Alberta Hansard — 23 March 2010, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 27, Session 3)

20100323

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

Province of Alberta The 27th Legislature Third Session Alberta Hansard Tuesday, March 23, 2010 Issue 22 The Honourable Kenneth R. Kowalski, Speaker

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

Albert (PC) Amery, Moe, Calgary-East (PC) Anderson, Rob, Airdrie-Chestermere (WA), WA Opposition House Leader Benito, Carl, Edmonton-Mill Woods (PC) Berger, Evan, Livingstone-Macleod (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Sustainable Resource Development Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC) Bhullar, Manmeet Singh, Calgary-Montrose (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Municipal Affairs Blackett, Hon.

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

Paul (PC), Minister of Infrastructure DeLong, Alana, Calgary-Bow (PC) Denis, Hon. Jonathan, QC, Calgary-Egmont, (PC), Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs, Deputy Government House Leader Doerksen, Arno, Strathmore-Brooks (PC), Deputy Government Whip Drysdale, Wayne, Grande Prairie-Wapiti (PC) Elniski, Doug, Edmonton-Calder (PC) Evans, Hon. Iris, Sherwood Park (PC), Minister of International and Intergovernmental Relations Fawcett, Kyle, Calgary-North Hill (PC) Forsyth, Heather, Calgary-Fish Creek (WA), WA Opposition Whip Fritz, Hon.

Yvonne, Calgary-Cross (PC), Minister of Children and Youth Services Goudreau, Hon. Hector G., Dunvegan-Central Peace (PC), Minister of Municipal Affairs Griffiths, Doug, Battle River-Wainwright (PC) Groeneveld, George, Highwood (PC) Hancock, Hon. Dave, QC, Edmonton-Whitemud (PC), Minister of Education, Political Minister for Edmonton, Government House Leader Hayden, Hon.

Jack, Drumheller-Stettler (PC), Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Hehr, Kent, Calgary-Buffalo (AL) Hinman, Paul, Calgary-Glenmore (WA), WA Opposition Deputy Leader Horne, Fred, Edmonton-Rutherford (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Seniors and Community Supports Horner, Hon. Doug, Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert (PC), Deputy Premier, Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, Minister Liaison to the Canadian Armed Forces Jablonski, Hon.

Mary Anne, Red Deer-North (PC), Minister of Seniors and Community Supports Jacobs, Broyce, Cardston-Taber-Warner (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Agriculture and Rural Development Johnson, Jeff, Athabasca-Redwater (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Treasury Board Johnston, Art, Calgary-Hays (PC) Kang, Darshan S., Calgary-McCall (AL) Klimchuk, Hon. Heather, Edmonton-Glenora (PC), Minister of Service Alberta Knight, Hon. Mel, Grande Prairie-Smoky (PC), Minister of Sustainable Resource Development Leskiw, Genia, Bonnyville-Cold Lake (PC) Liepert, Hon.

Ron, Calgary-West (PC), Minister of Energy Lindsay, Fred, Stony Plain (PC) Lukaszuk, Hon. Thomas A., Edmonton-Castle Downs (PC), Minister of Employment and Immigration Lund, Ty, Rocky Mountain House (PC) MacDonald, Hugh, Edmonton-Gold Bar (AL) Marz, Richard, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills (PC) Mason, Brian, Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood (ND), Leader of the ND Opposition McFarland, Barry, Little Bow (PC) McQueen, Diana, Drayton Valley-Calmar (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Energy Morton, Hon.

F.L., Foothills-Rocky View (PC), Minister of Finance and Enterprise Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (ND), ND Opposition House Leader Oberle, Hon. Frank, Peace River (PC), Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Olson, Verlyn, QC, Wetaskiwin-Camrose (PC) Ouellette, Hon. Luke, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake (PC), Minister of Transportation Pastoor, Bridget Brennan, Lethbridge-East (AL), Official Opposition Deputy Whip Prins, Ray, Lacombe-Ponoka (PC) Quest, Dave, Strathcona (PC) Redford, Hon.

Alison M., QC, Calgary-Elbow (PC), Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Political Minister for Calgary, Deputy Government House Leader Renner, Hon. Rob, Medicine Hat (PC), Minister of Environment, Deputy Government House Leader Rodney, Dave, Calgary-Lougheed (PC) Rogers, George, Leduc-Beaumont-Devon (PC) Sandhu, Peter, Edmonton-Manning (PC) Sarich, Janice, Edmonton-Decore (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Education Sherman, Dr. Raj, Edmonton-Meadowlark (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Health and Wellness Snelgrove, Hon. Lloyd, Vermilion-Lloydminster (PC), President of the Treasury Board Stelmach, Hon.

Ed, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville (PC), Premier, President of Executive Council Swann, Dr. David, Calgary-Mountain View (AL), Leader of the Official Opposition Taft, Dr. Kevin, Edmonton-Riverview (AL) Tarchuk, Janis, Banff-Cochrane (PC) Taylor, Dave, Calgary-Currie (AL) VanderBurg, George, Whitecourt-Ste. Anne (PC) Vandermeer, Tony, Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview (PC) Weadick, Greg, Lethbridge-West (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Advanced Education and Technology Webber, Hon.

Len, Calgary-Foothills (PC), Minister of Aboriginal Relations Woo-Paw, Teresa, Calgary-Mackay (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Employment and Immigration Xiao, David H., Edmonton-McClung (PC) Zwozdesky, Hon. Gene, Edmonton-Mill Creek (PC), Minister of Health and Wellness, Deputy Government House Leader Officers and Officials of the Legislative Assembly Clerk W.J. David McNeil Clerk Assistant/Director of House Services Louise J. Kamuchik Clerk of Journals/Table Research Micheline S. Gravel Senior Parliamentary Counsel Robert H.

Reynolds, QC Senior Parliamentary Counsel Shannon Dean Parliamentary Counsel Stephanie LeBlanc Sergeant-at-Arms Brian G. Hodgson Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms Chris Caughell Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms Gordon H. Munk Managing Editor of Alberta Hansard Liz Sim

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 597 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 1:30 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Tuesday, March 23, 2010 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Grant that we the members of our province’s Legislature fulfill our office with honesty and integrity. May our first concern be for the good of all our citizens. Let us be guided by these principles in our deliberations this day. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

What a great pleasure it is to rise today in order to introduce to you some very special guests who are here from Blessed Kateri school in the riding of Edmonton-Mill Creek. Accompanying them today are their teachers, Joel Piché, Ray Brooks, and Ms Darlene Payne. There are 61 visitors altogether, three classes. I would ask all of them to now please rise, and let us greet them with some warm applause. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Education. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my honour and privilege today to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly 54 grade 6 students from Brander Gardens elementary school located in my constituency of Edmonton-Whitemud. Accompanying the students are their teachers, Natalie Gago-Esteves, Matthew Thiessen, and teacher assistant Cindy Lee. I had an opportunity to meet with the students earlier, and they asked very tough questions, perhaps even tougher than those asked in question period. They are seated in the public gallery. I’d ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills. Mr. Marz: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure for me to rise today and introduce to you and through you on behalf of myself and the honourable and generous Minister of Transportation a group of very hard-working and forward-thinking municipal representa- tives from central Alberta. They are here representing the South Red Deer Regional Wastewater Commission as well as the Mountain View regional water system and are seated in the members’ gallery.

They are Warren Smith, councillor for Olds; Julia King, mayor of the town of Penhold; Judy Dahl, mayor of the town of Olds; Al Kemmere, reeve of Mountain View county; Cody Berggren, mayor of the town of Bowden; Patt Churchill, councillor for the town of Innisfail; and Dennis Cooper, councillor for the town of Penhold. I would ask that they all rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Elniski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a pleasure to rise today to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly three ladies from the Terra Centre for Pregnant and Parenting Teens. Over the past two years I’ve been fairly involved with this organiza- tion and have learned first-hand of the great work that they are doing for young moms in need. I’ll be speaking more about Terra in a member’s statement later this afternoon.

For now I would ask these ladies as I say their names to rise to receive the traditional greeting of the Assembly: Ms Erica Pitre, grade 11; Ms Mellisa Johnson, grade 12; and Ms Laura Slomp Booy, the youth leadership facilita- tor. They are standing, so let’s give them a little greeting. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Mr. Bhardwaj: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s an honour for me to rise today and introduce to you and through you Mr. Gurpreet Gill from my constituency of Edmonton-Ellerslie, who is here to observe the question period today.

He had the opportunity to meet several of my colleagues earlier this afternoon, and I hope he enjoyed it. At this time I would ask him to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a privilege to rise today and introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly members of the media from my constituency who have come to take in the sights and sounds of our Assembly and to meet with the Premier.

From the Athabasca Advocate I’m pleased to introduce Ross Hunter, Lauren Den Hartog, Chris Cain; from the River radio station Chris Byrne; and from the Smoky Lake Signal Nathan Taylor. If there is anything you need to know about our constituency of Athabasca-Redwater, these are certainly the folks who know it. I’d now like to ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. It’s also my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly two very special people, Gary Sampley and Laura Jurasek.

Gary is executive director of the Edmonton Epilepsy Association, and Laura has just been named president of that body. Laura has been a special blessing to my family in her role as a dedicated nurse practitioner at the Stollery children’s hospital in the pediatric neurology ward. They’re here today to help raise awareness for epilepsy, which I’ll talk about in my member’s statement.

Having a child with epilepsy can be hard at times, and I want to sincerely thank Laura, Gary, and all those involved with the Stollery children’s hospital and the Edmonton Epilepsy Association and ask that they please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Livingstone-Macleod. Mr. Berger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to rise today and introduce to you and to all members of the Assembly three people from the Mosquito Creek Foundation in Nanton.

They are part of the volunteer board overseeing the operation of our local seniors’ lodge and two self-contained housing entities. In the past few years this group has gone above and beyond their respective duties. When the local medical clinic was offered for sale, they set about fundraising and bought the clinic as well as the house next door for future expansion. They then stepped up and borrowed to partner with the province to build a 30-bed designated assisted living facility onto the lodge, repatriating individuals who were living away from their friends and family. Mr.

Speaker, they are seated in the members’ gallery, and I would ask them to rise and remain standing as I call their names: Lynne Foden, chief administrative officer; Leigh McNeill, board chair; and Rick Rogers, vice chair. I’ll now ask the House to recognize with a

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010598 thunderous applause the contributions that these people make to our seniors. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-South. Mr. Dallas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure today for me to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly two outstanding citizens of Red Deer, Mayor Morris Flewwelling and, accompanying him, the director of development services, Paul Goranson. They are in the Legislature today as part of their visit to Edmonton to meet with various government officials.

Mayor Flewwelling has served the citizens of Red Deer on city council and as mayor for over 25 years. In addition to this, in 1997 he received the Order of Canada, Canada’s highest c ivilian decoration, for his distinguished volunteer service and leadership of national signifi- cance in heritage preservation. The hon. Member for Red Deer- North and myself have been fortunate to work with these gentlemen over the years, and I’m honoured to introduce them in the Assembly today.

They’re in the public gallery, and I will now ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the House. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Terra Centre for Pregnant and Parenting Teens Mr. Elniski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to rise to talk a little bit more about the organization that I just introduced, the Terra Centre for Pregnant and Parenting Teens. Since 1971 Terra has provided programs and services to help pregnant and parenting teens gain confidence and develop the skills required to raise healthy and happy babies.

Terra supports approximately 600 clients and their children in the Edmonton area each year with a staff of more than 60 people in three different locations. They offer 12 programs, which include individ- ual counselling, home visitation, parenting support, group activities, services for dads, clothing exchange, childhood development activities, prenatal classes, housing support, and a child care centre at the Braemar school. Last fall I helped Terra raise some 120,000 diapers for their Baby Heroes campaign.

Along with the support of many others in the community our contribution to their campaign gave some 120,000 diapers to mothers in need. Terra is just an incredible organization that helps young parents return to school, make career plans, have healthier relationships, and helps with the community supports that they need. I would like to thank the organization, especially the young ladies who are here today, for the tremendous work that they are doing in supporting their cause. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater. 1:40 International Purple Day Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. Approximately seven years ago I awoke in the middle of the night to my wife’s screams for help. I found her leaning over our infant son, who, to my shock, was in full convulsions, eyes rolling back in his head. It was terrifying. As a parent at that point you’d give anything to access the best treat- ment and the most dedicated health care professionals in the world, and I’m glad to say that, thankfully, that’s what we have here in Alberta. Epilepsy is characterized by a number of recurrent and unpro- voked seizures that can occur at any age, as was the case in my family. Mr.

Speaker, this Friday, March 26, is International Purple Day, which caps off March as Epilepsy Awareness Month in Canada. Purple Day was founded in 2008 by then nine-year-old Cassidy Megan of Halifax, Nova Scotia. The name for Purple Day was taken from epilepsy’s internationally recognized colour, lavender. Purple Day was established to increase awareness about epilepsy and has succeeded in a short time. It launched internation- ally in 2009, and now there are 15 countries world-wide participat- ing in 2010 Purple Day activities. Epilepsy affects 50 million people world-wide and 40,000 here in Alberta.

One of the major initiatives that Purple Day seeks to achieve is to demystify epilepsy and seizures in general. They occur when the normal electrical balance in the brain is lost, with cells either firing when they shouldn’t or not firing when they should. I know I have acknowledged their presence here today already, but I want to thank all of the truly amazing staff at the Stollery children’s hospital and the people at the Edmonton Epilepsy Association for all their dedication and help and support. For more information please visit the Purple Day website at www.purpleday.org.

I urge my colleagues to wear purple this Friday in support of this great cause. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. REAP Calgary Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, several days ago I had the pleasure of attending the REAP sustainability breakfast. REAP stands for Respect for the Earth and All People. It’s a collection of 20 Calgary businesses that are working toward a more sustainable Alberta. The breakfast was held at Green City Motors, a very cool business that specializes in electric bikes and scooters.

REAP encourages citizens to shop locally for the environmental benefits, to keep Calgary’s local business scene thriving, and to provide good wages for Calgary workers. REAP produces an online magazine and holds educational workshops to inform Albertans about the benefits of a sustainable society. Their work to date has been very impressive. I encourage people to visit www.reapcalgary.com to see what these folks are doing. It’s exciting stuff. I had a great time learning about REAP and its efforts to promote sustainable living.

I’d like to thank Stephanie Jackman in particular for all her hard work and, in fact, I think you could say, visionary work in organizing REAP and keeping it going. The 21st century has presented humanity with perhaps its greatest challenge yet: learning how to live sustainably in the area of global climate change, maintaining prosperity while being kinder to our world and the biosphere it supports. I’d like to thank the folks at REAP for doing their part. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Little Bow. Barons Centennial Mr. McFarland: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Originally called Blayney, the village of Barons was incorporated and the first council elected on June 6, 1910. This community became the centre for many wheat farms, and at its peak the grain elevators had a capacity of more than 1.2 million bushels. More than a dozen world and reserve grand wheat and durum championship holders were from the village of Barons. Over the years Barons has been home to many other notables:

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 599 John Turner, who built the Paul Bunyan cultivator in 1935; Lloyd Johnson, who manufactured the Johnson blade; and Victor Erdman, who manufactured the Victory blade. All these pieces were designed to help prevent soil erosion during the Dirty Thirties. Then there’s Dr. Mark Grant, who helped develop one of the first winter wheat varieties at the Lethbridge research station; and Jason Turner, who along with his figure skating partner Jamie Salé competed in the 1994 Olympics in Lillehammer, Norway.

Not unlike many rural communities the seven one-room schools in the district were combined into a larger school, Barons consoli- dated school, which was established by this Legislature in 1915. It was one of the last to operate in Alberta. The school was also featured in the film Superman, filmed on location in 1977. The 1987 movie Betrayed was also partially filmed in both Barons and Carmangay. Barons No. 1 discovery oil well blew in November 21, 1950, and for years produced oil and employment.

In recent years in co- operation with the Alberta government and the Lethbridge Northern irrigation district the new 10,000 acre Keho-Barons irrigation project, a fully enclosed pipe low-pressure irrigation system, became a reality. From July 9 to July 11 this summer Barons will celebrate their centennial year, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank all the hard-working individuals and the community there for their pride and dedication in making this a reality. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo. Oil Sands Image Mr. Boutilier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Today I rise to speak about the environment and, basically, the bread and butter of my constituency, the oil sands capital of the world. We have a very rich history over the past 40 years, dating back to AOSTRA and, of course, the Alberta Research Council in terms of the scient ific advancements we have made. But with a two-a nd-a-half-year-old son it is clear we have much more work to be done. I often have said in the past that we need to save labels for planets, not for people, because any time that we actually start labelling people, we’re disenfranchising them.

We’re actually pigeonholing them and, really, like a boxer saying: you go into this corner, you go into this corner, come out, and let’s fight. I know that the Minister of Energy’s comments when he talks about how we’re going to counterattack some comments on what environmentalists have done, are well intended, but I think that in today’s 21st century we need to be more strategic.

What I mean by that is that rather than wearing a hat with a lightning rod on your head and going over to Brussels, it may be more strategic, similar to the national oil sands task force that we created back in 1997, to build partnerships, working together and lowering the rhetoric because with every counterattack there is usually another attack. I do believe that that would hurt my constituency in the oil sands, that I’m very proud of. It is the bread and butter of this province and of my community. Let us be strategic as we go forward and not be like a Jethro Bodine.

I know the Minister of Energy clearly is well intended, but his statesmanlike approach has been more a little bit of a rumble-tumble type of approach. We need to be strategic as we go forward. This is the message that I’ve heard from industry. We want to move forward in a strategic way in terms of celebrating this rich resource that we have been blessed with. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Helping Hands of Hope Mrs. Sarich: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a great pleasure for me to rise today and recognize an incredible new charitable organization here in the city of Edmonton, namely the Helping Hands of Hope foundation. The foundation currently supports individuals across the globe living in poverty in some very unique ways. Firstly, for seniors in Vietnam who have lost their eyesight, this organization provides the needed funding for them to receive cataract surgery, giving them back their independence and allowing them a renewed chance to assist their families with things like child care and food preparation.

These surgeries can actually raise the standard of living of an entire family in Vietnam. The organization’s second project targets those living below the poverty line in Nepal. The Helping Hands of Hope foundation provides clean water to these people by donating BioSand filters, which can remove up to 99 per cent of the harmful contaminants. Further, the organization works with the people to teach them the proper use of f ilters, along with sanitation and hygiene practices.

Altogether, this donation, which amounts to a total cost of $40, contributes to these individuals’ health and well-being and prevents the spread of disease. Mr. Speaker, last Friday the organization hosted their inaugural fundraiser, the first annual Global Fest, which featured exceptional food and multicultural performances. I had an opportunity to be in attendance at this event as the foundation’s first guest speaker.

It was a privilege and honour to meet all the compassionate women who are the driving force of this organization, namely Lise Durand, president, founder, and director; Randalle Wong, cofounder and director; Debbie Bildfell, secretary; Tam Duong, executive member; Dr. Patricia Sigurdson, treasurer; and Karen Smith, events co- ordinator. They have been working tirelessly as a group of women to see that they achieve their goals. Thank you to this organization for their determination and humanitarian efforts. I wish them all the best continued success in their future endeavours. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. 1:50head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Oppos ition main question. The hon. deputy Leader of the Opposition. Pharmaceutical Benefit for Seniors Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Adding to the increasingly long list of government health mismanagement is the July 1 implementation of the new seniors’ drug plan. The government hasn’t updated the website since fall, and seniors are left questioning what these changes mean for them. Most seniors are on fixed incomes, and if they can’t afford or struggle with the increase, then their families will have to step in and pick up the tab.

To the Premier. Seniors want to know: why do they have to pay for their health premiums, for drugs or not, when the rest of Albertans don’t? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I believe 80 per cent of the seniors’ drug coverage is carried by the taxpayer. There are some changes with respect to income levels, et cetera, but we’re continuing to work through that particular area. We want to make sure that everyone is treated fairly in the province of Alberta. The minister may have some further information on it, but we’re working through some detail. The Speaker: The hon. member.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010600 Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Back to the Premier: how will seniors who already have pharmaceutical plans like the Alberta Retired Teachers’ Association or Veterans Affairs be notified to opt out of this program, or is everyone required to opt in? What’s happening? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, as I said, we’re working through further details. Our main priority here is to make sure that those that cannot afford to pay have a program there that will s upport them.

We’re working out the details in terms of some of the other income levels and some of the other issues that come forward in this particular area. Ms Blakeman: Mr. Premier, it’s three months away. Given that the average income of seniors living in rural areas is much lower than seniors living in cities, why did the government choose the rural income level as the marker at which seniors will have to pay the new monthly premium? This disadvantages urban seniors, who have a higher cost of living. Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, I’m not quite sure where the hon. member is coming from in terms of rural income levels and urban. I think there’s quite a mix. I know that there are a lot of people living in larger urban areas that are struggling as seniors, and that’s why we’re looking at a much broader range, to make sure that everyone in this province is treated equitably. Teachers’ Unfunded Pension Liability Ms Pastoor: Mr. Speaker, in 2007 this government signed an agreement with the Alberta teachers.

At the time the Premier wrote to ATA, “I pledge to seek the Legislative Assembly’s support for the necessary funding to enable the Memorandum of Agreement’s full execution.” Now the government is sending mixed signals about its willingness to live up to the agreement on teachers’ wages, and school boards are more than concerned that they soon will be footing the bill. To the Premier: will the Premier, please, clearly articulate how his government is going to provide ongoing funding for this agreement? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don’t think there’s anything unclear about it at all.

We clearly indicated to school boards, in fact just yesterday, that the full 5.99 per cent increase on the average weekly earnings from last year, after arbitration, will be funded in their budgets and annualized. I’ve also indicated to them that the anticipated increases for September 1 this year and next year, we understand, now have to be calculated based on the average weekly earnings index. Now I have to work with the ATA and the Alberta school boards to figure out how we’re going to do that, not on a one- year basis but over the period of time.

Ms Pastoor: Well, to the Premier, but I’m sure it’ll go to the Minister of Education. You’ve answered part of this, but failing that, failing taking the responsibility for the arbitrator’s ruling could force districts to reduce staff or cut services. Is that right? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, what I’ve indicated to school boards is that we are anticipating, in fact we know, that there’s going to be an increase in our student population starting last year and moving forward over the next number of years, including perhaps up to 10 years. We’ll see an increase in student population.

It would be imprudent to cut back our teacher numbers in that period of time, so I’ve asked them to plan their teaching staff, teaching ratios, on the same basis as they had last year. I understand that may require them to draw on operating surpluses this year or even in some cases run a deficit. But over the next two or three years we’ll sort out exactly . . . The Speaker: The hon. member. [interjection] The hon. member has the floor. Ms Pastoor: A good segue into my question.

How can the Minister of Education expect school boards to survive off their reserves indefinitely, especially when some boards lack reserves and the Minister of Education has been clawing back money even from those that have it? The Speaker: There are no

preambles in questions. Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, school boards across the province are in an excellent fiscal position because of how well they’ve been funded in the past. We know that they had last year $440 million of operating reserves. Now that’s down to about $360 million, still sufficient to be able to finance their operations. Some school boards don’t. We’ve said that we will work with them to make sure not that they can run a deficit just indiscriminately, but if they need to run a deficit in order the finance the cost of teachers going forward, we’ll work with them on that.

The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. High-intensity Residential Fires Mr. Taylor: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. We have had at least four massive condo fires in Alberta in relatively new buildings in the last seven years and an untold number of examples where a house catches fire and takes out, oh, six or seven houses with it. In May 2008 the government announced immediate action to require sprinklers for balconies, attics, and crawl spaces in multifamily buildings, but it took almost one year to actually make the required changes to the building codes.

To the Minister of Municipal Affairs: why did it take a year for this government to take “immediate action” to improve fire safety? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Goudreau: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The changes to the Alberta building codes were adopted on March 12, 2009, and came into law just a little later, as they always do. Now, this allowed us time to adjust building and inspection practices and development plans and infrastructure. There are technical complexities that are required of the regulations, and the drafting, approval, and passages of the amendment regulations were completed, and it took time.

It was completed, then, by March 2009. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, given that the government made the point on May 23, 2008, of saying that we would not wait until the model national codes were amended because the high rate of building activity in this province made it such a priority to act right away to save lives and property, why did everything then go dark for 10 months? Why did it take so long? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated yesterday, we were very proactive in taking actions to protect Albertans. We’ve got the strictest fire codes in the country.

We’ve updated our building codes more than two years ahead of any other jurisdiction. That’s two

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 601 years over and before any other province. We took time to do a good job with consulting stakeholders and the public and to do the technical work that was needed. We wanted to assure that we would get things right. Mr. Taylor: Two years ahead of the national code and one year too late for the 300 people who were burned out in Millrise last week. Was this delay of immediate action because of pressure from the home building industry, and does the government think that pressure was warranted? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, there are normal transition periods that are happening out there, and we have to transition and work with the industry to allow that to happen. I want to emphasize the fact that we had some very, very high standards before the codes came into place, and now we have even better standards. Again, I re-emphasize: we’re the most stringent standards in the country. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore. Funding for Special-needs Foster Children Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Every day goes by, and Albertans observe that this government doesn’t know whether they’re spending or cutting.

We hear from f ront-line workers and service providers about problems in the departments. We read about waste and mismanagement. We know that leadership starts at the top. My question is to the Premier. Why didn’t this Premier get the minister of children’s services to cut her ministerial and deputy budgets to show leadership instead of asking the department to take cuts? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, all ministers took the action. There’s over $40 million worth of reductions in ministerial reductions across management positions in government, so that’s $40 million more to put into front-line services. Mr.

Hinman: Mr. Speaker, they continue to scare the people of Alberta. Foster parents, agents, and patients have all witnessed this government’s cutting. My question to the Premier: will the Premier assure this Assembly that the highly respected CEO of region 6 is not demoted or fired because this minister claims her directive wasn’t followed? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, those may be personnel matters. I don’t know the background information of what had transpired or didn’t transpire. Those are personnel matters and not open for discussion in terms of a policy discussion, and that’s what question period is all about.

Mr. Hinman: But there’s something that isn’t sounding right here. Some Hon. Members: Question. Question. Mr. Hinman: “Question. Question.” Why don’t you listen for a second or two? If we’re to believe the minister’s version of the events, she must produce original documentation that confirms the direction that she gave to the staff. When will she table the documents to this Assembly? 2:00 Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, taking this on a bit more serious note.

When we start dealing with the lives of children under our care or those of foster parents, that go out of their way to support children that in some cases have been abandoned by their family, when some of these issues come forward, it’s unfortunate that some choose to play politics with a very serious situation. Had anyone who had notice of this, either a foster parent or the member of the opposition, come directly to the minister and raised this issue, we would have been able to deal with it immediately rather than having some foster parents live through agony strictly for a political purpose.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Oil and Gas Royalties Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Conference Board of Canada, a well-respected economic research organization, says that natural gas prices are on the rise, actually projecting industry revenue to increase almost threefold in this year alone, and they made those projections before the latest royalty backdown by this government.

Will the Premier admit that the cuts to roya lties are completely unnecessary and that growth is dependent on market price, not the very limited royalty increase that his government previously brought in? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, once again, the same projections that have come back and forth over the years. I remember that just last year or two years ago projections were that oil was going to be at $200 a barrel; the very same year it went from $72 to $147 and back down to $35. So projections are projections.

We live according to the best information available, and we’re going to use those various pieces of information that come forward to government and make the best projections in terms of our budgets not only for this year but the rollout over the next two to three years. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker.

Given that the Premier cut royalties by $785 million a year – and that’s just the latest cut – and given that the Premier is trying to sell his multibil- lion dollar gift to the oil and gas industry as a job-creation measure and given that it is clear that prices will drive the market, not royalty adjustments, will the Premier admit that his royalty giveaway will not create more activity or more jobs but simply pad the bottom line of oil and gas corporations? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, I know that a change in policy will grow a much larger pie, and the slice of the pie that we have will be even larger of a much larger pie, and that is the future income that will support all of the programs and services that all of us enjoy in this province. Some of that revenue will be generated to cover those costs. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. His pie is half-baked.

Given that the Conference Board of Canada expects gas compa- nies to see profits of more than $8 billion a year by 2014 and given that the projection was calculated before royalty rates were lowered yet again, why does the Premier continue to insist that his oil and gas friends needed another royalty rollback when clearly they did not? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, once again, misinformation on behalf

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010602 of the member. When we look at overall generated profits, he’s not saying that all of those profits were generated in the province of Alberta. In fact, we lost competitiveness. Many of those profits were generated in different parts of the world, different countries. So that’s why we had to look at the changing market conditions, the price of natural resources, some of the innovation and new technol- ogy that’s necessary to get at gas that is in an aging basin here, in the western sedimentary basin in the province of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo. Provincial Deficit Mr. Boutilier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Today the Minister of Education suggested that perhaps school boards may have to run deficits. AHS is running a deficit; universities are running deficits. Does the minister of finance – my question is to him today – plan to have a road map on how he figures out the elimination of these deficits so that future generations will not be burdened with this incredible deficit burden? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, we certainly do.

The question of the teacher compensation was sent to arbitration, and we’re respecting the outcome of that. I believe the Minister of Education reported that in the two out-years there are some challenges. We’ll be looking to the Teachers’ Association, as we will to all of the public sector, to work co-operatively with us and do what’s best for all Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What is the minister of finance, in terms of his estimates of the accumulated deficits for the fiscal year 2010-11 for these entities, anticipating relative to their deficits? Dr.

Morton: Mr. Speaker, I didn’t particularly understand the hon. member’s question. We projected a $4.7 billion deficit for this year. That’s revenues minus expenditures over revenues. If he has a specific question about a portion of the budget, he’d have to give me that either in writing or as a second question. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Is the minister of finance taking a similar approach, hope and prayer of gas prices rising and oil sands prices rising, to the Getty era, and is this not a very dangerous precedent for the minister of finance to be following that road map? Dr. Morton: Well, in fact, Mr. Speaker, we’re doing just the opposite. In the 48 hours after the budget was released, all of the chartered banks and several other financial institutions released reviews of the Alberta budget.

Every one of those reviews said that our estimates and our projections on oil and gas were accurate and consistent with theirs and, if anything, a little on the conservative – i.e. cautious – side. So we’re on very solid ground there, sir. Court Service Caseloads Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, as I’m sure the Justice minister is aware, it is extremely rare to hear a sitting judge criticize the administration of justice, as was the situation in Medicine Hat just last week. Judge Fisher noted that a lack of funds was to blame for the haph azard court service in Medicine Hat.

My question for the Justice minister is this: is the judge correct in noting that the justice system is faltering in Medicine Hat? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That was an interesting comment made last week by the judge that the hon. member has referred to. We, in fact, did consult as to what was going on that day in court, had a conversation with some of the people who worked there. Our understanding at the time is that the sitting judge had recently spent some time overseas looking at the possib ility of implementing a particular docket court model.

His comments, we understand and have been advised by the people who work for the Department of Justice, were with respect to the process that he would like to see introduced, that would actually improve the administration of justice, and we’re happy to always consider those. Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, that’s an interesting spin, but Bill Cocks, a former Crown prosecutor, was also quoted in the Medicine Hat News as follows about this government: you can talk about being tough on crime and being a law and order government, but if you don’t put . . . The Speaker: Hon. member, remember? You signed the document: no

preambles. Remember? You signed that. You’re a man of integrity, I believe, so let’s get to the question. Mr. Hehr: I hear you. Well, then, to the minister: why aren’t you addressing the gridlock facing the courts in Medicine Hat, Alberta, like all of these people are asking you to? Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, in fact, we are. The mean times in Medicine Hat are five days better than in the rest of the province, and we’ll continue to improve the administration of justice right across the province. Mr. Hehr: Well, Crown prosecutors, defence attorneys, and the judiciary don’t seem to agree with the hon. minister.

So, really, who’s right? Are you right, or are these people just talking for the sake of talking? Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, my assessment of the day, based on conversations that have taken place in our department, is that there were three people who made very different comments with respect to an incident. I understand that the hon. member is characterizing them all as being the same; in our opinion, they’re not. The Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-McCall. Integrated Land Management Mr. Allred: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I understand that over the last few years there’s been considerable collaboration between the forestry and the energy sectors to share access roads, thus reducing the environmental footprint of resource development in the green areas of the province. My question is to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development. How much land has been saved from destruction as a result of this co-operation between these two industries?

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 603 Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, to give a definite answer relative to the acreage would be a bit difficult. Integrated land management is an approach that we’ve been working with for a number of years, and it is used by industry regularly now in the province of Alberta. The idea is very simple. What we want to do, of course, is to work together to plan the operations on the landscape and minimize linear disturbance. We’ve got about a 45 per cent reduction in the road and linear disturbances proposed in areas like the Kakwa. 2:10 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Allred: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: how are you and your department able to get these diverse groups working together to achieve this example of integrated land management? Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is a team approach. Just to give you an idea of some of the associations and so on, the Alberta Chamber of Resources, the Association of Petroleum Producers, and the Alberta Forest Products Association are some of the people that are involved in integrated land management planning, and of course it goes beyond that to a number of the major players that are active on the landscape.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Allred: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: since land-use planning is a major initiative in your department, how does this collaboration fit in with the land-use framework? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. That is going to be a very key piece as we move forward. Of course, I think that the member knows that the land-use framework discussions and the work that we’re doing now with respect to this initiative is a huge piece of business for all Albertans.

Integrated land manage- ment will be one of the supporting tools that we use in the land-use framework in order to properly manage landscapes in Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. Distracted Driving Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hundreds of other jurisdic- tions have distracted driving legislation, including seven provinces, 18 states, even China, India, and Russia.

The Minister of Transpor- tation explains his lack of action: “There’s no [use] putting in a law that doesn’t cover the actual problem.” To the Minister of Transpor- tation. Places like Washington, DC, saw a 43 per cent reduction in phone use because of their legislation. Why does the minister think that distracted driving legislation doesn’t work? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I absolutely never, ever said that distracted driving legislation doesn’t work. I said that we have to put together the proper legislation in order to address the big picture and all types of distracted driving.

If you look at 90 per cent of the other places, all they’ve done is taken a one-off and said, “Oh, we’re not going to allow cellphones,” or “Oh, we’re not going to allow texting machines.” Yes, those are a distraction, and they’re a problem, but there are a whole lot of other distractions out there, and we have to address that whole big picture. Mr. Kang: How long will it take for the minister to get to the actual problem, Mr. Speaker?

Given that the minister’s other excuse is that there’s more distraction than just cellphones, has the minister looked at New Hampshire’s law, which includes eating and applying makeup? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, again, he’s talking of a one-off. Now we go and address eating as a problem. I agree with him that all these things are a problem. It’s to be able to put them all together. If you cannot make it effective and if you cannot make it enforce- able, then we shouldn’t pass it. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That’s the question I’m asking you: when are you going to make it effective, Mr. Minister? When are you going to make it the law? Given that the distracted driving legislation is not like reinventing the wheel, how much longer will Albertans have to wait before the minister begins to take this seriously? How long? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, we’re not talking a bout reinventing wheels. In fact, there is no wheel in this particular instance because nobody has brought out the effective one that does it right, that makes sure we address it all.

We have to get that through that hon. member’s head: quit asking the same question, and help us get it right. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. Affordable Housing in Fort McMurray Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question may not be as exciting, but I’ll try. Affordable housing and homelessness is an important issue for the good people of Edmonton-Meadowlark. In 1993 I was studying there for a bout a month, and you could get a house for $500. A lot of empty houses. Then came the boom and the oil sands activity. There was a big need for housing.

When oil was at its peak, there were a lot of homeless in Fort McMurray. Now the oil sands have cooled, and housing has cooled. My question to the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs: why does your department insist at this point in time on building a big housing unit at Parsons Creek in Fort McMurray? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Denis: Thank you very much. I have to say that there’s no possible way that I could match the last performance in the answer. However, I do have some information for this member in and of itself. We’re preparing for the next phase of growth.

If we go back, in fact, to 2007, if we look further back, we’ve had the highest economic output that we’ve had in a long time. If we wait until we get to that point again, all that is going to happen is that we’re going to be two years behind. This is part of the plan. Mr. Speaker, we’re ready. By 2012 we’re going to have exhausted the amount of land at current rates in Fort McMurray. Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, my next question is to the same minister.

There’s a substantial amount of money that could probably be better spent in some of the major cities, specifically in Edmonton- Meadowlark, to address the issues of my constituents of chronic homelessness. Instead of building fancy new condo communit- ies . . .

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010604 The Speaker: Remember the

preamble thing we just talked about? The hon. minister. Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Phase 1 of Parsons Creek actually includes about 20 per cent in Fort McMurray of affordable housing, and that’s roughly where we’re going. This is part of our plan. Fort McM urray is an im portant part of our economy, and we’re looking to ensure that, in fact, all Albertans benefit from this. In fact, through transfer payments all Canadians benefit from our plans here. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Sherman: My apologies, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. My last question is to the same minister.

This project was desperately needed three years ago. Does this minister have a long- term housing plan for this province and for the good people of Edmonton-Meadowlark, and does he anticipate problems instead of reacting to them? Mr. Denis: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we do anticipate problems. Any issues, any problems that we look at are decided on an ind ividual basis. We’re working with the RM of Wood Buffalo to address any environmental concerns and also any housing concerns. This member, if he likes, can go and drive his blue van right up there and take a look at it. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Riverview, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Mackay. Cancer Services Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Cancer diagnosis and treatment require a tightly co-ordinated team that includes pathology, radiol- ogy, surgery, pharmacy, nursing, and other services which the Alberta Cancer Board used to provide. The previous minister of health disbanded the Alberta Cancer Board, and that cancer care delivery system is being dismantled. Cancer pathology is being folded into general pathology, cancer pharmacy is being folded into general pharmacy, and so on.

To the Minister of Health and Wellness: will the minister do the right thing for Albertans with cancer and restore the Alberta Cancer Board? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, the Cancer Board, the Mental Health Board, and AADAC were all amalgamated within the bigger picture of Alberta Health Services and the one superboard, as it’s sometimes referred to. But I take the member’s question very seriously, and I will undertake to have a look at the comments he just made. Dr. Taft: Well, that was a pretty weak answer, Mr. Speaker.

Given that one of the awful lessons from botched cancer pathol- ogy scandals in Newfoundland and elsewhere is that cancer pathology is very specialized, why isn’t the minister taking action to make sure that Alberta’s cancer pathology team isn’t dismantled? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe there’s any disman- tling in the system. In fact, we’re looking to augment it and hire more oncologists. There’s quite an active recruitment process going on right now.

I think that people in this province have grown accustomed to the fact that the oncologists we have in the two larger centres that treat cancer patients, not to mention the three that are coming on stream through the radiation therapy corridor, provide outstanding service. I think they need our support at this time. Dr. Taft: Well, those oncologists are calling me, and they’re expressing the concern, so this minister had better look into it.

How does the minister expect a fractured system, in which pharmacy, pathology, surgery, nursing, radiology, and all other services are reporting along different lines, to shorten wait times? Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr. Speaker, part of that is exactly the point of having one centralized board, so all of that information that was just alluded to can be looked at, can be collected in a consistent fashion with consistent gathering of information so that we can come up with that province-wide plan that will help improve things, not make them worse. We’re trying to work hard to get things better.

That’s why we’ve added the money to the budget, and that’s why we’re coming out with a more predictable and stable five-year funding plan. We’re going to fix that. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mackay, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. 2:20 Cultural Competency Initiatives Ms Woo-Paw: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Statistics Canada is projecting rapid changes to our population over the next 20 years. Major growth areas would include the aboriginal population, and it’s projected that a bout one-third of Canada’s population would be a visible minority.

Learning about effective integration and develop- ment of inclusive communities speaks to the need for two-way integration. My question is to the Minister of Education. You have initiated the Inspiring Education visioning process, and you have spoken about transformative change to our educational system. I would like to know what transformative concepts and ideas you or your ministry have discussed relative to . . . The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In addition to Inspiring Education, of course, we’re engaged in a number of areas: the School Act review, which is ongoing; setting the direction for children with special needs; the FNMI Education Partnership Council – I introduced the chiefs and the presidents yesterday in the House – the tripartite MOU that we’ve signed with the treaty chiefs and the federal government; workforce planning; and Speak Out Alberta. There are a great number of initiatives. The Inspiring Education initiative has told us that Albertans want an education system that addresses the different learning needs of different communities.

The Speaker: Sorry. We have to move on. The hon. member. Ms Woo-Paw: To the same minister. Numerous studies from jurisdictions across the country talk about the need to integrate cultural competency into the operation and practice of institutions. I’d like to know what your commitment is to this requirement. Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, we want to move beyond acknowledg- ing cultural diversity in creating equality to a more inclusive model that promotes equity and involves all cultural elements in our community in a meaningful way. We have a commitment in the School Act on diversity in shared values.

We have guidelines for recognizing diversity and promoting respect to ensure that all learning resources, including visuals, promote respect and under- standing for all members of society.

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 605 Ms Woo-Paw: What authority and opportunities does the ministry have to ensure that school systems meaningfully and systematically incorporate and implement cultural competency throughout the organization? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, helping students become culturally thoughtful and respectful starts in kindergarten and before and continues right through the system.

We have to ensure that our curriculum is infused with the principles of our heritage and the principles of our cultures, particularly with respect to First Nations and Métis students in the province. All Alberta students need to know and understand that cultural heritage, not just the FNMI students. Through broadening their understand- ing, teachers and administrators are able to see how important cultural competency is to areas of curriculum and development for all students. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Foster Care System Ms Notley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last Wednesday during Children and Youth Services estimates the minister repeatedly denied there were plans to cut funding to foster parents of special- needs children. She was surrounded at the time by nine senior ministry staff, none of whom uttered a peep about the planned cuts that the NDP subsequently discovered and reported on yesterday. My question is for the minister. How can Albertans trust your claims of protecting vulnerable children when you clearly can’t keep up with what’s going on in your own ministry? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member is correct: at Committee of Supply I made it very clear that my understanding was that there wouldn’t be any reduction in foster support services or resources in that. That was because of the direction that I had given two to three weeks previously not to reduce the supports or services or funding to foster care. I can assure you that I realize, too, and knowing that the buck stops at my desk, there are at times things that are not understood in the way that they’re put forward, and this is just one of those cases. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Notley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, notwithstanding that the Premier seems to believe it’s inappropriate to discuss some of these contradictions in public, given that the minister has repeatedly assured the House that cuts to her ministry would not affect families when, in fact, that was exactly what was planned at the time, how can the minister fail to see the absurdity of her assurances and refuse to admit that cuts to her ministry will negatively impact the level of care provided to Alberta’s children? Mrs. Fritz: Well, as you know, Committee of Supply is a three-hour meeting.

We did discuss this ministry at that meeting for three hours and, in particular, the area of child intervention. As I let this member know and other members at the committee, I trust what my staff has brought forward as to the change and the shift in practice of the way that child intervention is occurring in the field through the good work of 1,600 front-line workers. I trust that. I’ve assured you, Mr. Speaker, and the Assembly previously that I’m monitoring this closely. If I see that it’s different, I will go back through the right processes if more funding is required. Ms Notley: Well, Mr.

Speaker, given that this ministry has been plagued by repeated cases of negligent treatment toward foster families and their children and given that the minister’s tarnished credibility grows darker each time she’s asked to take responsibility for a foolish policy she doesn’t know anything about, when will the minister launch an independent, public inquiry into the foster care system and do away with the political leash she maintains on the children’s advocate? Mrs. Fritz: You know, Mr. Speaker, it’s always interesting how somebody can make a quantum leap to where we’re into a public inquiry.

Simply because there was a direction from me as the minister not to cut resources or supports or funding to foster care, especially for children with special needs, and an individual in the field did not follow through with that direction, now we’re into: we should have a public inquiry of the whole system. The answer to that is categorically no. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Strathcona. Online Driver Licensing Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Albertans move around a lot. In 2006 in Edmonton alone we had over 97,000 intraprovincial migrants.

Each time they change addresses, the Traffic Safety Act requires people to change their driver’s licence in person and to fork out $22.50. In comparison, Saskatchewan folks can update their billing and address information online 24/7, or in Ontario their self- serve kiosks allow people to change their drivers’ licences for no charge. To the Minister of Service Alberta: does the minister have any plans to make driver’s licence changes more accessible and cost- efficient? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

During these past two years this ministry has had excellent discussions with many of the registry agents across Alberta. One of the challenges is to provide better service to Albertans – and that includes online services as well as more locations across Alberta, so it is a very serious concern – and to balance that with the protection of Albertans’ information. We are certainly looking at a number of different areas. Ms Blakeman: Well, yes, it is a challenge, and yes, it’s in the private registry system.

So what exactly is the minister going to do, and when can we expect the government to deliver service that at least equals Saskatchewan’s? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, on the whole issue of online fees, with the registry agents that do provide those services in Alberta, we are on the lower end of the scale.

That’s something that I’ve been working on very hard because, again, it’s about providing Albertans with better service and making sure they can do things that are convenient from their home, making it more convenient for Albertans but also making sure that the information is protected, whether it’s a driver’s licence or whether it’s any other items that Albertans need to run their businesses or their homes.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010606 The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Okay. Well, back to the same minister. Since issuing changed licences to people who have undergone gender reassignment continues to be done on a case-by-case basis and takes so long, I wonder if there isn’t more at play here. When will that process be moved into the 21st century? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is with respect to the Vital Statistics Act, which has not been updated for about 50 years. That is something that we are currently working on, looking at that act and updating it.

That’s been an important dialogue, too. That is something that we’ll be bringing forward fairly soon. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Property Taxes Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier and this government have both stated that there will be no new taxes or no tax increases, a promise affirmed by the Minister of Finance and Enterprise in his budget speech, yet many Albertans are reporting an increase in their property taxes this year.

To the Minister of Finance and Enterprise: why are these people paying higher taxes when you yourself promised that taxes would not be going up? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, we did promise that taxes were not going up, and we have kept that promise. When it comes to the education portion of the property tax, we have actually cut it by 13 per cent, and this would be the 17th year in a row that we’ve either frozen or cut that portion of the property tax. However, that’s only one-third of property taxes.

The other two-thirds is municipal, and we have no control over what municipalities do with their portion of the property tax. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental, then, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs: given that property values have generally decreased in the last two years, why are property taxes increasing? 2:30 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Goudreau: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The market value on which the rate is applied is not the current value.

Rather, it’s the amount that a property might have realized if sold on the open market as of July 1 of the year prior to the taxation year. Mill rates are adjusted to ensure that the revenue remains stable in spite of price fluctuations seen in the housing market. With respect to education property tax the education mill rate is applied on a province-wide basis and reflects average property values for the whole province. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My final question, then, to the Minister of Education: how much is raised through education property taxes, and is this amount guaranteed to fund education priorities in our province? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Yes, Mr. Speaker. All money raised under the education property tax goes to the Alberta school foundation, and it is used to fund education across the province. We raise about $1.6 billion in property taxes, which is more than 25 per cent of the amount that they spent on education through the provincial spend- ing, and there’s an additional $199 million that’s raised by opted-out boards.

U of A Sustainable Development Campus Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, last November I raised some questions in the Assembly on an exciting report done by the Urban Land Institute into the development at the U of A’s south campus. The report advocated a bold goal for the south campus that by 2035, if everyone on Earth lived like the proposed community at the south campus, we’d arrest climate change and live sustainably within the limited resources of our planet. To the Minister of Envi ronment: last November 17 he said that he expected to receive the final report shortly, so has he now received it?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, thank you. And thank you to the member for this question because, frankly, I had forgotten that this report was under way. I’m pleased to advise the member that we have received a draft of the report. It was r eceived a couple of weeks ago. Our staff are providing some additional input, and we should have that complete in the next two weeks. We then would expect that the university would be in a position to release the final draft of the report in three weeks to a month. Dr. Taft: Well, that’s great news.

To the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology: given that last November 17 the minister said that this report would be circulated widely among Campus Alberta and officials in his own department, has this happened, and has the report had an impact? Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, indeed, the advice from the report actually makes up part of the University of Alberta’s institutional access plan and, as such, will be spread throughout Campus Alberta.

In terms of the advice that was given and some of the ideas that were there, by all indications it was a very successful symposium to develop the kind of advice that Campus Alberta can look to for sustainable innovation in the future. We will incorporate that in each institution’s individual access plan for their capital. Dr. Taft: Again to the same minister: does the Department of Advanced Education and Technology place any standards for sustainability on new buildings built by universities, and if so, will he make them public? Mr.

Horner: Well, we do, I guess, depend upon the boards of governance and the executives at all of these institutions to work with us in terms of the capital plans. As in the case of the University of Alberta, we expect that they’re going to be doing their work in terms of the type of capital plan that they want to put forward as it relates to the access plans that we have. It’s about student place- ment, Mr. Speaker, and it’s about sustainable communities for students to do what they need to do. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-North Hill, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo.

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 607 Harmonization of Oil and Gas Royalties Mr. Fawcett: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The competitiveness review and the resulting changes to the royalty structure were applauded by industry and are key to our government’s economic plan going forward. Some industry voices, though, are calling for the harmoni- zation of royalties between Alberta and its energy producing neighbours, B.C. and Saskatchewan. My question is to the Minister of Energy.

During the extensive consultation and development process of the competitiveness review, was the harmonization of royalties between the three provinces considered, and if so, what were the outcomes of this discussion? Mr. Liepert: Well, the short answer to that, Mr. Speaker, is no. Those discussions did not take place. But we have to remember what we’ve gone through for the last year: it was a competitiveness review; it was not a royalty review.

The competitiveness review concluded that there were a number of areas that we needed to take action on that would frankly make us one of the most competitive jurisdictions in North America. We’ve announced some. We’re commencing others. I’m not suggesting that at some point in time we wouldn’t have those discussions with our neighbouring prov- inces, but that was not discussed at this stage. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Fawcett: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With TILMA and the western economic partnership being clear indicators of our inten- tions to reduce barriers to investment and make business investment decisions easier, would it not make sense to extend this to royalties in our largest industry? What is the rationale for not doing so? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, we have to remember that TILMA stands for the labour mob ility agreement. I think that we’ve made tremendous strides in ensuring that we have the ability not only for labour to move back and forth across provincial borders but for business to actually operate back and forth across borders.

There’s still lots of work to do there. You know, as I said earlier, royalties are only one part of it. We’re always open to discussions with other provinces, whatever will make it easier for workers and also for businesses to operate. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Fawcett: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My last supplemental, again to the same minister: with the task force on regulatory enhancement under way, reviewing regulations pertaining to the energy industry, will their considerations include harmonization of regulations between the energy producing provinces pursuant to the goals of TILMA and the western economic partnership? Mr. Liepert: Well, first of all, I said from the very beginning relative to the task force that’s going to commence its work very shortly that there is nothing that is off the table, Mr. Speaker.

I would suggest that if through the consultations some good sugges- tions come forward that we could pursue with our neighbouring provinces of B.C. and Saskatchewan, we would certainly entertain that and look forward to some of those recommendations. Chronic Wasting Disease Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, the Alberta Fish and Game Association indicates that there is no reliable province-wide system in place to monitor chronic wasting disease, a disease that, if it spreads, could be irrevocably detrimental to Alberta wildlife.

To the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development: how can the minister claim that there is a reliable province-wide monitoring system in place when surveillance is based largely upon voluntary submission of heads by hunters? Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that this surveillance program, in fact, is quite robust. In the last hunting season we had about 4,860 heads submitted that were tested, and out of those, there were 12 that were found to be positive. It still indicates a relatively low density of the disease and still concentrated on the eastern side of the province of Alberta.

The program is spread across the province, so I think it’s quite robust. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Hehr: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that the minister’s budget has been cut this year along with 112 SRD staff and the disease boundaries are expanding, how will the minister be able to ensure that adequate testing will be done? Mr. Knight: Well, again, as I said, what we have here is co- operation with the hunting community. Mr. Speaker, it’s the hunters that actually help us with respect to this issue. It doesn’t matter how many fish and wildlife officers there are on the ground.

As long as we have and continue to have a good working relationship and the co-operation of the hunting community, the program can continue. Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, given that hunt farms are a major cause of the spread of chronic wasting disease, why is the minister expressing support for hunt farms at Alberta Fish and Game Association meetings? Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, I don’t know where the member gets his information from. I don’t recall him sitting at any table where I may or may not have made comments relative to the issue.

However, what I will say now to this House and to all Albertans is that there is a ban in place in the province of Alberta relative to hunting cervids on farms. That ban remains in place. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Oil Sands Image Mr. Sandhu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The oil sands have again come under attack by environmental groups to give the impression that Albertans don’t care about the environment. The other day one such group launched an online video game that shows the oil sands in a very unfair and negative light.

The Minister of Energy has spoken recently about fighting back with the facts on a national and international scale. My question to the Minister of Energy: when is he going to launch this much-needed counterattack against these outrageous messages? 2:40 Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that the Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo does not want us to be out there publicly defending our oil sands, we’re going to. It’s not just going to be the government that’s going to do that.

Later under tablings I’m going to table – I happened to notice just before question period today in the Hill Times a number of advertisements put on by the labour council of Alberta, by various companies in Alberta, by the Forest Products Association, all trying their best to counter this propaganda campaign.

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010608 Mr. Sandhu: My first supplemental to the same minister. I noticed in the media that a major buyers/sellers conference is taking place in Edmonton over the next two days. There are a number of Ontario and Quebec companies here seeking business, and I would like to know if the minister will be meeting with these companies when they are in Edmonton? Mr. Liepert: Well, as a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I know that the Premier today is addressing this buyers/sellers forum here in the city of Edmonton.

I am meeting tomorrow with the minister of industry from Ontario, who is here as part of that mission. I plan to ensure that she has a full understanding of not only how important the oil sands are to Alberta but to the rest of the country. They’re important in two ways. As the member says, we have Ontario suppliers here selling to the oil sands, but probably more im portantly the federal government has significant tax revenue that comes from Albertans and Alberta businesses that goes to the federal treasury that ends up in equalization payments to other provinces. Mr.

Sandhu: My final question to the same minister: does the minister plan to ensure that employees of these companies that supply goods and services to the oil sands are made aware that their employment is directly tied to a vibrant oil industry? Thank you. Mr. Liepert: Well, as I’ve said before, Mr. Speaker, I think it is important. It’s not just governments that have to understand that the vibrant oil patch – a strong Alberta makes a strong Canada. There are many who work in manufacturing in central Canada whose livelihoods depend on exports to the province of Alberta.

The oil sands and the oil industry are purchasers of billions of dollars’ worth of goods from Ontario and Quebec every year. It’s going to be our job to ensure that those who work in these particular facilities understand that. The Speaker: Hon. members, that concludes question period for today. There were 114 questions and responses from 19 different members. Of the 19, nine were Official Opposition members, one was the third party, two from the fourth party, one from the inde- pendent, and six from private government members. head: Tabling Returns and Reports Mr. Hehr: Mr.

Speaker, I have a letter from the Alberta Fish and Game Association and the appropriate number of copies that go through some of the points they bring up on chronic wasting disease and how they believe the disease could be more effectively moni- tored here in this province. Thank you very much. Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in the last answer to my question, I have five copies of three particular advertisements that appear in the Hill Times that I’d like to table with the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona on behalf of the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood.

Ms Notley: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood I’d like to table the appropriate number of copies of a news story in which the Confer- ence Board of Canada says that any increase in drilling rates will be because of higher prices, not the royalty rollback. This information relates to the questions that the member asked earlier today.

As well, I’d like to table the appropriate number of copies of 24 postcards signed by Albertans calling on the provincial government to keep its promise to build 600 new long-term care beds, as part of a postcard campaign sponsored by the Canadian Union of Public Employees. Thank you. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited with the office of the Clerk. On behalf of the hon. Mrs. Klimchuk, Minister of Service Alberta, response to a question raised by Mr. MacDonald, the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, on February 17, 2010, Service Alberta main estimates debate. On behalf of the hon. Dr. Morton, Minister of Finance and Enterprise, responses to questions raised by Mr. MacDonald, the hon. Member for Edmont on-Gold Bar; Mr. Fawcett, the hon. Member for Calgary-North Hill; Mr. Hinman, the hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore; and Ms Woo-Paw, the hon. Member for Calgary-Mackay, on February 24, 2010, Department of Finance and Enterprise main estimates debate. head: Orders of the Day head: Government Bills and Orders Second Reading Bill 15 Appropriation Act, 2010 The Speaker: The hon.

President of the Treasury Board. Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to rise today and move second reading of Bill 15, the Appropriation Act, 2010. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Mr. Taylor: That was quick, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. It’s my pleasure to rise and join in second reading debate on Bill 15, the Appropriation Act, 2010. This, of course, involves a tremendous amount of money: $39 billion in operating expenses, $7 billion in capital expenses, a deficit of $4.7 billion. I see the President of the Treasury Board is shaking his head at me right now.

Okay. [interjection] I didn’t hear that, but anyway maybe Hansard did. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie has the floor if he wishes to take it. Mr. Taylor: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying, a tremendous amount of money involved in the running of this province for 12 months: $39 billion in operating expenses, and we are running a deficit this year of some $4.7 billion.

There have been many concerns expressed by many members in numerous parties in this House about the notion that we’ve gone into deficit spending now, and there doesn’t seem to be a clear plan to take us out of deficit spending, just a promise that we’ll be back in the black in three years. That’s kind of a vague promise in our view over here on this side of the House, a kind of vague, trust-us sort of promise that somehow, God willing and the creek don’t rise, everything will be fine again in three years. Now, I have to do a bit of a balancing act on this, Mr.

Speaker, because after all, I recognize and I think most of us in this House do recognize that stimulus spending done at the right time can have a positive impact on an economy that’s in recession. There’s certainly

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 609 some stimulus spending in the capital budget, a great deal of stimulus spending in the capital budget, in fact. I think the government has done the right thing by putting extra money into health care, although I’m still waiting to see what the plan is around that. Right now it appears more like the minister of health wanted to use his Visa card, and the bank said: no, you’ve got to clear the outstanding balance before we’ll let you use it again. I got a chuckle out of the minister of health on that one.

That’s where a good chunk of the extra money in health has gone, but there’s also money above and beyond that for investment in the system. I think, Mr. Speaker, it’s fair to say that we have a shortage of doctors, we have a shortage of nurses, and we have a s hortage of hospital beds in this province, at least open hospital beds.

We certainly have a bizarre situation in Calgary, where we have a number of new hospital beds that have been opened over the last year, and a corresponding number of old hospital beds have been closed down because when this government went through its capital planning exercise around money to invest in capital build for the Calgary health region, it somehow forgot, failed, otherwise messed up the notion that when those capital projects were done, in order to operate them, there would need to be a corresponding envelope of operating money, which didn’t materialize. I think there’s no question, Mr.

Speaker, that in order to overcome at least some of the problems that we have in health care in this province, it’s going to require an extra investment of money, as we’ve seen in this budget. So that’s good. But it’s also been, I think it’s fair to say, a politically expedient thing for this government to do, to find a bunch of extra money to invest in health care, because health care has become a great concern to an awful lot of Albertans, including older Albertans, who are more likely to vote. 2:50 I wouldn’t be making this comment, I guess, Mr.

Speaker, if we hadn’t been through the debate and the turmoil that persons with developmental disabilities and their loved ones and their care providers had to go through earlier this year around plans, that were at least temporarily thwarted, to cut spending to PDD. We’ve got problems with Children and Youth Services.

We’ve got cuts happening in other areas, and it’s interesting to me that the cuts that we see happening in this budget tend to be cuts in areas where people are perhaps a little bit marginalized anyway, unlikely to vote, unlikely to cause trouble for the government if the government cuts their money. Still we have a $4.7 billion deficit, and still we have a tremendous amount of money being spent. It really is stunning, the amount of money that we go through in the run of a year.

I’m left to w onder whether this government has really gone through its operations with a sharp pencil and done everything that it needed to do, that it should be doing to determine where wasteful spending is happening and where spending could be at least redirected to areas of higher priority. I don’t think, Mr. Speaker, at least not to my satisfaction, that this government has yet succeeded in defining or putting out for province-wide debate what are the core programs and services that are considered to be sacrosanct, beyond being touched, beyond being cut.

I think that if you define core programs and core services, you say: “These are the things that Albertans hold most dear. These are the things that are most important in terms of public works and public services for the public good. These are the things that we must – we absolutely must – spend money on.

These are the things and the people and the programs and the services we absolutely must invest in.” Then, by definition, by default, the programs and the services that do not fall into the basket of core programs and services are those where you can go back in and take a second look and say: “Well, when times are tight, when people are hurting, when the health care system is in a mess and needs to be fixed, needs to be triaged at least and, hopefully, made better, when we have some of the problems that we have in this province right now within the context of a sluggish economy, which is recovering, albeit slowly, where are the areas where we actually can cut?

Is this an area that we really need to spend money on this fiscal year?” I don’t think that’s been done yet. I have not seen a whole lot of evidence as we went through the budget debates, the estimates debates, over the last five or six weeks or so. I’ve not seen a lot of evidence, a lot of clear definition of what is a core program and what isn’t. I will speak entirely personally now, and I’ll be very interested to hear what some of my colleagues on all sides of the House say about this.

It’s been again this year an interesting exercise, going through the estimates debates as we have in the evening in the various policy field committees, because if you are the Official Opposition critic on a particular department, it does give you the opportunity to sit with your counterpart, with the minister, and get into some fairly – depending on the minister, depending on the bureaucrats surround- ing him, depending on the time and the tides and everybody’s mood – detailed, in-depth discussion about why the money is being spent in the way that it is and what the priorities are.

You can actually, from time to time at least, learn a fair amount about what’s going on, not always, but from time to time, again depending on the minister, depending on the critic, depending on the time and the tides and the whole shebang. I do find that a rather interesting way to go about it. However, I can’t help but note that we still, when all is said and done, give each department, each ministry, whether it is Health and Wellness at $15 billion or Service Alberta at about $350 million, equal time.

Three hours of debate for the ministry starting each night at 6:30, ending each night at 9:30, with the Official Opposition critic getting first crack in a back-and-forth exchange with the minister for an hour, a five-minute break for coffee or juice, and then we’re back at it with the member of the third party and the critic from the fourth party and then a back and forth between opposition and governing party members of the committee. At the end of three hours we’re done.

Now, we have the opportunity, of course, we being anybody on that particular committee or anybody who is sitting in on that particular committee for that department’s debate on that evening, to submit a number of written questions and a reasonable expecta- tion of answers back from the minister within a couple of weeks. I haven’t been keeping track, by the way, Mr.

Speaker, as to what the delivery rate has been on that promise, but I know that a number of ministers over the course of the last few weeks did promise to get back to us with written answers in a couple of weeks, so hopefully if those promises haven’t been kept, they will be acted upon with this gentle admonition from this critic on this side of the House. Still, when all is said and done, you come to a situation where debate on a total of $39 billion worth of spending is governed entirely by the clock. Nearly half of that budget, $15 billion in Health, was debated in three hours.

We may have debated this budget department by department, ministry by ministry over the last five or six weeks, but the Health and Wellness budget is $15 billion. The operating budget is $39 billion. Health and Wellness got three hours just like every other department got three hours. We did a huge chunk of this budget in three hours, and at the end of three hours it was like: well, okay, there you go; that’s all the time we have for that. Now, that approach works just fine when you’re doing a radio talk show, I guess. You know, when you’re doing a radio talk show, you

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010610 are all powerful, and you can decide three weeks hence that you’re going to bring the topic back if you feel like it again. But it doesn’t work so well, in my opinion, in the public interest. I don’t know that the public interest is at all served by saying that we will devote three hours and only three hours to debating the estimates of the ministry of health, especially this year – especially this year – when there’s been a significant additional investment of public dollars in health care and especially this year when health care is in such an obvious mess.

We have gone through a failed restructuring of the system. I think it’s a failed restructuring of the system. I think the current minister of health spends all his time undoing the work of the previous minister of health. I mean, it’s kind of an ongoing process because, of course, the work put into motion by the previous minister of health is carried on by the Alberta Health Services Board and CEO.

They’re still in place, and they’re still, you know, beavering around and doing their little thing reorganizing the health ministry, while the current minister of health is coming along behind, aided and abetted sometimes by the Official Opposi- tion health critic and critics from the other parties, who are pointing out: “Hey, you know what? The way we do cancer care in this province now isn’t working anymore.

The way we do this isn’t working anymore.” Nobody knows anything in health care in terms of who reports to whom or who’s supposed to be accountable or take charge or make the final decision and have the buck stop on their desk for this or that particular area of health care, and the poor minister of health is running around after Stephen Duckett and the Alberta Health Services Board trying to put a leash on that pit bull that got out of its cage. For this we’re spending $15 b illion, and we spent three hours debating it. I don’t think that’s enough, Mr. Speaker. I really don’t.

Now, there are other ministries, the Ministry of Energy, for instance, where I felt as though that was time reasonably well spent. I felt that questions were answered, so I’ll give high marks on that to the Minister of Energy. There are other ministries that probably got full and adequate debate within that three-hour time frame. 3:00 Mr. Speaker, it would be better – it really would be better – if we would adopt the approach taken by so many other jurisdictions in this country and simply start debating the budget and keep going on it until it is done.

If we need to call the minister of health back for another session in a couple of weeks’ time after we’ve finished questioning him for an evening, we could do that, and we could get supplementary answers to our questions; likewise with the Minister of Education or the minister of advanced education or the Minister of Municipal Affairs or any other ministry. We have attempted to shoehorn these many billions of dollars into a very tight framework for debate, and the bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that when the time has elapsed, the debate is finished whether the public has been served by that debate or not.

I don’t think that’s a particularly wise or proper, appropriate stewardship of the taxpayers’ money in the province of Alberta. I don’t think we’re being proper stewards of the people of Alberta’s money. I think we should take a long hard look over this fiscal year at a different approach to doing this. We spend a tremendous amount of money in this province. We still spend on a per capita basis well above many other jurisdictions in this country. We don’t give it the full and complete debate that it needs.

We don’t know, and we will never know if we continue to debate the budget according to the rules that we have been using, where we’re getting value for our money as taxpayers, whether we’re getting value for our money as taxpayers, where things can be tightened up, where more money needs to be allocated. There simply isn’t enough in the system to look after our foster children or our elderly or our sick. We don’t know. When you look at the actual budget, the budget for Alberta Health Services is one line. What does that mean? What does that mean? Nine billion dollars, you know, for Alberta Health Services.

Well, gee, that’s nice. What does that mean? Where is that going? I’m not sure that anybody can answer that question, quite frankly, given the performance of Alberta Health Services over the last year, but it sure would be nice to give it a shot and see if we could find out. It sure would be nice to get a budget document that actually breaks that down. It sure would be nice to have the feeling that when the nine health regions were collapsed into the Alberta Health Services superboard, it wasn’t just an opportunity to fudge the numbers a little bit further. I think fudge, Mr.

Speaker, I will freely admit, gets a little close to the line in terms of unparliamentary language, but there is a degree of obfuscation that one suspects could be going on there in that there is this massive amount of money as a line item in the budget, and we really don’t know how it’s allocated, how it’s broken down. I think that we should. I think that the people of Alberta have a right to know how their public funds are being spent on public health care. Public health care is an extremely, extremely important thing to the people of Alberta, to the people of Canada.

But as much as we love our public health care system in this country, in this province, it’s also extremely important that we know where our public money is going and how it’s being put to use and that we as citizens can look at that and be able to make an informed decision as to whether we are getting value for our money or not. We may like public health care. We may love publicly funded health care. But that doesn’t mean that as citizens we’re prepared to stick our heads in the sand and say: “Well, okay, Mr.

Minister, government of Alberta; however you want to spend our $15 billion on health care, that’s all right with us. We don’t mind wa iting 13 hours in emergency. We don’t mind the fact that 1 in every 4 Calgarians can’t find a family doctor. We don’t mind the doctor shortages that exist in so many other parts of the province. We don’t mind that primary care networks, PCNs, should have been set up in more locations, I think, than they have been so far, that it seems to be an awfully hard slog and an awfully slow process to get those things set up.” We do mind that we have to wait so long for health care.

We do mind that we have to wait so long to find out why that thing that is hurting us is hurting us and what to do about it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Airdrie-Chestermere. Mr. Anderson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s an honour to rise and speak to this Bill 15, the Appropriation Act, 2010. You know, every time we talk about this topic, I guess, we come back to the same thing. It’s just that the spending of this government over the last several years has been out of control. It’s been a long, hard road for sure. I mean, we’ve been spending more than we should for a very long time.

I think everyone in this Assembly realizes that. [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] A lot of people in this Assembly, certainly on our side and definitely on the other side as well, campaigned on trying to bring our fiscal house back in order and get our spending under control, so this year, this budget, was an exceptional opportunity to make good on that campaign promise to try to get our spending under control and to try to show fiscal leadership. I remember during the 2008 campaign listening to the Premier speak about balancing the budget.

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 611 One of the things that he brought forward and he campaigned on was that under his watch we would not run deficits. Under no circum- stances would we run deficits. He was very strong on that. I remember going to the doors of the people in my community and saying: this is what this Premier and this government stands for, no deficits. We were going to be good stewards of the books. We were going to be good fiscal managers. That’s what we were going to do.

A lot of people in my constituency who were very unhappy with some of the direction of the government at that time with regards to the Royalty Review Panel and things like that said that they would support the governing party at that time but that they needed to get their act together on the financial side and on the energy side as well as on health care and a few other issues or else they would not support the government in the future. So I said that I would advocate those things as hard as I possibly could and have attempted to do so over the last two years both in and outside of the governing party.

As I look at the spending in this bill, the reason I’m so worried about this, Mr. Speaker, is that like many people in this Chamber I have children of my own. I don’t have grandchildren yet, but many people here do have grandchildren. I have four kids; they’re all under the age of six. The first is just entering kindergarten at Nose Creek elementary in Airdrie. You know, I look at them – and it changes your perception on life when you have kids, obviously – and one of those things that you think about is what their future is going to look like.

You start thinking about some of the advantages that you have in life, some of the good things that you have in life, and the opportunities that I’ve had in life, which I believe are many compared to other people in the world for sure. I think many people in Alberta have a lot of those same opportunities, so we really live in a blessed la nd, and we’re lucky to live where we live. When I look at the opportun ities I’ve had and then I look at my kids, I ask: are they going to have those same opportunities? Are they going to live in a place where when they go get a job, they can be assured that (

a) there is going to be a good job out there for them if they educate themselves? And (b), when they get into the workforce – say they want to try a business, or they want to save for their retirement or whatever it is, or they want to raise their family and they want to have kids of their own – are they going to be taxed to death, or are they going to live in a jurisdiction that allows them to flourish as a family and allows them to flourish as individuals and as entrepreneurs and as people?

These are the things that I think a lot of us, a lot of parents – and I’m not the only parent that feels this way – think about. 3:10 This is why I have such a problem with this b ill and with this government right now. They have lost their way on this issue, this issue of generational fairness. They have failed on so many accounts to save for future generations. I mean, they have not invested virtually a cent, if anything – I’m talking about from 2008 on here – in the heritage fund. They have raided the interest from that fund.

They haven’t replenished it when it went down in value last year even though we had a great year this year investment-wise. They have saved nothing for our future. In fact, they have been draining the sustainability fund from where it was not so long ago at $17 billion or 16 and a half billion dollars or whatever it was down to – I believe the number is going to come in at about $8 billion this year. They’re projecting it to be down to $2 billion by 2013, and that’s under some pretty rosy scenarios.

That doesn’t include the $6 billion in debt from 2008 to 2013 on infrastructure debt that they’re accumulating as well. If you took that out, the sustainability fund would be no more, and we’re back into the Getty years of debt financing. I just look at that, and that’s unacceptable to me, and it’s unacceptable to parents my age in most regards, I would say, because this is our future we’re talking about. I mean, look at what is going on in the United States right now. What an absolute gong show.

Thankfully, we’re not at that point, but here is, you know, a situation where you have the largest nation, our biggest trading partner literally spending themselves to death, where very soon they’re going to be in a situation – I mean, you already see it with their currency devaluing – where, with the baby boomers retiring, their kids are going to be completely unable to pay this bill, totally unable to pay this bill. The harder they work and earn money, it’s still going to be harder because the c urrency that they’re making is going to be devaluing that whole time. They’re in a huge, huge pickle.

Thankfully, and somewhat luckily in our case but also thankfully, we’ve had governments in the past who have been more responsible than that. Obviously, we’ve had the means of massive oil reserves, which has helped us, and we do not find ourselves in a position where we have massive debt.

We’re taking on a little bit of debt right now for sure, and it’s a problem, but we are still at a point that if we set ourselves aright, if we turn the corner, if we put the proper plans in place, if we rein in spending – we’re not talking about massive cuts; we’re just talking about limiting spending to inflation- ary pressures plus growth pressures – and if we started doing that today, we would be able to pull this out of the fire. We would. We are in a position where we can do so. Past governments have put us in that position to do so. The people of Alberta have put ourselves in that position to do so.

However, in this budget and in this bill I don’t see any realization of that urgency. I see more of the same. I see more spending on more social programs. I see we’re spending two times more than the next closest province per capita on infrastructure. Well, infrastruc- ture is great, Mr. Speaker, but someone has got to pay for it. What right do we have as legislators in this House today to pass that bill on to our kids for the next 10 to 20 years? That’s what we’re doing. It’s like we’re taking out a huge mortgage on a house, and then we say, “Oh, well, we’re going to give the kids a house.” Well, great.

What if the kids can’t afford to pay the mortgage b ecause all the baby boomers aren’t paying taxes anymore? What are they going to do then? Who is going to buy their house? No one is going to buy their house. They’re going to be left in a situation where they can’t afford to keep up the infrastructure that has been built. They can’t afford to keep the schools open that have been bu ilt and hire the teachers and the nurses and the docs and the home care workers and all those people that need to keep up the infrastructure. They won’t be able to afford it because they won’t have the tax base for it.

It’s plain and simple. That’s why we can’t get so far ahead of ourselves on infrastructure spending. This year the book deficit that the government is proclaiming is $4.7 billion, cash in, cash out. There has never been an accusation that they’re doing anything illegal with their bookkeeping, but as any creative accountant can do, you can make numbers look better than they are using generally accepted accounting principles. You can do it.

I would say that I think it’s very clear that this year from their books we are spending $7.6 billion more in cash going out than in receipts coming in from taxes and revenues and oil and gas reve- nues, et cetera. So that’s the situation we find ourselves in: a $7.6 billion cash deficit, just an astronomical figure. And that doesn’t include the AHS deficit that may be being incurred right now. I assume it’s being incurred. It’s been incurred. For the last however many years there have been debts in the health system, so I’m assuming there is

Alberta Hansard March 23, 2010612 more debt there. The municipalities are increasing their debt loads. The postsecondary institutions are increasing their debt loads. You have the teachers’ liability; we just took that on. That’s not included in that deficit number, nor should it be, but that’s another liability that our kids have to pay for. You know, it goes on and on and on. I guess I would say that if we were serious about tackling this problem, we would address it in this budget and in this bill. I simply don’t see it.

I don’t see any commitment by this government yet, not only to balancing our budget but to do so in a way that is actually proactive rather than cross your fingers and hope to God that natural gas prices increase, that drilling increases, that oil goes above a hundred again, that the dollar stays below 95, or whatever. I think the target was 95. I mean, it’s all about hope. It’s all about just kind of slowing down the rate of increases to about 6 per cent or 5 per cent, still way above inflation and growth. Slow it down a little bit and hope that the economy catches up.

Well, that hasn’t worked for a lot of countries. It hasn’t worked for Japan. They’ve tried that; didn’t work. They’re still in a stagflation situation. I don’t think it’s going to work for the United States either. I think they are in huge trouble. I think that in Canada, although we’re in less trouble, we too have issues. We basically took on as much debt as we’ve paid off over the last 10 years of hard work. We’ve basically taken it all back on over these last couple of years and in the next couple of years. What are we leaving to our kids?

I just don’t understand how we can sit here in the most richly blessed, resource-wise, province in the country and maybe even in the world in some regards . . . An Hon. Member: We could be. Mr. Anderson: Could be. We’re right up there . . . and just continue to kind of ignore and hope. I mean, at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, when this bill comes due, when our kids have to pay for this mortgage, when they have to pay for this massive amount of infrastructure that we’re putting on the line right now, when the mortgage comes due, they are going to be the taxpayers.

They are going to be the ones with the f our kids in school. I am going to be nearing retirement, and a lot of the folks here will be nearing retirement or retired and enjoying themselves, and they won’t be paying very much tax, that’s for sure. What are we going to say to them? “Oh, sorry. Oops.

You know, it’s unfortunate we haven’t saved anything from our oil and gas resources that are now obsolete because other technologies have occurred that we’re not as reliant on.” This is in 30 or 40 years from now. “We haven’t saved much of anything there, but we’ve built all these great schools and great postsecondary institutions. I know you can’t afford to hire t eachers to t each in them anymore, but at least you’ve got the building.” That’s the situation we’re going to find ourselves having to tell our kids in 30 or 40 years if we don’t get our act together on our finances.

Let’s not repeat the same mistakes that have been repeated over and over again by countries and jurisdic- tions. 3:20 Look at Argentina, for example. Look what happened to them. The people don’t know this, but a hundred years ago Argentina was actually kind of battling it out with the United States for the second largest economy on the planet. At that time England was first, and Argentina and the United States were going at it for second. They had a very prosperous economy, but they got into subsequent governments. They have rich resources. They had everything. [Mr.

Anderson’s speaking time expired] I hope we can take that into consideration as we move forward. The Deputy Speaker: We have 29(2)(

a) for comments and questions. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask the hon. Member for Airdrie-Chestermere if he could just finish his little history lesson on the Argentine economy and its fall from . . . Mr. Hancock: And how the extremists ruined it. Mr. Mason: Yes. Was it the right-wing ones or the left-wing ones? Mr. Anderson: I am absolutely tickled pink, literally tickled pink – pardon the pun – that you would give me that opportunity.

Basi- cally, what happened is that they had governments that successively built in huge, massive entitlement programs, huge en titlement programs that slowly but surely the people could not afford to pay. They continued to raise taxes up, up, up, up again. They drove out business, couldn’t afford to pay for the social programs. There became huge civil unrest. Obviously, there were a lot of different factors.

The point is that when you get into a situation where you let your spending run out of control, when you build in a gr oup of social programs and infrastructure that you cannot afford to pay, it leads to, well, not only the downfall of economies, but it leads to civil unrest and a whole bunch of other bad things. We’re not there at this point in Alberta, for sure. No one here says that we are. But if we continue down this road, that’s where we’re going. Look at what is going on with our closest neighbour. These things are happening today.

I have family – well, it’s on my wife’s side – that live in the United States right now. They’re in Missouri, and it’s not a happy place to be: double-digit unemployment, no real prospects, part-time work for the most

part if there is anything new. I mean, it is bad news, and that is happening all over the United States right now. We have got to get a focus here. I mean, what we should be talking about today is not approving, you know, a whack-load of spending. What we should be ta lking about today is: what are we going to do to get our province on track for the next 10 to 20 years, starting now, not starting in 10 years?

That means controlling our spending, putting money aside and building that heritage fund so that the interest from the heritage fund can eventually decrease our reliance on oil and gas, nonrenewable revenues. Who knows? If we built it large enough, it might even decrease our reliance on income taxes, both personal and corporate, and as those came down – you want diversification? Start lowering your income and corporate taxes. That’s diversification. That’s where you’d get more business coming in. Mr. Mason: Argentina is the question. Mr. Anderson: Well, it kind of led into that.

Anyway, I think that’s the discussion that we need to have. I hope that after this bill inevitably passes and this budget inevitably passes, we can start turning our focus immediately to the job of protecting the future for our kids and start thinking a little bit more about future generations rather than ourselves and the here and now. Thanks, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-North Hill. Mr. Fawcett: Thank you very much. I know that this hon. member often criticizes me that I don’t quite understand because I don’t have kids yet, but I do know this, Mr.

Speaker: when I eventually do have kids, I want to raise them right here in Alberta.

March 23, 2010 Alberta Hansard 613 This hon. member has criticized pretty much every government in North America for the amount of money that they’re spending over the last couple of years. I want to know from this hon. member: if he’s not happy with the United States and not happy with the Canadian federal government, with the amount of money that they’re spending these days, where does he want to take his kids to raise his kids? I mean, this is what the governments are doing. This isn’t something that’s isolated to Alberta. That’s my question to the hon. member, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Anderson: Well, the hon. member needs to clean his ears out. He always did have a problem listening. Never once did I say that about him not having kids. I don’t know where he gets that from. I never said also that I didn’t want to raise my kids in Alberta. You know, where he got that from, I don’t know. What I said is that I’m worried about their future. I’m worried about what will happen if we continue down the road that we have continued down. We’ve got to start setting an example, hon. member. It’s our generation.

It’s the young guys and their kids and their grandkids that are going to get hammered with this bill. I mean, are you saying by your comments that what the United States is doing is the right way to go? Is that what you’re saying? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Hehr: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s an honour to be able to rise and speak to this bill and comment a little bit about what has already been said and where we believe that things could be done a little bit better, a little bit differently going forward, comment a little bit about what has happened in the past, and maybe come to some sort of consensus in here as to what will make Alberta not only a better province a year from now, five years for now, 10 years from now but 40 years out. I believe it was the hon.

Member for Calgary-Currie who noted right off the top that the Alberta budget is a very large number nowadays: $39 billion, I believe, is what were spending. By no small means is that a small chunk of change. A lot of that comes from royalty revenues; some of that comes from personal income tax; some of that comes from corporate income tax; some of that comes from user fees. There’s a whole mix of things that we do in Alberta that goes to raise that amount of money. There’s even some of that money that has not been raised from those sources.

What is on the books is $4.3 billion in debt, and if you believe what some other people are saying in this House, the actual number in actual debt is closer to $7 billion. I would agree with the hon. members who have spoken before that no one is accusing the government of falsifying the books, but there are ways of accounting that make things look rosier than they are. If you look at some of the debt that is acquired, it would probably be closer to $7 billion.

If you look at other debt that’s in other areas, if you look at what is owed to the teachers on their liability, well, that’s another $6 billion or $7 billion. You get the point, Mr. Speaker. We’re starting to get to the point where things aren’t adding up, where things are getting to the point where we’re not able to live within our limits or live within the amount of money that we currently have. If we talk about some of those things that have been talked about, let’s go back to the estimates process, which – I will also follow the lead of the hon.

Member for Calgary-Currie – is a very interesting process and, I would agree for the most part, is a reasonable process set up to discuss various departments and to allow us to have a one- on-one conversation with the hon. minister about how the various departments are being run, what is going to happen in those departments in the coming year, talk about some of the programs and directions that they’re going to take Alberta in and what they’re going to do for the Alberta people with the money they’ve spent. I for one have mostly enjoyed those debates. You can learn a lot. You can get into some contentious areas.

I think there’s a learning process that goes on for both sides. I will say this: I don’t believe it’s in the best interests of the Alberta people to limit debates to three hours in certain areas. I agree with the hon. Member for Calgary- Currie that we may only need three hours for a department like Service Alberta that spends a relatively small amount of the whole Alberta budget. But is three hours reasonable to discuss I believe it was $15 b illion that we spend on health care or whatever large number it is? I don’t know. 3:30 I know what other jurisdictions do.

They allow the opposition members to take as much time, get as much detail out of the minister as they’re able to and ask questions back and forth that, hopefully, lead to a better and more effective way for the opposition parties to understand what the government is doing. When the opposition parties understand a little better, it’s helpful for us to do our job and more helpful to the Alberta people in the fact that they will know more about how their governments are running their various departments.

I would suggest that maybe we have to look at those ways that other jurisdictions are currently running their debates, and maybe we could go to those types of formats. It doesn’t appear that this has been an overly heavy legislative session, where we were forced to deal with a whole bunch of things on the agenda that needed to be done. This way it could have been facilitated, I think, in a very easy fashion, should we have wished to do so, and we could probably do that in the future very easily.

I also note in this little bit of a history lesson given to me by some of the members of my caucus who have been here longer and studied some of the budgetary process that if you look at the detail given, I guess, in the budgets in previous administrations here in Alberta, if we go back years ago, say, to the ’70s and ’80s, the type of line item you would get from a minister’s department was much more detailed than it currently is.

Just for those reading along, for instance, right now what we get for a line item in terms of the health budget says that X amount is being spent on health care this year in the province of Alberta. That’s what we get. There’s no more breakdown of where that money is being spent, what programs it’s being spent on, what money is going to XYZ area of the province, what is being spent on, let’s say, cancer care and, let’s say, other care. I don’t know how to most effectively do that. Nevertheless, I have been told – and I am actual

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20100323
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L27 S3 20100323 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d12fdc60412c3b1868d80a94f5e7b434a7a3a404

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