Alberta Hansard — 31 May 1984, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 20, Session 2)

19840531

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

May 31, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 1153 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Thursday, May 31, 1984 2:30 p.m. |The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 57 Public Service Pension Plan Act MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill No. 57, the Public Service Pension Plan. Act. This being a money Bill, His Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor, having been informed of the contents of the Bill, recommends the same to the Assembly. The highlights of the Bill are as follows.

All existing benefits under the pension plan will be maintained, and all will continue to be guaranteed by the province of Alberta. The existing Public Service Pension Board will continue as a separate entity. The traditional quasi-judicial powers of the board in individual cases and its traditional authority to act as an appeal tribunal on administrative decisions will be set out with greater precision and clarity. There is clear confirmation that pensioners will be able to appeal to the courts on matters of law and jurisdiction.

Pension policy will continue to be the responsibility of the Legislature, and the Executive Council where regulations have been passed. The Public Service Pension Board will be respon sible for providing policy advice regarding the pension plan. The administration of the pension plan will be the responsibility of the minister responsible for public pensions and the Depart ment of Treasury. As well, the phased-in increases in contri bution rates which were set forth in Bill 39 are incorporated in this Bill. Mr. Speaker, the Bill will be widely circulated in the weeks ahead.

After reactions to it are assessed over the summer, it is my intention to introduce another similar Bill, incorporating appropriate amendments, during the fall session. The elements of this Bill and the basic principles contained in it will be incorporated into other new Bills relating to the other five pension plans administered by the government, with appropri ate modifications to reflect the historical uniqueness of each of those pension plans. [Leave granted; Bill 57 read a first time] Bill 55 Securities Amendment Act, 1984 MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I request leave to introduce a Bill, being the Securities Amendment Act, 1984. While the Bill is large in volume, the amendments are mainly administrative. Given that approximately two years of history have been attached to the present Securities Act, a number of amendments have been recommended, especially in light of changes in circumstances across the country. Where possible, we have endeavoured to keep our legislation in line with leg islation in other jurisdictions. I propose that this Bill be widely circulated during the summer.

In light of what other circum stances may arise and reports that may be forthcoming, I am hoping other amendments may be suggested in the fall sittings. [Leave granted; Bill 55 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to statute, I'd like to file Sessional Paper No. 94. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the answer to Motion for a Return No. 159. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table copies of the annual report of the Attorney General's department, March 31, 1983. MR. PAYNE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table our response to Motion for a Return 142. MRS.

OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm tabling the answers to questions 171 and 172 and, on behalf of my colleague the hon. Associate Minister of Public Lands and Wildlife, the answers to questions 157 and 131. DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to file with the Legislature Library three copies of the discussion paper on the proposed Police Act. I'd also like to file the answer to Question No. 126. MR. LEE: Mr.

Speaker, I wish to file with the Legislature Library a petition from some 5,300 Albertans in the Edmonton area in which they have petitioned that the Alberta government permit the distribution of beer and wine in convenience and grocery stores in the province of Alberta. MR. ALEXANDER: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to file with the Legislature Library a petition by People Against Impaired Drivers. The petition contains some 7,000 names and reads: WE THE UNDERSIGNED protest the dangers posed to our lives and property by impaired drivers in Canada. WE . . .

PETITION the Governments of Canada and Alberta and the Edmonton City Council to protect us from these dangers by undertaking whatever public education or administration . . . or legal action as may be within their respective jurisdictions to effectively reduce the inci dents of impaired driving in Canada. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. WOO: Mr. Speaker, I take pleasure this afternoon in introducing to you, and through you to members of the Assem bly, 45 grade 6 students from St. Theresa school, which is situated in the constituency of Edmonton Sherwood Park.

They are accompanied by teachers Connie Poschmann, who is their group leader, Mr. Ernie Drvaric, and Mrs. Chris Kolochuk, and by their bus driver Mrs. Dionne. They are seated in the members gallery, and I ask that they rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague the Minister of Tourism and Small Business, the Member for Peace River. I am pleased to introduce to you and to all members of the Assembly a group of 30 grade 6 students from Deadwood. They're accompanied by group leader Mr. Gordon Nelson.

1154 ALBERTA HANSARD May 31, 1984 teacher Mrs. Shirley Nicklason, parents Mrs. Olga Gordey, Mrs. Darleen Frith, and Mrs. Lorraine Burrows, and bus driver Mr. Cornelius Boos. They are seated in the members gallery, and I ask that they also rise and receive the welcome of this House. MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly, some 25 grade 8 students from the Colonel Walker community school in the constituency of Calgary Forest Lawn. They're accom panied today by their group leader Mr. McTavish and by bus driver Mark Curran.

They are seated in the public gallery, and I ask them to rise and receive the cordial welcome of the Assembly. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Abacus Cities Investigation MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the hon. Attorney General. Given the speculation that this is the last day of the spring session and noting in the April 17 Hansard that the hon.

Attorney General would try to give the Legislature some indication, within approximately two weeks, as to what the government proposed to do with the RCMP recommendation that charges be laid in the case of Abacus Cities, my question is: now that it's May 31, 1984, when will a decision be made? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, i suppose it just proves how accommodating I can be with respect to matters of timing. The decision was not taken within two weeks. As all hon. members know, I indicated at that time that two weeks was a minimum time frame, although it was my best estimate.

There have been a number of briefing sessions since, and I had rather hoped to be able to make that decision public one way or another by tomorrow. But my thought now is that it will probably be early next week. MR. NOTLEY: I see. Mr. Speaker, I hope the minister's pre diction is a little more accurate than the last one. A supplementary question.

Could the minister advise the Assembly whether he has asked his officials to report on why the RCMP investigation to lay charges in this controversial — expensive, I might add — and important matter was not brought to the attention of the minister until the day after i raised the question in the Assembly? i make reference to the answer to Written Question 170. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I don't want to be flippant in any way in responding to the hon. leader.

But the fact of when i was officially advised by the acting deputy surely bears out my contention, made on a number of occasions, that these matters are not dabbled in, so to speak, by the Attorney General personally with respect to decisions respecting prosecutions. We've had many discussions, both in and out of the House, about the importance of the independence of Crown counsel and Crown attorneys. If I'm not venturing too much, I think I could say that sometimes questions were put to me which were meant to indicate that I was continuously interfering in the discretion of Crown counsel in various cases.

I think that that is clearly evidence dramatically and massively to the contrary, Mr. Speaker. The fact is that in answering the question for the hon. leader I checked agendas of meetings I'd had with the Deputy Attorney General from as long ago as early 1983, because I knew subsequently, when the matter was researched, that he had received some memoranda with respect to rec ommendations of charges. To the best of my knowledge and ability to do any checking at all, those were not mentioned to me in 1983.

I was left with responding to the hon. leader only by saying that going on my recollections for 1984, it was indeed the day after the matter was raised in the House that I was formally advised. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. I'm sure the question of whether this is a massive indication of anything is a subject of debate, but we wouldn't want to debate in the question period. However, could I put to the minister what process the government is following. We had the RCMP recommendation with respect to Dial, and we had special prosecutors given a relatively short time.

Could the minister elaborate, in a little more detail, what steps have taken place subsequent to April 16 with respect to this RCMP recommendation, once the min ister was apprised of it, I gather on the 17th, by his deputy? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think it's been indicated previously in the Assembly that the Crown attorneys working on the case had had it under consideration since 1983.

One of the reasons it wasn't acted on earlier in that year was that although the recommendations had been provided, the Baines report, which later also received a lot of attention in the Assem bly, had not yet been completed. All the observations of the RCMP and the people working on the Baines report were considered relevant to the decision as to whether charges should be laid. The result of that was that the matter was of course well in hand. Mr.

Speaker, although there were some waiting periods during which Crown counsel were perhaps spending time waiting for the Baines report rather than actually developing recommendations for me to see. By early 1984, sufficient consideration had been given so that they would be able to prepare recommendations for me. I have seen those recommendations and gone over the summa tions of the Baines report and the Crown counsels' opinions on the RCMP recommendations. That has all occurred since April.

What remains to be done is simply for me to publicly indicate, after one more consultation with senior personnel in the criminal division of the department, the decision respecting prosecutions. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Given the widespread public interest on this matter and the minister's undertaking on April 17 to try to make a decision within two weeks, did any special procedural obstacles stand in the way of at least being able to make a decision before the adjournment of the spring session? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, in the administration of jus tice, there is no particular magic as to whether or not the Assembly sits. The decisions have to be made in season or out of season. I think one thing I've been taught in the process, including this afternoon, is not to give the hon. leader any more estimates of when I think decisions can be made. I indicated at the time that I thought I was being accommodating in giving him what was my best estimate at the time. I think that giving him my best estimate was perhaps not the thing to do. I should have given him my worst estimate. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, the question is whether the min ister's worst estimate is next Tuesday or Wednesday, or five or 10 years in the future.

May 31, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 1155 Could I ask the minister's colleague, the Minister of Con sumer and Corporate Affairs, a supplementary question. On the 25th of this month, the minister promised the Assembly that the Securities Commission would give her an answer that day, if my recollection is correct, as to how much longer it would take to complete the Abacus study. What did the com mission tell the minister? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, my advice subsequent to that question, later that same day, was — and again, it's an estimate.

I think the Assembly can judge by the questions that just preceded this one that we walk on fragile ground when giving estimates. But the estimate was two weeks. MR. NOTLEY: Hopefully, Mr. Speaker. Labour Relations MR. NOTLEY: Could I direct my second question to the hon. Minister of Labour. It's a follow-up to questions my colleague the Member for Edmonton Norwood raised Monday with respect to lockouts in this province and the Labour Relations Board ruling.

Given the widespread concern of a number of other groups — plasterers, construction labourers, bricklayers in southern Alberta, and now employees at the Suncor plant in Fort McMurray — about the use of the lockout approach by employers to foil the intent of the Labour Relations Act, will this government drop its position of benign neutrality and act to ensure that there is labour peace? MR. SPEAKER: I would have a very difficult time character izing that as a question. However, if the hon. minister wishes to deal with it, he should no doubt have the opportunity. MR. YOUNG: Mr.

Speaker, there are several aspects to the question and the manner it was put, but let's stay with the basic issue. The basic issue is whether the Labour Relations Act, which is reflective of the system of labour relations across North America and in some other areas, is in fact a balanced system. As I've mentioned before, the Labour Relations Act, under which the lockout is being taken, is the same system which has existed for many years.

It is well accepted that in the event of a disagreement on the terms and conditions of employment that one or the other of the parties insists on putting or not putting into a collective agreement, one party has the capacity to have a legal strike and the other party has the capacity to have a legal lockout. That's exactly what is happening. It is acknowledged that lockouts are very rare, and I think there are pretty substantial reasons for that too, as the hon. member would know. It's not so rare that there are strikes. But the lockout is the counterpoint to a strike.

It is a balancing of the positions of the parties. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. As the minister well knows, the strike and the lockout are the end results of a comprehensive and extensive process, not the begin ning, which is what is happening now. My question to the minister is: given some of these remarkable positions that are faced by working people — plumbers from $23 an hour to $12 an hour and the suggestion in . . . MR. SPEAKER: Let's come to the question, [interjection] Order please. Let's come to the question. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, my question requires this expla nation.

There have been a number of proposals to cut back wages substantially. My question to the minister is simply this: what assessment has this government made of the impact on consumer purchasing power of an approach to industrial rela tions which could well lead to massive cutbacks in the salaries of Alberta consumers? MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, to respond to the question, I first have to comment on the observations which were made in the lead-in to the question and which are not accurate. MR. NOTLEY: Sure they are. MR.

YOUNG: With respect, it is mediators in the Department of Labour who participate in some of the bargaining that is a prelude to either a strike or a lockout. Because those staff report through the administration to my office, I happen to know there was bargaining in these situations prior to lockout and prior to any other work stoppage. The fact of the matter is . . . [inter jection] Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure the hon. leader wants to hear the answer. The fact of the matter is that there has been bargaining. Mediators have been involved in all these situations.

In some instances the bargaining has gone on since February at the very least. The fact that the parties are still very far apart is not a reflection that there was no bargaining. It's a reflection on the perceptions of the economic circumstances in which each finds itself. Mr. Speaker, the real question, as I recollect it now, had to do with consumer purchasing power. May I address it this way. Consumer purchasing power is a reflection of a number of things, and mainly it is the number of hours worked times the dollars per hour at which the work is done.

In the circum stances where we now reduce that to an individual employee, the problem the employee faces is the same problem the bus- inessperson, the employer, faces; that is, in the construction industry we are overbuilt. That's well known and well acknowl edged. There is simply not work to go around. Regrettably, there is unemployment and underemployment. There is work at standard rates, not at overtime rates. And there is work today at non-union rates, as there was before. I can't, and would not, confirm what the employers' position is.

The best information I have — I receive a variety of advice on what the employers' position is. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. It seems to me that we've just heard from the minister what the employers' position is. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. NOTLEY: Can I ask the minister whether or not this government has undertaken any assessment — through either the minister's department or one of his colleagues — of the impact on consumer purchasing power of what in fact are some very massive rollbacks in wages.

The wage packet is a very critical element of the consumer purchasing power package in this province. Has there been any assessment at all? MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, the important question is the posi tion of the individual employees and whether or not they have a job and at what rates they have a job. That's a concern not only to the employee but also to the potential employer. If the employer cannot afford to pay them and can't find the oppor tunity to create a job, then it's an academic exercise to talk about consumer purchasing power.

1156 ALBERTA HANSARD May 31, 1984 The fact of the matter is that the industry is in a very difficult economic adjustment period. Frankly, I think it would be more helpful to try to understand and explain the challenge confront ing the industry than to talk about an academic question which isn't really going to affect the decision that's going to be made at the bargaining table. The problem is the amount of work that's available in an overbuilt industry in the one circumstance, in other circumstances, it may be international competition. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, it's not an academic question to workers.

Could I put a question to the minister about what role, if any, the government is prepared to take with respect to concerns — his hon. colleague the Minister of Manpower has told every body to go north to find jobs — in Fort McMurray about a lockout at Suncor. What role, if any, is the department taking to encourage a settlement so that kind of result is not resorted to? MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I want to make one point very clear. As I expressed in my previous answer, the concern for the individual employee is definitely not academic.

Hopefully there is no member of this House who doesn't have a real feeling for the frustration of persons who may be seeking employment and don't have it or who are faced with examining their situation, the industry in which they find themselves, and the difficult economics of that industry. Surely no one considers that to be academic. In using that response, I was referring to the hon. member's question dealing with consumer purchasing power, and trying to indicate that that's much more complex than the manner in which the question was asked.

In respect of any of these disputes, if the parties do not voluntarily ask for mediation assistance at some point before they reach a breakdown stage, at the point where they ask for a legal strike vote to be taken or at the point where they issue a lockout notice or indicate to us that they may be issuing a lockout notice, it is departmental policy that the mediators automatically phone the parties and offer assistance. The prob lem is that in these circumstances, we are faced with very intractable differences of opinion as to what the real circum stances are.

There have been many cases this year where we have not been able to provide the assistance we would like to be able to provide, simply because the perceptions of the parties are so different one from the other. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. This deals with the government philosophy. The minister has been quoted as indicating . . . I think he's made reference — not inside the House but outside the House — to the vagaries of the marketplace.

Given the fact that this government has been prepared to use the emergency provisions of the Labour Act to send people back to work when the bargaining power of labour was strong — for example, nurses; other examples can perhaps be found — why are we taking a very neutral position when the vagaries of the marketplace allow for substantial rollbacks in the wages of working people? MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, to the best of my recollection — and I think my recollection covers all the instances — the only time the provincial government has moved to terminate a work stoppage has been when the public sector is involved.

The public sector is very distinctly different, in terms of the pro cesses and incentives that weigh upon the parties to stimulate a resolution, from those in the private sector. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. However, the government was very quick to point out . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Could this be the final supple mentary. I'm a little concerned about reaching all the members who would like to ask questions. MR. NOTLEY: Fine, Mr. Speaker.

Then could I ask the min ister's colleague the Minister of Manpower, since we're dealing with jobs and lockouts and the concerns, and the minister has been quoted as indicating that students should go north this year to obtain work, to tell the House what objective study he has in his possession to indicate that there is literally a bonanza of jobs for young Albertans in the northern part of this province? MR. ISLEY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should not always put one hundred percent stock in outside quotes.

I believe he is referring to advice I suggested to young people who were having difficulty finding work, that they should pick up a copy of the Alberta wage subsidy application form and use that as a tool in finding jobs, and shouldn't hesitate to move into the agricultural community, which has been responding very pos itively in job creation, and shouldn't hesitate to look beyond the urban centres to the small-business sectors of our rural communities. Hospitality Expenditures MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the Premier relates to a document, tabled yesterday in the Legislature, with regard to hospitality and entertainment expenses of government. The costs in the three-month period were some $227,000, or $2,500 per day. I wonder if the Premier could indicate whether the current rate of expenditure is the same. Will we be faced with the same type of hospitality and enter tainment expenses in the current fiscal year? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, I expect it would increase, with our activities in terms of international marketing in both the private and public sectors, and in a number of other efforts too, to lure investors back to Canada and back to Alberta as well as to sustain our marketing. So my judgment would be that the amounts involved would probably increase. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question in light of the Premier's answer — and I think that's a rather noble answer.

When I review the three months' expenditures, the majority are in Alberta, not necessarily outside Alberta and not necessarily for groups that have visited from outside Alberta. My question to the Premier is: what type of criteria are used in terms of hospitality and entertainment expenses right here in Alberta for Alberta groups, where the relationship between the meeting and economic development in this prov ince really does not exist? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, in terms of any particular item, it's debatable. Many of the hospitality items involve people coming into the province.

Other elements of hospitality involve discussions with groups within the province in terms of economic strategy, international marketing, and marketing within Canada. Certainly in any particular case, it's a matter of debate. We welcome the debate. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. In terms of the various functions that are hosted, can the Premier indicate whether there is a set of written criteria or whether each minister, or MLA in some instances, can freely determine when they want to host and entertain at public expense?

May 31, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 1157 MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, there are no established cri teria because there is such a wide variety of events and a wide variety of circumstances in terms of the places in which the hospitality occurs, the nature of the people involved, and the type of event. There is a wide variety, so the instructions to the ministers are to use their judgment, to constrain the expend itures involved, and to try to do it on a least-cost basis. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Pre mier. I refer to an example in June 1982.

The Department of the Environment hosted an affair where there were 13 bottles of spirits which cost $45 each. In this report, which I have here . . . MR. NOTLEY: Forty-five dollars each? MR. R. SPEAKER: . . . many instances are documented where the bottle cost $30.1 wonder if the Premier could indicate whether there is some type of policy in terms of what type of refreshments are purchased. Are some of the functions allowed to have Dom Perignon or others to have Baby Duck? Who determines the difference between one function and another, as to what kind of wine they drink? There is a significant cost difference.

MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether the Minister of the Environment has those facts. But each minister would have to answer for the item, not being acquainted with the spirit that was involved. MR. NOTLEY: Well, Fred? Forty-five dollars a bottle. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Pre mier. I refer back to the budget speech . . . [interjection] It still continues, Fred, if you'll examine the document. In the budget speech, Albertans were told, "Government cannot be out of step with the realities facing our citizens".

I ask this question of the Premier: has the government conducted a secret survey that we're unaware of, showing that Albertans entertain in such a lavish way as well? That's precedent. MR. LOUGHEED: Again, Mr. Speaker, I suppose it's a debat able point. There are many business organizations that are steadily involved in terms of entertaining and hosting, and one would have to compare it on that basis. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Pre mier. This relates to a point I made earlier in this session with regard to reporting after some of these functions.

I suppose a number of the functions hosted were policy making or meetings of some kind. Has the Premier reviewed the policy with regard to the minister or the Premier himself reporting back to this Legislature some of the results of those various meetings, hosted at $2,500 in early 1983? It's most likely more expensive and, as the Premier indicated, it's going to be more costly this year. Has the Premier reviewed that policy? Will we be hearing more from the ministers in this Legislature, as to the results of those very excessive expenditures? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, some of the most useful func tions have intangible results, and it would be impossible to respond to the question in a tangible way. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, that's certainly a very run- around kind of answer. Can the Premier make a commitment that this Legislature will have an increase in the number of ministerial statements with regard to what the government is doing, and be able to report significant things to this Legisla ture? Through that medium, are we going to hear more about what the government is doing? That relates directly to how some of those ideas are derived. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, the answer is no. Workers' Compensation Coverage MR. BATIUK: Mr. Speaker, the Minister responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compensation tabled the report of the Select Committee on the Workers' Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Could the minister advise why there has been no provision for those employed or involved in agriculture? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, the select committee weighed it very carefully and included the two work forces, the teachers and the agricultural work force, as areas for which they did not recommend universal coverage. MR.

BATIUK: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. With the number of public meetings you had, could the minister advise whether there were such requests for this provision? MR. DIACHUK: Yes, Mr. Speaker. In their submissions to the select committee, several segments of the agricultural com munity recommended and requested that compulsory coverage be arranged and required for agricultural workers. Most of these were the organizations that are involved in the farm labour pool and the distribution of the farm labour people throughout the province. MR. BATIUK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the minister.

Seeing how comprehensive this report is, I know there was a lot of work and time put in. Could the minister advise whether all members on this select committee made a comparable and adequate contribution to this report? MR. SPEAKER: I have a little difficulty with this invitation to the minister to distribute fulsome congratulations to the mem bers of the committee. MR. DIACHUK: If I may, Mr. Speaker, I would like to answer it. Yes. International Travel Expenses MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the Provincial Treasurer. It's to follow up.

In the absence of the Minister of International Trade, I would like to ask some questions about government waste in this time of restraint. My question is simply this: does this government have any policy regarding when and why secretarial staff should go along on international junkets? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. Minister of International Trade would probably like to elaborate at length and enthusiastically.

However, I can say that although the expenses he incurs in promoting the interests of Alberta around the world, in dealing with our trading potential, our interna tional focus, and in dealing with people with whom we do business or could do business — as the hon. Premier said, it is up to each minister as to the resources necessary in order to

1158 ALBERTA HANSARD May 31, 1984 achieve those goals for the province of Alberta. That is the criterion he has applied with respect to expenses. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. For the information of members, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to file three copies of the personal expense claim of a clerk typist III from the Department of International Trade who went along on a trip to Asia this spring. On a point of order, I've taken the liberty of whiting out the name of the individual involved, since that's of course irrelevant. It's government policy that's under question.

My question is: is it usual government policy for secretarial staff on junkets to take tours at public expense, in this case a tour of Singapore and a tour of Bangkok? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I don't have access to the information, which hasn't been shared with me. We have a talented public service in this province. In the conduct of the affairs of the province, the use of their abilities in terms of conducting public policy is the judgment of the minister. MR. MARTIN: Obviously very talented, on excursions.

My supplementary question: has the government prepared — and I think this is the crux of it — any written policy on support staff travel which could be made public? Could the Provincial Treasurer advise why it is not possible, on what I might call these grand excursions, to second assistants from our various agents general around the world? MR. HYNDMAN: Again, Mr. Speaker, it's a matter of indi vidual judgment on the part of each minister, which is the proper way of direct accountability. I'm sure the hon.

Minister of International Trade would like to debate that fully with the hon. member at an appropriate time. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. The minister tabled it. We're talking about government policy in a time of restraint. My next question concerns International Trade expenditures but flows from the reply to Order for a Return No. 215, which the Treasurer tabled yesterday. On page 711 of the return, I see that the Minister of International Trade has claimed for a dinner with seven parliamentarians from the apartheid regime of South Africa.

Can the Treasurer advise how it is that the return asserts that the names of these parliamentarians are not known? MR. HYNDMAN: I don't know the detail on that, Mr. Speaker. As I pointed out yesterday, this return cost some $15,000 of public money to prepare; there are hundreds of thousands of pieces of detailed information. But again it's up to the indi vidual judgment of the minister, who is accountable to this Legislature. I'm sure he will have a full and complete answer. [interjections] MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the Treasurer in view of that answer.

Is it the practice of ministers of this government to meet with foreign parliamentarians whose names are not known? Or in this case did the minister have dinner with a number of strangers and then, after dinner, determine that they were parliamentarians from South Africa? This is government policy. [interjections] It's in the government pol icy. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, the [inaudible] speaks for itself. Postsecondary Education Financing DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, this morning a petition was presented to my office by concerned University of Alberta students.

I took the liberty of saying that it was not in order, and I passed it on to the Minister of Advanced Education, to whom it was addressed. Is the minister in a position to indicate if he's had an opportunity to look at that petition? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I'm in a position to say that I haven't had a chance to look at it; that is, examine the intention of the petition itself. However, I have been briefed as to some of the principles, which are stated in the covering letter. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Advanced Edu cation.

In light of the concern expressed by these students, is the minister or the department giving any consideration to increasing the funding to universities in this province? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I'm tempted to give my speech on the level of assistance to universities and colleges, which I'm sure all of you have heard before. But in terms of accom modations and follow-up to what I have indicated in the House previously, the department is undertaking a monitoring process right now. We'll be measuring the number of students who are applying for admission to universities and colleges across this province.

This monitoring is as a result of the assistance from the university and college presidents and essentially is taking their system and massaging the data to see whether or not students are applying for two, three, or four slots in various places. In that case, Mr. Speaker, we will be able to measure whether or not there is ample opportunity for students to go to universities and colleges across this province.

It's my prelim inary view that I have no reason to change the opinion I expressed here before; that is, all students who are coming out of high school this year, who are able and qualified to go to university, will have a slot somewhere in Alberta. English as a Second Language Program MR. SHRAKE: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. Minister of Education. I know he's aware of the difficulties that some of our new Canadians, the Vietnamese, are having regarding getting enrolled in English as a Second Language programs.

Our good Minister of Advanced Education, Dick Johnston, agreed that he would be looking into this problem. My question is, would the minister consider possibly meeting with the Minister of Advanced Education to explore the fea sibility of some ad hoc ESL programs or some other means of solving the backlog of Vietnamese people who are waiting to enroll in English as a Second Language courses so they can get gainful employment? MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I'm always prepared to meet with my colleagues in the cabinet, even without a matchmaker mak ing the arrangements.

But perhaps even more significant would be the opportunity for my hon. colleague, me, and perhaps other interested members to meet with members of the recently arrived communities of new Canadians. The problem men tioned is certainly a significant problem for the Vietnamese community, but it's also a problem for some other communities of new Canadian arrivals. Certainly if we're going to extend a helping hand, we'll extend it to all the communities that need such assistance. MR. SHRAKE: That is an excellent suggestion.

May 31, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 1159 A supplementary question to the Minister of Manpower. I understand there are some programs, funds, and so on available through Manpower. I wonder if it would be possible, if our good ministers of Advanced Education and Education get some thing going, for him to also participate or maybe put some of his good funding in there to assist along this line, not just with the Vietnamese but all our new Canadians that need to learn to speak English. MR. ISLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I would be quite prepared to par ticipate with the other departments involved and with the vol unteer groups that are working in our settlement services in addressing this problem. MR. SHRAKE: Thank you very much. Workers' Compensation Report MR. COOK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could direct what is really a supplementary question to the Minister responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compensation. It is with regard to the report tabled yesterday by the select committee.

Could the minister indicate what changes there will be in the super- assessment and merit rebate policies and when we might see those changes take place? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, it is expected that the changes the select committee recommended would be available for employers and other groups to peruse sometime in the summer of 1985, with all hope to have them in place about January 1, 1986. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Special Guests? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS (reversion) MR. WOO: Mr.

Speaker, it is my pleasure, again on behalf of my hon. colleague the Member for Peace River and Minister of Tourism and Small Business, to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, 50 grade 6 students from Glenmary school, which is situated in the town of Peace River. They are accompanied by their teachers Mrs. Lucy Del- meida. Miss Teresa Murphy, Mr. Maurice Laurin; parents Mrs. Barrett, Mrs. Tremblay, Mrs. Brosseau, Mrs. Laurin, and Mr. Gall. They are also accompanied by Mr. Schollen, the chairman of the Peace River separate school board, and his wife Mrs. Schollen.

They are seated in the members gallery, and I ask that they rise and receive the welcome of this House. head: MOTIONS FOR RETURNS 179. Mr. R.

Speaker moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the cost to the government of Alberta to provide vehicles for members of Executive Council and Mem bers of the Alberta Legislative Assembly, including (1) the purchase price of the vehicles, (2) the repair and maintenance cost of the vehicles. (3) the registration and insurance cost of the vehicles, (4) any additions or alterations to the vehicles, and (5) the cost of chauffeurs or any other part-time drivers. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, this is virtually identical to Retum No. 216, which I tabled yesterday.

It's clearly super fluous and redundant, because the information has already been provided. So to avoid the superfluous aspect of it, I urge the Assembly to defeat the motion. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. member conclude the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, in concluding the debate, I have only this to say: it sometimes takes so long for these motions for returns to get here that you have to send a second missile to sort of create a little excitement on the other side of the House so we get them back. MR. MARTIN: And it's always such good information. MR. R.

SPEAKER: Right, it's beautiful information. I mean, this is only $20,000. That's about six days of living high on the hog by government. When it doesn't come, I want to hasten the work getting here so we'll cut back on a few costs in government that are unnecessary, that don't supply jobs. Cer tainly the wineries appreciate it. MR. NOTLEY: Yes, but that's from Europe. MR. R. SPEAKER: Right. If the emphasis is going to be on foreign wine, it isn't going to do much for the 150,000 people who walk the streets of Alberta. That's very, very true. Mr.

Speaker, I want to conclude this debate by saying I may even bring it back again if the answer isn't quite adequate, and reword it a little so the government comes clean and gives all. But at this moment I'll accept the Provincial Treasurer's opinion that maybe we should set this aside, because I have some information from yesterday and we'll go from there. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: I'm just trying to construe the hon. member's concluding remarks, in which he purported to agree with the suggestion of the Provincial Treasurer that we set this aside.

Does that mean a withdrawal of the motion, or do we put it to a vote? MR. R. SPEAKER: To a vote. [Motion lost] 180. Mr. R.

Speaker moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a list of all expenditures approved by the Treasury Board with respect to hospitality and entertainment expenses paid during the period January 1 to March 31, 1983, itemizing for each event: (1) the meal served; (2) how many attended; (3) the names of those attending, where known; (4) the offices of those attending, where known; (5) the group names of those attending, where known; (6) the amount of liquor served at each event; (7) the brand names of all the liquor served at each event; and

1160 ALBERTA HANSARD May 31, 1984 (8) the cost of each type of bottle. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, again, this is superfluous and redundant because the information was provided in Return No. 215, which was tabled yesterday. It's moved by the same hon. member and covers the same time period, so again it should be defeated. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I think the Provincial Treasurer has made a good point, and I intend to vote against this motion. But I do want to offer an observation. I think it's worth noting that the hon. Member for Little Bow did a great service with the motion. I am not surprised that the hon.

Provincial Treasurer was so sour and downcast when he had to table the information yesterday and make reference to the cost involved both yes terday and again today. But the information is certainly impor tant for the public domain in Alberta. Perhaps it cost $15,000 to obtain it, but I think there's probably at least $1 million worth of public information that the people need to know, about the way in which this government is squandering their funds. I can well appreciate the testiness on the part of government, having to cough up some useful information.

I just want to say that while I think this particular motion is not necessary, the hon. Member for Little Bow is to be commended for digging out a little bit of useful information, prying it out of this government. While they were not happy in the process of delivering it, I for one would be quite prepared to defend, on any platform anywhere in the province, the funds necessary to obtain this kind of information, so the public knows exactly what's going on as far as entertainment expend itures are concerned. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. member conclude the debate? MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, certainly the motion should be voted on. The point emphasized here is that sometimes the only way we get a report from government is by requesting it more than once. I have now, on the second or third occasion, said to the Premier that I'd like more ministerial statements. I think that's a very important item on our agenda, because with a ministerial statement we could have justified this expenditure of over $1 million on entertainment expenses in the fiscal year '83-84.

After some of these important meetings which are supposedly developing the future of the economy of Alberta, we should have some kind of report. The minister should be able to come back and say, we agreed on this point, or this is the progress on the issue with regard to the environment in Alberta, or this is the report on the issue with regard to Senate reform in Canada. Certainly the Minister of Federal and Inter governmental Affairs agrees with me on this and has made some reports to the committee as well as commented in this Legislature. I appreciate that, but I think it's a good example for other ministers.

Following a massive expenditure, a report should come back. For example, the expenditures of the Department of Public Works. Supply and Services are in here. The hon. Mr. Cham bers spent over $32,000 on entertainment at a function in Banff. At one dinner, for example, there were 42 bottles of spirits, 10 bottles of wine, and 120 bottles of beer — that's 10 dozen bottles of beer. That's one session. If that didn't loosen some minds, nothing did. But did we have a report back to this Legislature on what was determined and what came out of those meetings? Mr. Speaker, we didn't.

That urges us in this Assembly and on this side of the House, to rewrite the question, resubmit it and ask for more infor mation, which we have done. That's the reason for Motion 180 on the Order Paper at the present time. There are many other examples, but I don't care to go through the rest of them here at this point. The motions are necessary; they are part of accountability.

If it's a priority of government in the deter mination and the building of policy through hospitality and entertainment expenses, then the least we should get back in here are ministerial statements or some type of format that is a better reporting session. Ministers do not take advantage of the budget speeches as much as they should. There's an opportunity where reporting on this kind of thing could happen. It doesn't happen in a full and formal way. Some ministers make opening statements, but that doesn't make a full report on some of the policy devel opment that's going on.

I think ministers should take the oppor tunity in the throne debate and report back to the House. It doesn't happen in this government. In a former government I was in, one of the requirements of the ministers was to report to the House in a formal manner in either of those debates. This government has forgotten about that in its relationship between the Assembly and the general public. Mr. Speaker, we go this route and ask for these kinds of motions and will continue to do that, even though this one may be defeated because we already have the information. MR.

SPEAKER: I must say that although I'm going to put the question, I have some doubt as to whether it's in order or just a waste of time of the House to put a motion which asks for information that's already been given. However, giving it the benefit of the doubt for the time being and without creating a precedent, I'll ask for the members in favour of Motion for a Return No. 180 to please say "aye" and those opposed to please say "no". [Motion lost] 181. Mr. R.

Speaker moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a retum showing the titles of and the preparation and pub lishing cost of each report or study prepared in conjunction with the preparation of the Kananaskis Provincial Park, as well as the names of each author or authors, the names of the persons or companies awarded contracts to prepare the studies or reports, the dates the government announced it was accepting tenders, and the dates each report or study tender was accepted by the government. [Motion carried] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, hon. members of the oppo sition and other members of the Assembly have agreed that private members' business this afternoon might be set aside in order to proceed with government business, and the first motion to be called is Motion No. 11. head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS 11. Moved by Mr. Crawford:

Be it resolved that when the Assembly adjourns for the summer recess, it shall stand adjourned until a time and date prior to the commencement of the Third Session of the Legislature deter mined by Mr. Speaker after consultation with the Lieutenant Governor in Council. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, this is the adjournment motion relative to the fall sitting.

May 31, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 1161 MR. NOTLEY: I just want to make several comments on Motion No. 11. Mr. Speaker, for the first several sessions when fall sittings of the House were held, I'm sure you will recall that in 1972 and 1973 — and it may have been for even another year or two after that, but at least for the first several years — the motion for adjournment in the spring set out the time that the fall session would commence. What we're dealing with today is a motion which will allow the Speaker to set the time after consultation with the Lieutenant Governor in Council. Mr.

Speaker, I just want to make it clear that all members of the House are equal, and it would be unfortunate if we in the opposition were not given immediate notice of the decision as to when the fall sitting is to occur. We have schedules to meet and plans to make, the same as government members, the same as you. When we had the date set in the adjournment motion, people could plan around it,

whereas now we are delegating that power, and have done for some time, to the Lieutenant Governor in Council and the Speaker. I simply want to say, on behalf of opposition members in the House, that should this motion be passed, as I presume it will, I hope that when the determination is made, we are advised immediately and don't find out about it accidentally some time afterwards. MR. SPEAKER: By no means do I wish to enter into a debate with the hon.

Leader of the Opposition, but I'd like to assure him that although in the past few years the notice itself has not said when the decision was reached, the notice has in fact gone out at once. There has been no delay that I'm aware of in the Speaker's office in sending out the notice immediately to all members. In fact in some years — and I propose to do that this year — the notice has been ready before the decision has been reached, so it could go out immediately by just filling in the date. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, if I might close debate by adding a few words. I also want to indicate to the hon.

Leader of the Opposition that it seems to me — I don't think he disagrees with it — that the timing of the session is a matter the government must determine. That's done when a session is commenced. It's the Lieutenant Governor's proclamation that creates a new session, and an adjourned session perhaps is similar. The only reason there is no specific date is that that takes away flexibility. That occurred to members of the Executive Council a few years ago, and that's why a motion more along these lines was then adopted.

If there was a sudden exigency that required the attention of hon. members, this would allow the sittings to be called back sooner if necessary. [Motion carried] 13. Moved by Mr. Crawford:

Be it resolved that (1) the Standing Committee of the Legislative Assembly on Law and Regulations take under consideration, in general terms, the reports issued by the Institute of Law Research and Reform and report to the Legislative Assembly as to which of the reports of the institute the committee rec ommends be referred to it for detailed study.

(2) The committee shall report to the Legislative Assembly no later than the second Monday of the fall sittings of the 1984 session. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, the explanation hon. mem bers might want to have with respect to this motion is that over the years the Institute of Law Research and Reform has of course been producing reports. I believe the institute has been in existence for well over a decade now and has produced something in excess of 40 reports on legal research.

In the course of a meeting with the board of directors of the institute some months ago, the question came up as to how members or staff at the institute might have a somewhat closer liaison with other members of the Assembly, in addition to myself as their normal contact point. Out of that discussion came the suggestion that perhaps the committee on law and regulations could have a part to play, and that is reflected in Motion No. 13. [Motion carried] 14. Moved by Mr. Crawford:

Be it resolved that the membership of the Select Standing Com mittee on the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Act be amended by adding Mr. Alger and Mr. Cook. MR. CRAWFORD: At the present time there are 13 members on the Select Standing Committee on the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund, and the legislation allows for 15. The thought implicit in the motion is that the committee should not have to get along any longer without the assistance of the hon. Member for Highwood and the hon.

Member for Edmonton Glengarry. [Motion carried] head: GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Third Reading) [It was moved by the members indicated that the following Bills be read a third time, and the motions were carried| No. Title Moved by 45 Medical Care Statutes Russell Amendment Act, 1984 49 Appropriation (Alberta Hyndman Heritage Savings Trust Fund, Capital Projects Division) Act, 1984-85 (No. 2) Bill 54 Chiropractic Profession Act MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I would like to move third reading of Bill No. 54, the Chiropractic Profession Act.

Hon. members will be aware that in a question period in the Assembly last week, I was asked whether or not concern had been expressed to me about this legislation, particularly whether or not such concern had been expressed by any mem bers of the profession. I answered at that time that some concern had been expressed and that in my view it was not directed against the legislation but was a concern about the professional development of chiropractic in the province and the future of the Chiropractic Association.

I am pleased to report that a meeting was held in my office last Tuesday afternoon, involving four of the chiropractors in the province who had expressed concern about the legislation and a lawyer who was representing their interests. As a result of what was an extensive meeting, I am satisfied that the great majority of professional chiropractors in the province are sup portive of the Bill. I am satisfied that such concern as is

1162 ALBERTA HANSARD May 31, 1984 expressed can and will be dealt with in and by the professional association and that the expressed concerns do not reflect in any significant way on the principles and contents of the Bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 54 read a third time] Bill 207 Remembrance Day Act MR. R. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague the hon.

Member for Lethbridge West, I move third reading of Bill 207. [Motion carried; Bill 207 read a third time] head: PRIVATE BILLS (Third Reading) jit was moved by the members indicated that the following Bills be read a third time, and the motions were carried] No. Title Moved by Pr. 4 Dino Alberto Knott Adoption Koper Termination Act Pr. 6 Concordia Lutheran Seminary Stiles Act (for Szwender) Pr. 7 Newman Theological College Stiles Amendment Act, 1984 (for Hiebert) Pr. 8 George Harold Sibbeston R.

Moore Adoption Act Pr. 10 Edmonton Research and Stiles Development Park Authority (for Hiebert) Amendment Act. 1984 Pr. 11 Edmonton Convention Centre Stiles Authority Amendment Act, 1984 (for Hiebert) Pr. 12 Alberta Association of Musgrove Municipal Districts and Counties Amendment Act. 1984 [On motion, the Assembly resolved itself into Committee of the Whole] [Mr. Purdy in the Chair] head: PRIVATE BILLS (Committee of the Whole) Bill Pr. 1 Central Trust Company and Crown Trust Company Act MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Are there any amendments, questions, or comments to be offered with respect to any

section of this Bill? [Title and

preamble agreed to] MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Would the hon. Member for Edmonton Whitemud like to report the Bill? MR. ALEXANDER: I move that the Bill be reported. [Motion carried] Bill Pr. 3 Foothills Christian College Act MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Are there any amendments, com ments, or questions to be offered with respect to any

section of this Act? [Title and

preamble agreed to] MR. STILES: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my colleague the hon. Member for Calgary North Hill, I move that Bill Pr. 3 be reported. [Motion carried] Bill Pr. 5 Alberta Savings & Trust Company Act MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: There's an amendment which amends the name of the Bill to read Pacific Security Savings & Trust Company Act. Are there any questions or comments to be offered with respect to the amendment? [Motion on amendment carried] [Title and

preamble agreed to] MR. ALEXANDER: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Bill be reported as amended. [Motion carried] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee rise and report. [Motion carried] [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] MR. PURDY: Mr. Chairman, the Committee of the Whole has had under consideration and reports Bills Pr. 1 and Pr. 3, and reports Bill Pr. 5 with some amendments. MR. SPEAKER: Having heard the report, do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take the remaining step with respect to the three private Bills that have just been in committee and have them read a third time. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Assembly agree with the motion to call the third readings? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: It is so ordered. head: PRIVATE BILLS (Third Reading) Bill Pr. 1 Central Trust Company and Crown Trust Company Act MR. ALEXANDER: Mr. Speaker, I move third reading of Bill Pr. 1, Central Trust Company and Crown Trust Company Act. [Motion carried; Bill Pr. 1 read a third time]

May 31, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 1163 Bill Pr. 3 Foothills Christian College Act MR. OMAN: Mr. Speaker, contrary to what may have been thought, I am present. I will move third reading of Bill Pr. 3, the Foothills Christian College Act. [Motion carried; Bill Pr. 3 read a third time] Bill Pr. 5 Pacific Security Savings & Trust Company Act MR. ALEXANDER: Mr. Speaker, I move third reading of Bill Pr. 5, Pacific Security Savings & Trust Company Act. [Motion carried; Bill Pr. 5 read a third time] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, His Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor will now attend upon the Assembly. [Mr.

Speaker left the Chair] head: ROYAL ASSENT SERGEANT-AT-ARMS: Order! His Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor. [The Honourable Frank Lynch-Staunton, Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, took his place upon the Throne] MR. SPEAKER: May it please Your Honour, the Legislative Assembly has, at its present sittings, passed certain Bills to which, in the name of the Legislative Assembly, I respectfully request Your Honour's assent. CLERK: Your Honour, the following are the titles of the Bills to which Your Honour's assent is prayed: No.

Title 1 Students Loan Guarantee Amendment Act, 1984 2 Agricultural Chemicals Amendment, Act, 1984 3 Emblems of Alberta Amendment Act, 1984 4 Municipal Land Loans Repeal Act 5 Young Offenders Act 7 Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 1984 8 Legislative Assembly Amendment Act, 1984 9 Senior Citizens Housing Amendment Act, 1984 10 Fur Farms Amendment Act, 1984 11 Municipal Financing Statutes Amendment Act, 1984 12 Co-operative Marketing Associations and Rural Utilities Guarantee Amendment Act, 1984 13 Planning Amendment Act, 1984 14 Pipeline Amendment Act, 1984 15 Agricultural Pests Act 16 Stray Animals Amendment Act, 1984 17 Cancer Programs Amendment Act. 1984 18 Department of Energy and Natural Resources Amendment Act, 1984 19 Fuel Oil Administration Amendment Act, 1984 20 Universities Amendment Act, 1984 21 Insurance Amendment Act, 1984 23 Hospitals and Medical Care Statutes Amendment Act. 1984 24 Employment Standards Amendment Act, 1984 25 Public Health Act No.

Title 26 Veterinary Profession Act 30 Queen's Counsel Amendment Act, 1984 31 Financial Administration Amendment Act, 1984 32 Government Land Purchases Amendment Act, 1984 33 Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Amendment Act. 1984 34 Corporation Statutes Amendment Act, 1984 35 Child Welfare Act 36 Mines and Minerals Amendment Act, 1984 37 Oil Sands Technology and Research Authority Amendment Act, 1984 38 Public Lands Amendment Act, 1984 39 Pension Statutes Amendment Act, 1984 41 Alberta Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act 42 Alberta Corporate Income Tax Amendment Act, 1984 43 Alberta Income Tax Amendment Act, 1984 44 Appropriation Act, 1984 45 Medical Care Statutes Amendment Act, 1984 46 Engineering, Geological and Geophysical Professions Amendment Act, 1984 47 Alberta Art Foundation Amendment Act, 1984 48 Cultural Foundations Amendment Act, 1984 49 Appropriation (Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund, Capital Projects Division) Act, 1984-85 (No. 2) 50 Law of Property Amendment Act, 1984 51 Small Business Equity Corporations Act 52 Real Estate Agents' Licensing Amendment Act, 1984 53 Rural Electrification Statutes Amendment Act, 1984 54 Chiropractic Profession Act 207 Remembrance Day Act Pr.

I Central Trust Company and Crown Trust Company Act Pr. 3 Foothills Christian College Act Pr. 4 Dino Alberto Knott Adoption Termination Act Pr. 5 Pacific Security Savings & Trust Company Act Pr. 6 Concordia Lutheran Seminary Act Pr. 7 Newman Theological College Amendment Act, 1984 Pr. 8 George Harold Sibbeston Adoption Act Pr. 10 Edmonton Research and Development Park Authority Amendment Act, 1984 Pr. 11 Edmonton Convention Centre Authority Amendment Act, 1984 Pr. 12 Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties Amendment Act, 1984 [The Lieutenant Governor indicated his assent| CLERK: In Her Majesty's name, His Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor doth assent to these Bills.

HIS HONOUR: Mr. Speaker, members of the Legislature: By all accounts and the number of Bills, you've had a very busy session. It's nice that you've finished it up by June 1 so you'll pretty well be able to have the summer in your consti tuencies. I don't expect you to work all the time there. I hope you take time off to have a little fun. I'm not going to take any more of your time. Thank you for your efforts, and God bless you all. SERGEANT-AT-ARMS: Order! [The Lieutenant Governor left the House] [Mr. Speaker in the Chair]

1164 ALBERTA HANSARD May 31,1984 MR. SPEAKER: Please be seated. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I move that the Assembly now adjourn in accordance with Motion No. 11, passed earlier today. [Motion carried] [The House adjourned at 4:08 p.m.]

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19840531
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L20 S2 19840531 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	f0a4de8bc3910f5c204c2cb2365f608089ea29f5

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