redwater. I know we have lots of challenges, but I think there are opportunities ahead of us to solve the problems that we have heard in the last while. Thank you very much. THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I'd just remind members that we don't use proper names.

We do address people by either their ministry or their constituency. The hon. leader of the ND opposition and hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. MS BARRETT: Thank you, Chairman – Madam Chairman, pardon me. I do it all the time; don't I? But I won't say your name. A couple of observations first. Number one is under arts and libraries. This is line item 2.1.2. Y ou'll see the figure of, let's call it, $1.9 million compared to last year's budget, which was nearly $2.3 million. I can't understand why that amount is down.

Of course it constitutes an increase over the worst of the cutting years, but what concerns me – and there is no breakdown. I know it says that there's $53.2 million going for arts, heritage development, recreation, sport, and volunteer services. I don't understand why funding for the arts, in particular, is down as drastically as it has been over the last five years. [interjection] Oh, sorry: page 79 and page 72; page 72 for the figures and page 79 for the Community Development business

summary. This is an industry that for every dollar of public money put into it generates more than three dollars in revenue for the

870 Alberta Hansard March 12, 1998 government. I will just give you a contrast here. We know that one of the most heavily subsidized industries in Canada is agriculture. I'm not going to blame this government, because it was the Trudeau government that insisted upon what they called the cheap food policy. They initiated it. I disagreed with it as an economist, and I still disagree with it. I'm not blaming this government, because all of the provincial governments are pretty well forced into lockstep on this issue.

Just have a look at page 47 of the budget for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development; support for production, processing and marketing: 35 and a half million dollars. Then you go to page 51, agriculture insurance and lending assistance, and you've got $156 million. Well, that's nothing – I mean that's an awful lot of money compared to the money that's going into the arts.

I don't understand, considering the economic generator that the arts have demonstrated themselves to be, why we – you guys, the government – are so tight-fisted on this matter. 3:50 In program 2 back on page 72, the human rights and citizenship component we see is down from $2.69 million – let's call it $2.7 million – to $2.18 million, and I'll round that up to $2.2 million. That's a significant drop. I suspect what it means is that less time and effort is being devoted to issues related to human rights.

All the boards and commissions that we used to have that stood as independents are now rolled into the one, and I'm not convinced Albertans are well served by that kind of funding decrease. The only other thing that I would like to mention has to do with the seniors' benefit. Well, first of all, I don't understand why, if the government is willing to start spending a little bit more money, as it is when you look at the financial assistance – last year it was budgeted at $184 million; it's up to $186 million. It's a tiny amount.

However, what I don't understand is why the Alberta Council on Aging is not being funded. I mean, that organization did phenomenal work, continues to do phenomenal work, and instead of dedicating their time to doing that work, they're having to do fund-raising so that they can get their newsletter out. That to me is a pity. On the seniors' benefit, the ASB, page 74, I see what was budgeted last year is $135.5 m illion . We're down to $133 million. I also don't understand that, when you consider that seniors – if you want to isolate a demographic that took the biggest cut in program support, it was the seniors.

I heard the Minister of Community Development say: well, you know, don't worry about the homeowner tax relief that we used to have; we rolled it into ASB. I was pleased to hear her say that she's working on maybe providing some kind of monthly support so that you don't get, you know, stuck with one gigantic bill once a year from your municipality, but I have a hard time swallowing that. When I look at the figures that the ACA gave me last year – and I referred to them I think last year – it looked to me like the total package of benefits for seniors had decreased by a total of 30 percent.

That does not impress me. These are the people who built the province. They're still paying their taxes if they've got earnings that get to that level. I'm very dubious about Bill 22, which I won't talk about because we're in estimates, but I certainly don't want to see them having to start paying health care premiums if they qualify for the Alberta seniors' benefit program.

Finally, I would like to say on the special-needs assistance operations that I was delighted to hear the Community Develop- ment minister's response on how those things are handled: putting a real priority on that program and on personalized service and immediate service, and no phone message that says, you know, that if you want help here dial 1, if you want help in another area dial 2, et cetera, et cetera, and otherwise we're just going to leave you on ignore. That's what my mom used to call it. She used to say: Pam, they put me on ignore.

I loved it. [interjection] Now, you watch out, you FIGA – you're not a FIGA minister anymore. Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs minister, I'll save some comments for you. I just remembered one more thing about seniors that I wanted to mention. I have a lot of confidence, by the way, in the Minister of Community Development. I've worked with her on issues for many years. She was always ready. If I didn't like something she was doing when she was Health minister, she was always ready to come out in the back and talk it over with me. Y ou know, we got along very well.

I was her critic for several years, and we're still friends. Isn't that something? We're still friends, and I was her critic. I do have one concern that the member responsible for the seniors – whatever it is. I can't get my reading glasses on fast enough, folks. I'm a soon to be a senior I reckon. I had to go to bifocal glasses and reading glasses when I'm wearing my contacts. It's the group homes the Member for Edmonton-Glengarry talked about, and that was the group homes for seniors.

Not only are they unregulated if they have four beds or less, but I am aware of a situation which I would like the government to investigate. If you can give me a square answer on it, I'll privately give you the name of the company. I don't want to say it on the record. One outfit operates a group home for up to six seniors. They pay the approximately $840 a month that they would be paying in any of the long-term care facilities; that's standard. Then on top of that they're paying $500 a month for what are supposed to be medical benefits. There is no nurse on staff in the daytime.

The woman who owns this operation is a nurse. She goes out and works in the daytime. She comes home at 6 o'clock at night and she's there. It's her home; of course she's there. But she's not actually working unless somebody needs medical attention. They say: well, you know, if anybody needs medical attention, we can call and get that. Y eah. Well, anybody can call 91 1. I'd like to know what this extra $500 a month is for, and I will slip across in a minute and give the name to the minister. Thank you very much. THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Edmonton- Centre. Sorry. Go ahead, hon. Minister. MRS.

McCLELLAN: I just have two or three or four really quickly, because there were some direct questions on budget element 2.1.2. Some of those changes are simply a reallocation of dollars. For example, each area is contributing to the Connec- tions magazine. As you know, we have one magazine. Most of you have read Connections. Y ou know it's a pretty good – I think excellent – magazine actually. Each area contributes to that, whether you're in seniors or libraries or different areas, so there have been some transfers there. Some of the dollars were transferred to the field offices.

As we indicated, we want to make those field offices user friendly. We want to make them warm people places. So there was a transfer there. Human rights and citizenship. Of course you know there was an amalgamation of services there. I'm pleased to tell you that in fact it gives more service, particularly to human rights. It's a better division of staff, where if they are needed in one area, they

March 12, 1998 Alberta Hansard 871 can be there, and if they aren't, then they do their other work. So it was a better alignment of staff, and it has given I think up to eight more persons for, say, the human rights area when they need them. Y ou know, we've been fighting with keeping our waiting times down, so that made some changes there. The seniors' benefit grant, although it looks like it's down, is not down because of any reduction in dollars in the program.

It is down because the seniors who are accessing the program, the new seniors that are coming on, frankly are more affluent in many cases than seniors were years ago, so there isn't the draw on the program. The benefits have stayed the same, the criteria have stayed the same, but it is needs based and it is income tested. And I will remind all hon. members that it is not asset tested, nor would I ever recommend that it would be, because I think it's important that seniors have their homes and are able to stay in them. If you look a little further, then you will see that the special- needs assistance program

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19980312
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L24 S2 19980312 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	cfc5ecd4f2bd4182d43b6968b9ce65741023635b

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