Alberta Hansard — 5 May 2005, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 26, Session 1)

20050505

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1301 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, May 5, 2005 1:30 p.m. Date: 05/05/05 [Preceded by the Sergeant-at-Arms, the Speaker, accompanied by the officers of the Assembly and Commodore Doug Learoyd, Squadron Leader Mr. Justice Sam Lieberman, and Captain Stu Lindop, entered the Chamber and took his place in the chair] [Commodore Learoyd, Squadron Leader Mr. Justice Lieberman, and Captain Lindop took their places at the bar] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon and welcome. Let us pray.

On this day we give thanks for those who on land, at sea, or in the air served sovereign, country, province, and the cause of freedom 60 and more years ago. We ask for blessings on all here present. Especially we remember our war dead: those for whom there is no known grave, those who lie in fields world-wide, and those whose bodies were committed to oceans deep. We give praise and glory to all who served and for all that they did both in our name and for generations yet unborn. For service and sacrifice, we are eternally grateful. We will never forget.

For those who served and did not return, would you please remember them in a minute of silence. Amen. Please be seated. 60th Anniversary of Victory in Europe Day Address to the Assembly on Behalf of Armed Forces The Speaker: Hon. members, 60 years ago yesterday at 11 p.m. a signal from Canadian Army main headquarters in Europe was dispatched. It read: “All operations cancelled forthwith. Cease fire 0800, 5 May 1945. All units stand fast until further orders.” After five long and bloody years the war in Europe was effectively over.

The peace was signed three days later, and victory in Europe was officially declared. Unfortunately, the conflict in the Far East was to continue until August 1945. In the members’ and the public galleries today is a representative group of Alberta veterans of the Second World War. The flags above the Speaker’s dias – the Red Ensign, the Royal Canadian naval ensign, and the ensign of the Royal Canadian Air Force – are those under which they served. In the Speaker’s gallery are Honorary Colonel Stanley A.

Milner of the South Alberta Light Horse Regiment; Honorary Colonel Sandy Mactaggart, the Loyal Edmonton Regiment; Mr. Robert Whitley, president, 700 (Edmonton) Wing of the Air Force Associa- tion of Canada; Mrs. Lenore Schwabe, vice-president, Alberta- Northwest Territories Command of the Royal Canadian Legion; Mr. Darryl MacLeod, president, Naval Officers Association; Honorary Colonel Bart West, 408 Helicopter Squadron; Reverend Canon Tom McKnight, past president of the Army, Navy, Air Force Veterans Association. May I ask all of these great Canadians to rise. [standing ovation] Thank you. You may be seated.

Hon. members and ladies and gentlemen, at the Bar in the Chamber are three very distinguished Albertans and Canadians. Each represents their former service. I’ll ask them to rise. At my left is Commodore Doug Learoyd of the Royal Canadian Navy Volunteer Reserve, who saw service in His Majesty’s Canadian ship Poundmaker on convoy duties in the North Atlantic in 1944 and 1945. In the centre is Captain Stu Lindop, South Alberta Regiment, Canadian Army, who was wounded by a sniper on October 12, 1944, at Bergen op Zoom in the Netherlands. On my right is Squadron Leader the Honourable Mr.

Justice Sam Lieberman, who at age 18, in 1940, joined the Royal Canadian Air Force. He gained his wings in 1941. Subsequently he completed two operational tours, one in England and Gibraltar and the other in Aden in the Middle East with Number 8 Squadron, Royal Air Force. In inviting these three distinguished gentlemen onto the floor of this Assembly, this House confers its heartfelt gratitude, admiration, and its deepest respect to all who served. It is the pleasure of this Assembly to now invite Squadron Leader Lieberman, on behalf of all this province’s veterans of the Second World War, to give his remarks.

Justice Lieberman. Mr. Justice Lieberman: Mr. Speaker, Members of the Legislative Assembly of the province of Alberta, Commodore Learoyd, Captain Lindop, fellow veterans. Thank you for granting me the privilege of addressing you on the occasion of your commemoration of the 60th anniversary of VE Day. It is indeed fitting that the year 2005, a year that has been designated and declared as the Year of the Veteran, be recognized in this manner.

I come before you as a proud veteran of the Royal Canadian Air Force who today is beset with the mixed emotions of pride, humility, and sorrow combined with a sense of satisfaction in our hard-won victory: pride in having been given the privilege of addressing you on the eve of the 60th anniversary of VE Day on behalf of all those courageous Canadians who voluntarily and unselfishly volunteered to serve in the Allied Forces in World War II, humi lity in the knowledge of my minuscule contribution to that great victory, and sorrow that so many paid the u ltimate sacrifice in achieving that victory. 1:40 Great Britain’s declaration of war on September 3, 1939, brought into sharp focus the threat to our way of life posed by the oppressive and tyrannical policies of the fascist European powers.

Our freedom-loving nation recognized that threat and, although not obligated by Commonwealth membership to do so, independently declared war on Nazi Germany on September 10, 1939. We were then a nation of only 11 million, perhaps 12 million people, but in the ensuing five years over 1 million of our citizens, including 45,000 women and 3,000 members of our aboriginal people, volunteered to serve in our armed forces. Tragically, 45,000 of those volunteers were killed and 55,000 were maimed or seriously injured.

Although the majority of the volunteers served in the Royal Canadian Navy, the Royal Canadian Army, or the Royal Canadian Air Force, the navies, armies, and air forces of our allies were replete with members of the Canadian armed services. Our citizen volun- teers served in all theatres of the European and Pacific war and following VE Day continued to serve in the Pacific theatre, where victory was achieved on August 14, 1945, VJ Day. I must also mention the Merchant Marine, that often ignored but highly important arm of the Allied Forces in which many Canadians gallantly served.

Those of our citizens who were not in the armed services kept the engines of industry producing those materials necessary to support our war effort. In the broad sense of the term they, too, are veterans and deserving of our thanks. Mr. Speaker, in my opening remarks I referred to the emotion of sorrow. I shall always have a deep sense of sorrow and regret that so many lives were lost or maimed in achieving victory. I leave you with this sobering thought.

It is the Allied victory in World War II, to which our veterans contributed so much, that has made it possible for us to live in freedom under the rule of law in a country governed

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051302 by the principles of democracy. Your assembly here today in this magnificent Chamber is proof that our veterans’ sacrifices were not in vain. It is this fact that gi ves me satisfaction in so costly a victory. Please join with me in paying tribute to all veterans who through the years have served our nation in two world wars, in Korea, and in peacekeeping missions throughout the world. How sad it is that so many of them did not live to see this day. [applause] The Speaker: Squadron Leader Lieberman, thank you very much.

Please know that on behalf of all of the men and women of this Assembly and all of the men and women of this province, we are indeed truly eternally grateful for you and your comrades for what you did for us. Mr. Hancock: Victory in Europe. What joy those cries must have raised for the men and women at arms, for the people of Holland and the rest of Europe, and for the families at home: the mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, those waiting and hoping for the safe return of loved ones. Victory in Europe.

I don’t believe any of us on the floor as members were there, but we represent over 3 million Albertans who owe their freedom and liberty to those who were. Each and every one of us has our own family chronicle, our own connection, and each and every one of us was affected, touched in some way by the long march to that day. Victory in Europe. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the hon. the Premier, the government, and all members to commemorate one of the most glorious and most solemn events in Canadian history. On Sunday people around the world will join together to remember and celebrate victory in Europe.

Victory in Europe came on May 8, 1945, when Allied forces, many of them from Alberta, liberated the Netherlands and helped bring the horrors of the Second World War to an end. It is particularly fitting that we stand today on this day of Yom ha-Shoah to celebrate the defeat of tyranny and genocide. On that day 60 years ago the people of Europe shed tears of joy, hope, and relief as these soldiers did th eir grim work. They thank these soldiers for their bravery and their sacrifices on their behalf. Today, six decades later, all of humanity thanks those soldiers, those armed forces, once again.

We thank them for their dedication to a cause that stirs us today as much as it stirred them 60 years ago, we thank the spirits of the soldiers who died on that day and on all the other horrible days that the war raged throughout Europe, and we remember the many veterans who returned home from the war but have since passed on. My father, Richard Hancock, just newly married, left our home in Fort Vermilion in northern Alberta and volunteered for service. He went on to become a navigator in the Canadian armed forces as well as being an instructor before being posted to England.

As an instructor he never was required to fly into battle over Europe, but like so many Albertans he stepped forward to answer the call of duty and was one of the truly fortunate who were able to return home, unlike so many young men, and then begin to build a family and a life. Victory in Europe Day marks the end of a conflict the size and violence of which has no match in history. In World War II approximately 78,000 Albertans served the Allied cause. Of those, over 3,300 did not return from the battlefield.

All of these brave soldiers, along with many, many others from Canada, risked everything for the most noble of causes: the right of people to live in peace, dignity, and freedom. I was reminded by Captain Stu Lindop just before coming in that the South Alberta Regiment won the only Victoria Cross won by any of the Canadian armed regi- ments during the Second World War. Thankfully, there are over 22,500 World War II veterans from Alberta who are still with us. We are truly honoured by those of you who could join us as guests today. In Canada 2005 is being marked as the Year of the Veteran.

It is a year during which Canadians remember the contributions of the country’s veterans and extend a hand of friendship and gratitude to veterans in their communities. One opportunity to learn more about the contributions of Albertans is the upcoming Alberta Centennial Tattoo. That tattoo is being held at Rexall Place from July 21 to 24. Members of the Legislature and veterans invited by members will be attending on the afternoon of the 24th. It’s a unique production that tells the stories of Alberta’s soldiers and veterans as well as police officers. That tattoo, Mr.

Speaker, will be a stunning tribute to those who have protected Albertans over the last 100 years and is a most appropriate event in the Year of the Veteran and the 60th anniver- sary of VE Day. In Alberta we all owe an immeasurable debt of gratitude to our province’s veterans. Though 60 years have passed since the end of the Second World War, the drama, the horror, the sacrifice of that global conflict continues to inspire generations of Albertans. In that war and on Victory in Europe Day in 1945 Albertan forces did us proud.

They proved with their hearts that freedom is worth fighting for, and many of them proved with their lives that the fight can often only be won at great cost. Today the fruits of those sacrifices continue to bless us. The freedom that we enjoy to assemble in this House and the freedom our families enjoy to pursue their dreams stem directly from what those soldiers did 60 years ago on the battlefields of Europe. We as members of this Assembly have the privilege to serve, a privilege we are reminded of each day as we enter the rotunda with its memorials, because our fathers and mothers answered that call.

To those soldiers, to those armed forces, a nd to their families we say thank you. Their courage reminds us all that we must never take our freedoms for granted. Those veterans certainly did not. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 1:50 The Speaker: Thank you, sir. May I now call on the hon. Leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition I am honoured to be part of this very special ceremony in the Assembly today to commemorate the 60th anniver- sary of Victory in Europe Day.

We are proud to remember those Canadians both past and present who were part of the long fight and struggle that finally resulted in the surrender and defeat of the Nazi military forces in Europe. It was May 8, 1945, when Winston Churchill declared Victory in Europe Day, soon shortened to VE Day. Instrumental in accom- plishing this victory was the lib eration of the Netherlands, which was completed on May 5, 1945, exactly 60 years ago today, when German forces surrendered to the First Canadian Corps in Holland.

More than 7,600 Canadians gave their lives for the liberation of the Netherlands, most of whom are buried in Canadian war cemeteries in Holland. In 1939, when Canada joined the A llied Forces, our population was about 11 millio n people. By the end of the war 1.1 m illion Canadians, a full 10 per cent of our population at the time, enlisted to serve in World War II. Over 42,000 Canadians were killed in World War II, 55,000 were wounded, 9,000 suffered as prisoners of war in conditions that deteriorated as the war dragged on, and

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1303 countless thousands, tens of thousands of others, were emotionally and psychologically scarred for life. Like many of us here, my parents threw themselves into the war effort. My father served in the RCAF, and my mother did civilian service, so I grew up hearing the stories about the war first-hand. For people of my generation, so many of us who grew up with a shadow of the war from our parents’ generation, it is our responsibil- ity to pass on these stories and memories.

It’s very important that subsequent generations know about and remember the sacrifices that were made by so many Canadian men and women during World War II. So please join me in thanking Justice Sam Lieberman, represent- ing the air force, Captain Stu Lindop, representing the army, and Commodore Douglas Learoyd, representing the navy, for being here today. Also, please join me in honouring all of the veterans here today to represent and commemorate the energy, effort, and sacrifices made by Canadians to achieve the end of the war. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Thank you, sir. May I now call on the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is with great humility that I rise today on behalf of the New Democrat caucus to pay tribute to the men and women who contributed to the liberation of Europe from Nazi occupation 60 years ago. Canada was there to stand and fight in Europe right from the beginning. By the time peace was finally won, over 1 million Canadians had served in the armed forces or the merchant navy; 47,000 of these brave men and women gave their lives.

As Canadians we can be truly proud of those who put their lives on the line to defend their own country and to liberate others. The wartime efforts of such people, including the honoured guests that are here today, should act as a benchmark for the greatness we seek to achieve in our own lives. I’m constantly amazed at the accom- plishments that can be achieved by people placed in extraordinary circumstances. These Canadian men and women who helped to liberate Europe volunteered to give up their regular lives to fight for freedom, for justice, for security, and ultimately for peace.

Their efforts are etched as one of the most proud moments in Canadian history. When the First World War ended, that war to end all wars, the world looked at the devastation that had been wrought and etched the solemn vow of “never again” on cenotaphs across the world. But a firestorm of hatred and greed rose again in Europe and in the Far East, and humanity was compelled to stand and fight again. It is the duty of all of us who live today to ensure that the world will not descend into the chaos and destruction of global conflict.

If we could fight half as hard as those who liberated Holland but for peace, equality, and compassion for others, then we might do these veterans proud. We honour the men and women who stepped forward to liberate Europe from those dark years of World War II. We celebrate their victories, mourn their losses, and express above all our thanks. The Speaker: Thank you, sir. May I now call on the hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, honoured guests, and visitors. It is a humbling honour to be present and to pay tribute to such a heroic group of individuals.

With my heart full of gratitude to each of those who sacrificed so much and to those who have sacrificed their lives, we truly owe our remembrance of them. May we make sure that we always do remember them and those who did give their lives for our freedom and that we may guard it with all our heart, might, mind, and body that we might pass it on to future generations. They gave their lives for us, and may we guard it and always remember them. Thank you.

The Speaker: To all of our honourable guests today, our veterans, it’s customary in this Assembly when we want to give recognition for the members to remain at their desks and to pound those desks. I will now invite my colleagues to do it one more time. [standing ovation] I’d invite my colleagues in the Assembly to remain standing, and all of you, ladies and gentlemen, if we would all rise, now I’m going to invite a young lady who is one of our tour guides, Colleen Vogel, to lead us all together in the singing of our national anthem. Please join in in the language of your choice. Hon.

Members: O Canada, our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command. With glowing hearts we see thee rise, The True North strong and free! From far and wide, O Canada, We stand on guard for thee. God keep our land glorious and free! O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. The Speaker: Please be seated. To our honoured guests, we thank you very, very much for participating with us today. We are now going to begin our daily Routine, which will go until 5:30 this afternoon.

That may be more punishment than any of you would want to endure, but please feel free to stay as long as you wish to see the fruits of your efforts some 60 years ago now translated into democracy in this Assembly. Thank you very much. head: 2:00 Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Education. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s indeed a pleasure for me to rise today to introduce to you and through you two very special guests in the members’ gallery. Sam Farberman is a grade 3 student from Onoway. He is 8 years old, and he’s a tremendous worker and a great student.

His father, Frank Farberman, is a long-time, very close friend of mine who owns and operates Direct Work Wear, a business in my constituency. They are proud members of a great team. I would ask now if they would please rise in the members’ gallery and receive the warm applause from all the members here. They’re just behind the line up there. Welcome.

The Speaker: Hon. members, in addition to the honoured guests that we have here today we do have groups of students from Jean Vanier elementary school, Glenwood school, the Alberta College and Technical Institute Students’ Executive Council, Bow Valley College, and representatives from the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees. I’d ask them all to rise so that the hon. members can recognize them all. The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m extremely honoured to

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051304 rise today and introduce to you and through you three guests seated in the public gallery: Claudia Villeneuve, her son, Nicholas Villeneuve, and their friend Denise Iskiw. The two ladies represent two great pregnancy and childbirth support organizations based in our capital city. The first one is the Edmonton VBAC, or Vaginal Birth after Caesarean Support Association, a

chapter of the International Cesarean Awareness Network. This organization supports mothers who wish to avoid a Caesarean, mothers who are reco vering from a Caesarean, and mothers who wish to now give vaginal birth after their initial Caesarean delivery or deliveries. The second organization is ASAC, the Association for Safe Alternatives in Childbirth. They support informed consent during birth: home birth, water birth, midwifery care, doula care, and breastfeeding. They’re both volunteer-run organizations. They work very hard to increase awareness and to offer real choice for expectant mothers.

I want to thank them for helping organize the rally outside by the Legislature steps today, and I would ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a great pleasure to stand today and to introduce to you and through you to this Assem- bly a very special lady in my life: my mother, Marlys Hinman. She has been a pillar of strength and determination for me throughout my life. She has taught me to always believe you can achieve your dreams, and the only way you fail is to give up.

Her Canada centennial project, she always claimed, was MS, when she was diagnosed with it. There is nothing that would make her happier today than to be able to rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly, but I’ll ask her just to wave from her wheelchair in the gallery. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly three distinguished women who are part of the integration of midwifery services evaluation project.

They are Susan Beischel, an assistant professor at Mount Royal College in Calgary; Beverley O’Brien, who is currently a professor of nursing at the University of Alberta; and Susan Sommerfeldt, who is a member of the sessional faculty at the University of Alberta. Their report provides extensive evidence for why midwifery services should be funded in this province. I believe my guests are seated in the public gallery. I would now ask them to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to the Assembly four members of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees political action commit- tee: Ron Whan, AUPE vice-president; Bonnie Nahornick, committee member from Calgary; Don Westman, city councillor from Fort Saskatchewan; and Brad Smith, who’s a member from Edmonton. Could they please all rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would also like to acknowledge four members of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees.

The Speaker: I’ve already introduced them, hon. member. Sorry. I did a global introduction and included them all. Proceed. Mr. Chase: Thank you. With us today, hon. Speaker, are Carol Carbol of Edmonton, Jason Heistad, who is from Olds College and also an Innisfail town councillor; Cherelyn Stefaniszyn, who comes from Blackfalds and is also a town councillor; and David Climenhaga, who is the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees communications director, and he hails from St. Albert. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon.

Leader of the Official Opposition. Securities Commission Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today, right now, this govern- ment is sitting idly by as the Auditor General and the authority of this Legislature are being bullied by the Alberta Securities Commis- sion. My first question is to the Acting Premier. Can this minister explain what actions the government will be taking to support the Auditor General’s legislative aut hority to investigate fully the enforcement complaints threatening the confidence of Alberta’s capital markets? The Speaker: The hon. Acting Premier. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Auditor General is an officer of the Legislature and operates under the legislative authority granted to him by the Legislature. The Securities Commission is granted authority under its act under the Legislature. The two have differences of viewpoint about the interrelationship between their two acts and their authorities and have applied to the courts to have that difference of viewpoint resolved. That’s where people go when they have differences of viewpoint. That’s where people go when they need

interpretations of law. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you. Again to the Acting Premier: given that the longer the delay in getting to the roots of the ASC allegations the more the confidence in the Alberta market suffers, what steps are being taken by this government to ensure that the process is not delayed by long court procedures and petty bickering with ASC commissioners? The Speaker: The hon. Acting Premier. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We anticipate that an interim chairman of the commission will be appointed as early as this afternoon or perhaps tomorrow morning.

That interim chair will be fair, will be independent, will be someone who is new to the commission but strong, and will work out with the commissioners and the Auditor General the terms of audit if it’s at all possible to do so. The Speaker: The hon. leader.

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1305 Dr. Taft: Again to the Acting Premier: given that the Finance minister seems to have no interest in getting to the bottom of this investigation, will this minister please inform us as to which minister we should be asking to take the lead on this issue? The Speaker: The hon. Acting Premier. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Finance has been firm and strong on this issue from the very day that it’s been brought up in this House. She’s been keen to get to the bottom of the issue.

She’s asked the Auditor General to expedite the audit, and we’re going to do everything possible to support the process, including the appointment of an interim chair of the commission to deal with the issues quickly and thoroughly. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government has a lot to say about bullying in schools. Unfortunately, it has absolutely nothing to say about the bullying being done by the Alberta Securities Commission.

First, they’re accused of bullying their employees, and now they are bullying the Auditor General all the way to court. My questions are again to the Acting Premier. Given that the part-time commissioners and the chairman of the Alberta Securities Commis- sion are government appointed, why is the government allowing these individuals to bully them by taking an officer of the Legisla- ture to court? 2:10 Mr. Hancock: A strange question coming from the very member who questioned the credibility of the officer of the Legislature only two weeks ago and failed to apologize for that, as he should have. Mr.

Speaker, there are two independent groups involved here. The Auditor General, who operates under the authority granted by the Legislature as an officer of the Legislature, and the Securities Commission, which operates under

an act under authority granted by the Legislature. There are issues with respect to the control of information and documentation. Those issues have to be resolved. It’s appropriate to have those issues resolved. It would have been better if they were resolved by negotiation between the parties and understanding between the parties, but it’s also appropriate, where there are disputes, where there are questions that need to be resolved, to go to the courts, another independent party, to determine what the right procedure is. That’s not bullying.

That’s a process, and it’s a process which can happen expeditiously and appropriately. Dr. Taft: Again to the Acting Premier: given the bullying by the Alberta Securities Commission of the Auditor General, will this Conservative government now admit that the Mack report, which has outlined concerns of enforcement problems, may well in fact be true? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General is engaged to do an audit and do an audit under the appropriate circumstances.

Those circumstances, the scope of the audit, will be refined, and if there are concerns about how that’s refined, the courts will assist with refining the scope of the audit under the law, determining the appropriate processes, and the new interim chair of the commission will ensure that an independent thorough review is done of what has happened there. It’s well in hand, it’s proceeding, and it will happen in the interests of Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you.

To the same minister: given that the executive director of the ASC oversees enforcement cases at the commission and has the authority to see which enforcement cases are pursued, why does this same person have the power to decide if the Auditor General can investigate enforcement cases? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, the issues that are before the court are exactly that: what the authority of the Auditor General is with respect to the files and information, confidentialities, and other issues.

It’s appropriately before the court where there are issues of the determination of law, determination of scope of authority, and determination of scope of the audit. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Municipal Grants to Crowsnest Pass Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The municipality of Crowsnest Pass is being shortchanged by this government.

This government made a commitment specifically to this region: if they amalgamated, any funding, whether that is for policing or infrastruc- ture, would be delivered in the most cost-advantageous way to the municipality. Now this government is threatening to withhold funding unless a new agreement is signed. My first question is to the Solicitor General.

Given that the minister stated in his letter to the mayor of Crowsnest Pass that no policing grant funding will be provided until a grant agreement has been signed, can the minister explain why he is taking this intimidating tactic instead of working with officials from Crowsnest Pass to honour a previous agreement? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

As I mentioned yesterday to the hon. member, the Crowsnest Pass regulation deals only with the calculation of grants and is not applicable to the Police Act, which requires the province to pay for policing costs for certain municipalities. The letter that Crowsnest Pass got is exactly the same letter that the town of Ponoka, the town of Rocky Mountain House, the town of Peace River got. The exact same letter. The amounts are different in the fact that the municipal policing grants are based on a $200,000 grant and $8 per capita above 5,000 up to their population.

This is an opportunity for the town of Crowsnest Pass to look at the responsibility they have regarding providing policing to their community because of the fact that their population is over 5,000. Dr. B. Miller: To the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation: with respect to infrastructure grants, will the minister inform us if he will honour the agreement in place to provide infrastructure grants based upon the most cost-advantageous way to the region, or will he follow the Solicitor General’s tactic and threaten to withhold funding unless a new agreement is signed? Dr. Oberg: Yes. Dr. B. Miller: Okay.

I’ll try somebody else. To the Minister of Municipal Affairs: given what has happened with the Solicitor General, will the minister inform the people of Crowsnest Pass and this House if the tactic of forcing a municipality to sign new grant agreements that are absolutely not in the best interest of the people

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051306 is the preferred method of negotiation with municipalities by this government? The Speaker: Well, in about an hour from now we may get to the estimates of the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Very briefly now. Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, I’ll try and be brief.

Without reiterating what the Solicitor General has already said, I want to explain to the member that the Municipal Government Act and the regulations refer to grants that are provided to municipalities and do not refer to the situation with respect to policing, which is a partnership between the Solicitor General and municipalities. So there are two separate identities. Where the confusion is coming in is that policing used to be part of unconditional grants that were provided to municipalities that may or may not have been used for policing.

A couple of years ago some of the funds were transferred from Municipal Affairs to the Solicitor General, which were then topped up by the Solicitor General to provide conditional grants in the form of offsetting costs for policing, and that’s the difference, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker. Electricity Exports Mr. Eggen: Mr. Speaker, this government is quietly moving ahead with power exports to the American market even though it appears to have no plan to protect residential, farm, and small business consumers back here at home.

Electricity exports threaten to deplete our supply of natural gas, contribute to more coal-generated plants, and could have serious implications under the North American free trade agreement for our own energy reserves. My question is to the Minister of Energy. Given that there are so many outstanding questions on electricity exports, why is the project going forward without public consultation, which the Alberta Advisory Council on Electricity recommended to do a year and a half ago? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, I’d like to first state that the project at this stage is nowhere near the stage of going forward.

There are lots of discussions about that. It’s a proposal by a company. They’ve got a lot of work to do before it ever gets to the stage of coming forward for regulatory approvals. Those are just the what-ifs. The people continue to plan and assess as to projects that truly could benefit consumers here in Alberta also. I do want to state, though, that the export policy does say and clearly has been that Albertans won’t pay for export lines in that capacity, so they won’t be harmed in any way. It truly would just add another opportunity, potentially, to import power as well. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Eggen: Thank you. To the same minister: given that Canada is bound by NAFTA to guarantee the Americans an ongoing supply of energy regardless of the state of our own surplus or reserves, how will the minister guarantee that Alberta will have enough surplus to keep prices at home down first and to make sure that we meet our own needs first? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, those assertions about NAFTA are completely wrong. We’re under no obligation. We’re under no obligation to export when you don’t have the capacity to export.

Those are things that, if you are offering and want to trade goods, would be offered on the same basis that we would to Albertans. But, clearly, all jurisdictions, all countries see to the needs of their own citizens, and in this case Albertans would also be protected. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Eggen: Thank you. To the same minister: will the minister, then, commit to Albertans here and now that we will have a stable and affordable supply of power for our own needs and that he will not sell it all away to the Americans, like they did with the gas? Mr.

Melchin: Thanks for outlining our energy policy, our electricity policy. That’s exactly what we are doing. In that sense we are very fortunate, and I’m glad that he raised how well consumers are actually benefiting from the deregulation. We actually have prices today for our consumers that are below what you would have on a regulated model in Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. 2:20 Postsecondary Education Federal Funding Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As a political move against a potential defeat, the minority federal Liberal government in Ottawa made a deal with the NDP to increase the spending of our tax dollars in different areas. For postsecondary education their political promise is to increase federal spending of our tax dollars by $1.5 billion, but there are conflicting reports about where the money will go and whether there are strings attached to it. My question is to the Minister of Advanced Education. Can the hon. minister tell the House how much of this federal taxpayers’ money for postsecondary education is expected to trickle back to Alberta?

Speaker’s Ruling Questions outside Ministerial Responsibility The Speaker: Well, hon. member, to my knowledge and my understanding these are proposals before the Canadian House of Commons that have not been approved or passed yet. I have no idea how an hon. minister in Alberta could possibly speculate about something that hasn’t happened yet. But if the minister wants to take a shot. Postsecondary Education Federal Funding (continued) Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The reports that we have indicate that the proposal encompasses about $1.5 billion.

As you quite accurately indicate, we have no idea whether it’ll be passed or whether the federal government will be defeated before it even gets to that, so we can’t plan in any way, shape, or form to spend any of that money. We don’t know what strings might be attached, but if we were to get the portion that we would normally be allocated of that sort of thing, we’d get about $150 million. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that this money could be back in Alberta, could the minister tell us if Alberta needs to commit to using it to reduce the tuition for our students?

The Speaker: Well, once again, with due respect, the question period is not to deal with questions about speculation. Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, what I can advise the House is that there have been some discussions between officials to try and anticipate how this might trickle forward because it’s necessary to be prepared. While we wouldn’t want to speculate on whether or not

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1307 the budget is passed, we do have to be prepared in the event that the resources come forward. There are reports that it will be tied to tuition. However, there are also conflicting ideas as to how the federal government might implement it, through the tax system or otherwise. Mr. Cao: My question to the same minister: regarding the promise to pay for the tuition increase in Alberta this coming September, could the minister commit to using this money to help in that? Mr. Hancock: Mr.

Speaker, it should be very clear in this House that we have budgeted – in fact, Committee of Supply has voted on it – $43 million to pay for the promise that we made to pay the increased cost in tuition at public institutions for students in the province of Alberta. Any federal monies would be used for other purposes. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Electricity Consultant Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let’s talk about this government’s own deals on electricity deregulation.

We all know that electricity deregulation has been a rip-off and has cost Alberta consumers billions of dollars. What many Alberta consumers don’t know is that the man now responsible for seeing through this policy nightmare is being paid over a million taxpayer dollars for only three years’ work. This man, Mr. Kellan Fluckiger, is a former energy adviser to the defeated Governor of California, Gray Davis. My first question is to the Minister of Energy. Given that the Ministry of Energy has over 1,400 public service employees, why is this government giving away at least $1.1 million to a private consultant, Mr.

Kellan Fluckiger, whose only job is to further entrench the $8 billion electricity deregulation disaster? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, it is very true that we do employ the individual that he said under a contract basis, and the terms are approximately correct as to what he said. We do make sure that we want to have the best expertise that we can in an industry that requires such expertise. He has been brought under a three-year contract. We are very fortunate.

There are very few people with the expertise in the kinds of things that we’re dealing with, in the very integrated deregulation of the market, and he has offered tremendous value for this province. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the hon. Minister of Energy again. It’s certain that there are no PC members with expertise in electricity deregulation, or consumers wouldn’t be faced with these enormous bills. How many other employees of Alberta Energy are private consultants, which cost taxpayers more than three times as much as a well-paid public service employee?

The Speaker: I figure there are a couple of questions there. Take your choice. Mr. Melchin: Take my choice? Well, maybe I’ll emphasize the great things that have happened from deregulation that have saved Albertans millions if not potentially what could add up into billions of dollars all the time. We now get power, as a result, from a tremendous amount of new supply that’s been brought on, many of them green related, very clean coal technology. Some of the best technologies have come forward, that have opened up the field to bring on generation.

It’s also opened up that Albertans are getting today prices below the replacement cost, really, of that power that’s being brought on. As a result of the good things of competition, Albertans benefit. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Minister of Energy: why does the government of Alberta have a contractor represent the province’s interests at national and international meetings on electricity deregulation? Why not have a member of the province’s fine civil service do that? Why hire out when you have good help at home? Mr.

Melchin: The individual referenced, again, is under contract to actually work with the government on government policy. He does represent the government in impl ementing those policies that are determined by this body right here in the Chamber. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Graduated Drivers’ Licences Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Recently I received an inquiry from a constituent regarding the implementation and success of the graduated licensing system.

The graduated licensing system was created to help new drivers develop their driving skills over a period of time while they are under regulations that endeavour to protect them. This constituent felt that there is very little enforce- ment of the licence rules for new drivers and that some new drivers, hearing and seeing little about enforcement of the rules, are not motivated to follow them. My question is to the Solicitor General. Are there random checks to ensure that graduated licensing is being observed by new drivers, especially in rural areas? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The graduated driver’s licence came into this Assembly in the year 2001. In fact, I brought that legislation through, the graduated driver’s licence program. The idea behind the legislation was, in fact, to help cut down on traffic collisions and deaths among Albertans but mainly among younger Albertans because of the issues related to the driver training. Mr. Speaker, the enforcement programs that go on within the law enforcement community throughout Alberta are there.

They don’t go specifically out after individuals regarding their drivers’ licences, but in any normal procedure in stopping a vehicle regarding an infraction, they do check those drivers’ licences. Again, the provisions are within the act to in fact penalize them if they don’t respond to the proper legislation. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you. To the same minister: will the minister consider implementing random roadside checks such as checkstop? Mr. Cenaiko: Mr.

Speaker, roadside checkstops are part of the law enforcement community’s STEP program, the selective traffic enforcement program, which they change on a monthly basis

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051308 throughout the province. That could be one of the areas that our law enforcement agencies look at in the future. As well, with any checkstop program, whether it’s for drunken driving, whether it’s for equipment violations, whether it’s for overloads on trucks, or any other issues . . . An Hon. Member: Purple gas. Mr. Cenaiko: . . . purple gas, as my colleague mentioned, obvi- ously a driver’s licence is going to be one of the pieces of identifica- tion that’s going to be required at that check.

The police officer will check at the time to determine whether the individual does have a proper driver’s licence. Mrs. Jablonski: My final question is to the Minister of Transporta- tion and Infrastructure. What are the penalties for a new driver that is found to be driving outside the designated time frames, and how are these penalties enforced? The Speaker: Well, hon. member, now is about the seventh time I’ve said that the question period is not the time for

interpretation of statutes. Respond to the latter part of the question. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. First of all, it’s extremely important to note that the fine is actually $100 with two demerits. The key to this, though, that people have to remember is that there’s a diminished threshold for demerits with graduated drivers’ licences. If you receive eight demerits, your licence is actually gone, so that has severe repercussions when it comes to insurance as well as future licences down the road.

We attempt to monitor this as closely as we can , and I believe that the Solicitor General has answered very explicitly the things that are being done. It’s an excellent program, Mr. Speaker, and working very well. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View, followed by the hon. Member for Little Bow. 2:30 Health Care Privatization Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the first ministers’ meeting this past fall Premiers agreed upon an action plan for public health care that included as one of the guiding principles access to medi- cally necessary health services based on need, not ability to pay.

Along with $41 billion in provincial health funding the federal health minister extended an invitation to this government to discuss contentious issues around the Canada Health Act but has been rebuffed. Albertans are more than tired of this self-serving and dysfunctional relationship between provincial and federal govern- ments. To the Acting Premier: given that the violation of the Canada Health Act may have serious repercussions for Albertans, why did the government refuse a meeting with the federal Health minister to discuss the consequences of privatization? Mr. Hancock: Mr.

Speaker, I would take under advisement the question for the minister of health as to what circumstances took place with respect to such a meeting, but I guess it’s fair to also ask why the federal minister wouldn’t have attended to listen to the international experts at the symposium which was recently held to find out what the best practices around the world might be. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Acting Premier: how do private MRI clinics meet the equal access criterion of the Canada Health Act? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure what kind of

interpretation I’m being asked for there, but it’s very evident that in this province we have expanded the number of MRIs available through the public system to the point where it’s the highest number of scans that happen across this country on a per capita basis and that public access to MRIs is better in this province than anywhere probably in North America, but certainly in Canada. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given that the federal transfer payments account for about 16 per cent of Alberta’s health revenue, is this government willing to risk $5 b illion in federal transfers in order to promote the third way? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, one thing that should be very clear is that we need to have a thorough, unemotional discussion based on facts about the best practices around the world.

That’s what the minister of health has been conducting in an international sympo- sium this past week, bringing in experts, bringing in people to talk knowledgeably about health care delivery so that Albertans can have access to the best practices in the world delivered in the best way. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Little Bow, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Truck Driver Certification Mr. McFarland: Thank you.

On behalf of all the constituents in the Little Bow riding I extent a simple and sincere thank you and appreciation to all our Canadian veterans and their families on this special day and to you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing this special ceremony to take place in this Assembly. My question today is to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation. The government has proposed a new college-based truck drivers’ certification program for Alberta truck drivers. My question to you, Minister, is this: does this program apply to current class 1 licence holders, or is it specifically for new drivers? Dr.

Oberg: Actually, Mr. Speaker, it’s for neither. First of all, if you have a class 1 licence, you certainly are under no obligation at all to take this particular course. Secondly, you still can go out and take a class 1 course if you like. What we’re proposing in this potential course that could be offered in a pilot project at Red Deer College is a way to get enhanced training. It could be things like bills of lading. It could be how to secure your loads. It will be all of the above.

What we hope to do is to be able to put out a truck driver that is a true professional that will very easily and very quickly become employed by the trucking industry. There is one other detail that we’re looking at. There’s certainly an element of possibility, I guess is the best way I could describe it, and that is that we would like to see a decrease in insurance rates for those kids from 19 to 25. As you know, Mr. Speaker, for a 19 to 25 year old it is almost impossible for them to become a commercial driver due to the high insurance rates.

We’re presently looking at working with IBC, the Insurance Bureau of Canada, to ensure that these rates come down for these kids. The short answer to the question is: if you have a class 1, you can continue on and be a commercial driver; you do not need this course to become a commercial driver.

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1309 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. McFarland: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I understand that the large carriers probably support this move. I am wondering, through the minister, if this has an adverse effect on the cost for independent and smaller trucking operations in Alberta? Dr. Oberg: No, it doesn’t, Mr. Speaker.

Again, what we’re hoping to put out is a qualified driver, and that qualified driver hopefully will get a preferential treatment from the employers and, indeed, will actually make the employers money because he will be a more skilled driver when it comes to time of employment. So, again, the answer is no. This is purely a voluntary program and hopefully will lead to a better level of education and expertise in Alberta’s commercial drivers. Mr. McFarland: Last question, Mr. Speaker.

If this came about because of the problems associated with Delta Driving School, why wouldn’t you have just pulled their licensing authority rather than perhaps imposing a program on all drivers? Dr. Oberg: Again, Mr. Speaker, we’re not imposing this on all drivers. The key thing to note in this is that certainly the Delta Driving School incident was a very unfortunate incident, and we have taken considerable action on that. This proposal has actually been under way since 2001, so it’s been in the works for four years.

It’s been championed by the driving industry, by the employers, and it’s something that we’re moving forward on a pilot basis. I hope, and I think there’s good evidence to show that it will put out a better class of drivers. It’ll put out a class of drivers that the employers are looking for when it comes to driving these huge trucks, that are now going down the road at in excess of a hundred kilometres per hour. Very important program, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Calgary Hospitals Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As we have discussed here in question period before, the city of Calgary faces a shortage of acute-care hospital beds that even under the best-case scenario will not be eliminated until 2010. Building the new southeast hospital alone will not solve the bed shortage. Calgary also needs significant expansions or modernizations at its existing hospitals and a new, larger, urgent-care centre in the city core.

To the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation: beyond the government’s commitment to fully fund construction of the new southeast hospital, what is the minister doing to address the Calgary health region’s other capital needs this year? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Included in this last budget, as the hon. member was alluding to, there’s very close to $500 million for a new hospital in southeast Calgary. This is a huge amount of money. That adds on top of approximately $350 million for the new children’s hospital, which is about to open.

Those two particular in stitutions are going to vastly increase the number of beds in hospitals. The hon. member is right. There still is a potential bed shortage. I think that the health authority has to come up with different ways to look at it. We’re working extremely closely with the health authority at this point in time. Does that mean that they’re automati- cally going to get another $500 million tomorrow because they’ve asked for it? The answer is no. Mr.

Taylor: To the same minister: could the minister offer a little further clarity, please, on whether there is additional funding to allow the expansion of the Rockyview and Lougheed hospitals and redevelopment of part of the Foothills to go forward to completion, or is this last year’s dollars to do the preliminary work? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, this is last year’s dollars that they’re looking at doing the preliminary work with. They’re scouting out exactly what is needed. There has been no official commitment on the $500 million project that has been proposed. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One more question for the minister. Is there any money in the budget this year for the Sheldon M. Chumir health centre in Calgary’s central core? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the budget was tabled roughly two and a half or three weeks ago, and all of the projects that were in the budget are going to be funded. Off the top of my head, through to the hon. member, I do believe that there was, but I certainly will take a look closely at my budget and get back to you with exactly whether or not the Sheldon Chumir was funded with this particular budget. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky. 2:40 National Child Care Initiative Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Canadians are about to get a meaningful commitment to high-quality early child care and development services after 13 years of broken federal Liberal promises. It obviously takes NDP MPs to keep the Liberals honest. Provincial and federal governments have already agreed that these services will be based on four principles of quality, universality, accessibility, and child development, known as QUAD.

Albertan families, however, are waiting with concern to see whether this government is willing to sign an agreement with the federal government so that Alberta’s children can enjoy these high-quality services. My questions are to the Minister of Children’s Services. Given that Saskatchewan and Manitoba have already signed child care deals that put the QUAD principles of quality, universality, accessibility, and child development at the centre of their child care policies, why hasn’t Alberta made a similar commitment to families here in this province? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs.

Forsyth: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have, actually. We do have a verbal agreement with Minister Dryden that we reached several weeks ago. I’d like to reiterate that it’s a verbal agreement. I have written Minister Dryden on two separate occasions, asking him for a written confirmation on our verbal agreement. He still has not replied. In fact, the last letter I got from one of his bureaucrats really, actually, didn’t give us an answer at all. I had a good conversation again with Mr. Dryden last Thursday, I believe, asking him one more time if he would please respond in

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051310 writing to our verbal agreement, and we would be prepared to sign the bilateral agreement. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister share with this House what conditions sh e has put on signing on to this agreement that are keeping the federal minister from replying to her letter? Albertans are wanting to know this. Mrs. Forsyth: That’s a good question because there have been no restrictions on the letter to Minister Dryden whatsoever. We had a verbal agreement. Mr.

Dryden agreed with what Alberta wanted, and Albertans have clearly said that they want choice in how they raise their children. I will tell the hon. member that when I brought up to Minister Dryden in the federal/provincial/territorial meeting in February that Albertans would like to see a child tax credit for stay-at-home parents, he said: absolutely not; it’s not part of the discussion. All of the issues that we wanted addressed by the minister he agreed to a few weeks ago by verbal confirmation.

We’re just waiting for a written confirmation, and we’d be pleased, then, to take it to my cabinet to sign on to the bilateral agreement. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My final supplementary to the same minister: given that it’s we ll within this province’s fiscal capacity to both invest in nonprofit child care services with money coming from the national child care plan and provide more support for families who choose to have one caregiver stay at home, like tax incentives, eliminating health care premiums, and the like, will the minister stop dithering and make sure that we get the agreement as soon as possible? Mrs. Forsyth: Well, Mr. Speaker, let’s be very clear: this minister isn’t dithering. The minister that is dithering is the federal minister.

If it’s so important for him to have a national child care program across this country, then maybe I can encourage the member of the opposition and members of the Liberal Party to pick up the phone, call the federal minister, and say: please, will you respond to the Minister of Children’s Services in this province and commit to their written confirmation? The Speaker: The hon. Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. United States Energy Legislation Mr. Knight: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Energy recently returned from Washington, DC, after attending sessions where he spoke to two key organizations and met with key members of Congress and senior officials of the U.S. government. My questions are to the Minister of Energy. Given that the minister’s trip took place during a time when there is renewed debate on the U.S. energy bill, can the minister please tell this Assembly: in what way can Alberta influence these discussions? Mr. Melchin: Mr.

Speaker, our good friends and neighbours to the south, the United States, have been in discussions for some years, actually, on an energy bill that would really look at their energy security. Alberta figures prominently in that role, given that we are the largest source of both oil and gas to the United States. Some of the things that have been very important is that they have listened to Alberta and, I would say, other delegations as well. When the gas from the north was coming and those pipelines were proposed from Alaska, there was at one stage a proposal to put a floor price in.

It would have been very punitive to Alberta to have had a different marketplace in Alaska, gas coming, which would tie into the Alberta hub, versus the rest of the gas that flows down to those same marketplaces. So those are things that have been very helpful to see from our own involvement, and that’s part of why we’ll need to continue to be there. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Knight: Thank you. Again to the Minister of Energy: could the minister please tell the House how Alberta will benefit from these discussions? Mr. Melchin: Mr.

Speaker, it’s very important with our largest exports going to the United States, with our industries very much intertwined, many of the companies that are investing billions of dollars in the expansion of our projects here coming from the United States, that we do look towards how we ensure that the policies on both sides of the border help facilitate those things that would be also in the best interest of Alberta. Rather than just being hewers of wood – shipping raw bitumen south, for example – we want to see if we have the opportunity in the formation of that policy to do the upgrading here.

We would also look at the refining capabilities of sending finished products to the United States versus just the synthetic crudes. Another level that’s showing great interest is in the oil shales in the United States, a very substantial size of resource in the western states. They’re looking toward some of the technology and working with us on sharing technology that we use in the oil sands in Alberta and how that could also benefit them in their research in the south and how that could benefit us both in developing the oils. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon.

Member for Calgary-Hays. School Construction Estimates Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and thank you again for allowing me to introduce the guests today. This government’s funding program for new schools is as flawed as its space utilization formula, which forces the school boards to prematurely close inner-city schools before receiving funding for new suburban school construction. My first question to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation comes from urban school board trustees.

Why is this ministry continuing to use 2001 construction costs when providing grants for 2005 school building projects? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The estimates on the 2001 costs are a constant that we use. When the tenders come in, we then pick up the extra costs on the tenders. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much. To the same minister: when will this government address its multimillion renovation downloaded deficits forced on school boards throughout this province?

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1311 Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the interesting thing about that question is that our budget was just debated last week. Included in my budget this year are 109 school projects around the province, including 45 new schools. The interesting point about that is that the number of students in the schools in Alberta is actually on a decline. So we have built 45 new schools for fewer students than we had the year before. Mr. Speaker, I think this government is doing a good job. Can we do better? Yeah, we can.

There are some areas where we have seen growth in the school numbers, we have seen an expansion, and the schools are not there because they may be two or three miles away. We are looking at addressing the situation when it comes to the location of the schools, but we must remember that the number of students in Alberta is going down, and we’re building 45 new schools, 109 new schools projects. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker.

My final question to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation: given that the minister has publicly admitted that his new space utilization formula will do nothing to prevent further urban school closures, what hope can he provide for parents that they’ll be able to keep their children’s community schools open? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the thing about closing schools or keeping schools open is that it is a school board decision, and I believe that probably the biggest controversy has been around Edmonton at this particular time.

The Edmonton public school board has made some decisions based on learning opportunities. They’ve looked at putting schools together. To keep schools open when there’s a 10 or 15 or 20 per cent occupancy, pay the lights, pay the power, quite simply is a waste of taxpayers’ dollars. I think the Edmonton public school board has been a good citizen when it comes to saving taxpayers’ dollars. 2:50 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Hays, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Private Security Legislation Review Mr. Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Private Investigators and Security Guards Act currently involves the regulation of private investigators and security guards and has not been amended since 1965, when the legislation was initially developed. Most security guards were simply watchmen, and today they provide a wide variety of services under a broad range of levels in training and licensing. Today the Solicitor General announced a review of this legislation. My questions are to the Solicitor General. What do you hope to accomplish by initiating a review of the private investigators and security guards legislation? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The objective of this review was to ensure that the legislation, which is more than 50 years old, is modernized and outlines clear standards for the public security industry. We need to ensure that the roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and that they’re properly trained and held accountable for the work that they provide in the commu- nity. The existing legislation no longer meets the needs of the government or the public.

With rapid growth in the private security industry, there’s a greater need for co-ordination between our police services and, as well, the private security firms. Private investigators and security guards outnumber the police in Alberta, and security guards and private investigators are paid by private interests to protect private interests. The review will include international as well as interpro vincial research during the public consultation. Mr. Johnston: Is the Solicitor General planning to address the inconsistencies in licensing in the private security industry? Mr. Cenaiko: Mr.

Speaker, the inconsistency in licensing is an important issue, and I thank my hon. colleague for bringing it up. The review will be comprehensive and include a number of areas such as parameters for licensing, minimum qualification and training standards, and legal authority duties and responsibilities for those individuals. Mr. Johnston: My final question is again to the Solicitor General. You mentioned training. How w ill you address the inconsistency and lack of training standards in the industry? Mr. Cenaiko: Mr.

Speaker, under the current legislation there are no minimum provincial educational or training requirements for private investigators and security guards in Alberta. I want to thank the hon. Member for Calgary-Foothills, who is going to be chairing the review and, obviously, will be looking at some of these major issues, training being one, which is key to providing the necessary skills and knowledge required by security practitioners, especially when they’re interacting with the public.

Training will also help security personnel maintain their own safety, and the proper training of personnel is an essential ingredient to improve the quality and professionalism of the security industry in this province. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore, followed by the hon. Member for Battle River-Wainwright. Sustainable Resource Management Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta is blessed with remarkable natural diversity. Our public lands, a vast array of natural resources such as timber, water, and rangeland, are the home to many species and animals.

These are places that deserve protection to ensure their sustai nability for future generations. However, the actions of this government do place the natural heritage in jeopardy. To the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development: given that in British Columbia there is widespread support from public, scientists, and from the government to declare a moratorium on the sport hunting of the grizzly bears, which have a population of around 7,000, why is this government still allowing sport hunting and ignoring the sc ientists and not calling for a moratorium? Mr. Coutts: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the whole basis of our policy is that of conservation, and when it comes to grizzly bear, part of the conservation is making sure that you know exactly how many grizzly bear there are out there. You put the science behind the monitoring. The science behind the monitoring is being done through our foothills model forest grizzly bear initiative. We put millions of dollars into making sure that the grizzly bear population is sustainable in this province, and we do that through DNA testing. We have the science behind us.

We took a number of initiatives to have a recovery team look at shortening the hunting season as well. We also restricted areas in the province where grizzly bear can be hunted, mainly from highway

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051312 3 down to the Montana border, over to the British Columbia border. We put a number of initiatives in place to make sure that the grizzly bear are protected in this province. Mr. Bonko: To the same minister: given that pine beetles have infested some of our most pristine and protected areas, will this government finally commit more resources to controlling this pest or rely on the cut and burns and the possibility of divine intervention by the weather gods? Mr. Coutts: I’ve answered this question many times in this House, Mr. Speaker, so I will be brief.

Prior to the third quarter of last year we put a million dollars into pine beetle prevention in this province. We have also partnered with the British Columbia government to match dollar for dollar what they ’re putting into helping stop the pine beetle at the British Columbia-Alberta border. We have a strategy in place in this new budget for 2005-2006 to make sure that the kinds of resources that are needed to stop the pine beetle – and it’s strange. I’m going to say it one more time for this hon. member.

In getting rid of the pine beetle, you do have to identify the trees that the pine beetle is in, and that’s done by aerial surveys. It’s done by on-the-ground surveys. It’s most important that when you have identified the pine beetle in the tree on the ground, you get rid of that tree and you burn it so that you protect the other trees, the healthy trees that are next to it. It is absolutely necessary to clear-cut and burn those trees. The Speaker: That was the shortest one minute and 30 seconds I’ve ever heard. Mr. Coutts: Well, it’s important. Mr.

Bonko: To the same minister: given that the department has stated that it is working on strategies to deal with the demands on our forests from both forestry and the oil and gas sector, will the integrated land management strategy be based on conservation or economic maximization? Mr. Coutts: Oh, no, Mr. Speaker. Quite the opposite. It is a balance between economic, social, and environmental concerns.

Our department of Sustainable Resource Development has a long history of making sure that that balance is put in place on everything that we handle, right from forestry through to our fish and wildlife and through to land management, and we will continue to do that in the years to come. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: Hon. members, in a few seconds from now I’ll call upon the first of six to participate. The hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill. Canadian Contribution to Victory in Europe Dr. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At 8 o’clock on the morning of May 5, 1945, exactly 60 years ago today, enemy forces surren- dered to the Canadian front in Europe. This Sunday, May 8, will mark the 60th anniversary of Victory in Europe, or VE, Day, the celebration of the end of the terrible conflict in Europe. It was a conflict which affected nearly every nation on earth and which brought about an unprecedented number of casualties. War is truly an awful thing, but the conduct of war is sometimes both necessary and morally imperative, and World War II was certainly one of those times.

It was a war that was fought by the Allies against an enemy which Churchill called “a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime.” Our nation answered the call of that just war from the outset, and we were there in the dark months and years when Britain and its Commonwealth stood virtually alone against an evil enemy. It was a time which Churchill would call our finest hour. Between 1939 and 1945 more than a million Canadian men and women, or one adult in 12, would don a uniform, and 41 per cent of men aged 18 to 45 served in the Canadian armed forces.

Included in the Canadian casualties were 55,000 wounded and maimed and over 45,000 who paid the ultimate price in the service of their country. Today, 60 years on, the ranks of our Canadian heroes who waged this great war against tyranny and evil are thinning. But today and this Sunday may we pause on the anniversary of what was for many a time of happiness and gratitude but also of sober reflection to remember the deeds of our veterans and those who have gone on, to salute them and to give thanks for what they have done for Canada, for freedom, and for the cause of humanity.

We shall never forget. 3:00 The Speaker: Hon. members, the hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne has consulted with me, and I am going to allow him to refer to an exhibit. The hon. member. Liberation of the Netherlands Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise in the House today to commemorate not only the end of fighting in Europe but also the end of foreign occupation and oppression for a nation. Today marks the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Netherlands by Allied Forces. More than 7,600 Canadians died during the nine-month campaign waged to liberate the country.

Canadian and other allied troops fought a difficult battle across the Netherlands, and the winter conditions made their task even more difficult. However, it was not only the soldiers who experienced hardship during this winter. The winter of ’44-45 was known as the Hunger Winter in western Holland. Food supplies in the cities had been exhausted, fuel supplies were vi rtually extinct, and transportation was practically nonexistent. Under these conditions thousands of men and women and children perished.

My mom told me many stories of when she would sneak under the dark skies into the tulip gardens to gather bulbs to make tulip soup. She spent her complete teenage years under Nazi control. On April 28, 1944, a truce was arranged, stopping fighting in western Holland. This allowed food supplies to be brought in for the starving population. Mr. Speaker, I have a sample today with me of those rations passed to my family from the Red Cross and the Canadian soldiers.

The relief of the hardship experienced by those in west Netherlands came at a vital time, and the Canadian soldiers who were a part of the liberation were greeted with cheers of joy. Again, my mom told me of this day in Rotterdam and how the memory remains clear in her mind today. Not only did it mark the end of German occupation; it marked the day that members of my family were released from Nazi work camps in Germany.

The victory on May 5, 1945, served to cement the ties between Canada and the Netherlands which had been first formed in 1942, when Crown Princess Juliana sought refuge in Canada after being forced to flee both her homeland and Great Britain. These ties were further strengthened on January 19, 1943. On this day in an Ottawa

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1313 hospital room decreed to be Dutch territory, Princess Juliana’s third daughter, Princess Margriet, was born. This tiny infant was a bright light during a dark time, and Canadians claimed her as their own. The strength and continuity of the ties between our two countries continues to this day and is be st evidenced by the tulips which bloom in Ottawa each spring. These flowers are a bright and vibrant gift from the Dutch, which reminds us of the lives which were freely given and the friendship which was formed during this

chapter in history. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Hon. members, if I understand the exhibit correctly, this is a real tin box that was dropped via the air by Canadian air service people over Holland in 1945. The contents I do not believe are original, but the box is. If the hon. member wants to circulate it as a World War II memento, that would be wonderful. Mr. VanderBurg: Yes. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona. Strathcona Cadet Tattoo Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This past Saturday evening it was my privilege to attend the third annual Strathcona Cadet Tattoo held in Sherwood Park.

This year’s theme was Bridging the Gap, with the focus on 2005 being the year of the veteran. In keeping with the tradition of a military tattoo, the event included pipes and drums, military band, precision teams, a variety of dancing, and the finale, which combined the sights and sounds of it all. The unique blend of music, ceremony, and theatre showcased the talents of cadets from all across Alberta. I would like to recognize the corps who attended and performed for the crowd. They included 238 RCSCC Campbelltown Sea Cadet Corps, 12 Squadron Royal Canadian Air Cadets, NLCC E.W.

Cormack Navy League Corps, 2733 Army Cadets, 4 Wing Cold Lake Pipes and Drums, and the pipes, drums, reeds, and dancers of Vimy Ridge Academy. In addition to recognizing these gifted young people, I would also wish to commend and bring special recognition to those individuals involved in organizing and contributing to this spectacular perfor- mance. They’re Lieutenant Jason Finkbeiner, Mr. George Arndt, Mr. Michael Chute, Mr. Reid Morris, Mr. Dave Wright, Pipe Major Chris Yeo, Mr. Alistair Briggs, and Mr. Mike Luce. Congratulations to all of th e participants, who successfully bridged the gap.

It was an excellent event and celebration of tradition. May the tradition long continue. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Midwifery Services Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise in recognition of the 15th annual International Day of the Midwife, held every May 5. In celebration of this special day this year the Association for Safe Alternatives in Childbirth, ASAC, collected invoices for midwifery care that Albertans have paid for from their own pockets since 1991.

ASAC asked me and my hon. colleague from Edmonton-Strathcona if we could submit these to the attention of the minister of health. I quote: we are giving a large stack of invoices to the Alberta health care insurance plan for midwifery care that has been paid for out of pocket by Albertans since the Alberta govern- ment pledged its support of midwifery and funding in 1991. End of quote. Similar invoicing in Manitoba helped get midwifery services funded in that province. This profession is relied upon by many families to bring their children into this world.

If midwifery services are not publicly funded soon, then Alberta women may have one less option available to them when they deliver their babies. A decade ago the Alberta Association of Midwives had 150 members, who were hoping that midwifery would become publicly funded. The profession lost some members when official registra- tion of midwives began in 1998 and additional government fees were added to their costs. More midwives have been driven away by the continuing lack of coverage under Alberta health care while some other provinces publicly fund midwifery under their health care plans.

Alberta must consider going that way, especially in light of a severe shortage of obstetrical doctors in this province. The idea of having a day to honour midwives was born in 1987 at the International Confederation of Midwives conference in the Netherlands. The first International Midwives Day was celebrated on May 5, 1991, and now it’s observed in more than 50 countries throughout the world. On this International Day of the Midwife many Alberta families hope that this government will support midwifery as the safe childbirth alternative it is. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford.

Fly for a Cure Charity Fundraiser Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the hon. Member for Strathcona shared with this House his thoughts on May being Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month. I would like to echo his statements as it gives me the opportunity to speak about a sport for which I have a passion and a unique and exciting fundrais- ing initiative about to take pl ace near Rosalind in the constituency of Battle River-Wainwright.

Beginning May 14 and going right through to May 22, hang gliding and paragliding enthusiasts from across western Canada will gather to participate in the second annual Fly for a Cure fundraiser, which will run in conjunction with the Western Canadian Hang Gliding Championships. Pilots collect sponsorship dollars for each mile they fly during the cross-country competitions, with proceeds going to the United Way campaign. Twenty-five per cent of the proceeds are then designated to an MS charity while a further 25 per cent are designated to breast cancer research.

In its inaugural year last May this thoughtful combination of sport aviation and commu- nity caring raised over $14,500. Mr. Speaker, my family has known a number of fine individuals brought down by the ravages of MS, and both my wife and mother- in-law are breast cancer survivors, while the United Way has long been my first choice when choosing a charity to donate to.

I would like to thank the organizers, Rob Clarkson and Ralph Herten, for their efforts, major sponsor PCL Construction Manage- ment for their involvement, and Vincene Muller for generously forwarding all donations in honour of the world-renowned hang gliding pilot, Chris Muller, to the Fly for a Cure fundraiser. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Midwifery Services Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today is the International Day of the Midwife, and young mothers with their babies and baby

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051314 carriages, their families, accompanied by their s upporters and midwives, gathered on the steps of the Legislature to demand the full integration of midwifery services into Alberta’s public health care system. We know that doing so will save our health care system needed dollars. It’s a cheaper and more popular choice for many women. It’s a common-sense solution that addresses cost sustainability for public health care. 3:10 A report just released by Dr.

Beverley O’Brien and her colleagues at the University of Alberta faculty of nursing shows that women who use the services of a midwife save the health care system as much as $1,100 or more per childbirth. According to the Associa- tion for Safe Alternatives in Chil dbirth, the total savings to the province if integration were done would be as much as $50 million. But midwifery, Mr. Speaker, is so much more than dollars and cents. Midwife-attended births have been proven to yield better health outcomes for both mothers and babies. Better birth weights are one outcome.

Also there are lower risks for postpartum depres- sion, better education on nutrition and breast-feeding. All of these things are crucial for women’s health, and it’s time we had a health care system that recognized all of these benefits. Given all of these positive health outcomes, the fees that women who exercise their choice to use midwifery services in Alberta are forced to pay are an outrage. They amount to a user fee for an important health service. Fees in excess of $2,000 create uneven access to midwifery services because only women who can afford these services receive them.

Fees create uncertainty for service providers. Fees also marginalize the service, when it’s clearly a way of doing things that should be brought to the centre of the public health care system. Mr. Speaker, it’s time that we in tegrated midwifery into the mainstream health care services. Thank you. The Speaker: Hon. members, might we revert briefly to Introduc- tion of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (reversion) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have the pleasure of introducing to you and through you to all members of the House a group of 25 visitors. They are members of the Alberta College and Technical Institute Students’ Executive Council. They are led by Elaine Ho, the newly elected executive director. All of these young guests are gathered in our city to hold an annual meeting. They are sitting in the public gallery, and I would now ask them to please rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m thrilled to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly Annemarie van Oploo and her two children. Annemarie is the political action co-ordinator for the Association for Safe Alternatives in Childbirth. ASAC is a mid- wifery consumer association that acts as a resource to parents and parents-to-be on birthing issues as well as lobbying for safe child- birth alternatives. Annemarie organized today’s rally for the International Day of the Midwife. At this time I’d ask that she rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table a petition signed by 285 Albertans who are eager to see potentially life-saving improvements to highways in northern Alberta, particularly highway 63. With today’s tabling the total number of signatures on this petition so far is 3,766. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to table a petition from the good Alberta citizens from the fine communities of Spruce Grove, Pickardville, Onoway, the beautiful Stampede city of Calgary, and the city of Lethbridge, the home of the world-famous Japanese gardens.

We the undersigned residents of Alberta, petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to prohibit the importation of temporary foreign workers to work on the construc- tion and/or maintenance of oil sands facilities and/or pipelines until the following groups have been accessed and/or trained: Unem- ployed Albertans and Canadians; Aboriginals; unemployed youth under 25; under-employed landed immigrants; and displaced farmers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are 103 there. head: Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to make the following motion under Standing Order 30:

Be it resolved that this Assembly adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly to discuss a matter of urgent public importance; namely, the dangerous precedent set by the Alberta Securities Commission, an agent of the Crown, challenging the legitimate authority of the Auditor General, an officer of this Assembly charged to conduct an investigation vital to the public interest. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise pursuant to Standing Order 34(2)(

a) to give notice that on Monday I will move that written questions appearing on the Order Paper do stand and retain their places with the exception of Written Question 32. I’m also giving notice that on Monday I’ll move that motions for returns appearing on the Order Paper do stand and retain their places. head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In honour of the International Day of the Midwife, which is today, I would like to table a package of information prepared by the Association for Safe Alternatives in Childbirth.

The document provides evidence that midwifery is a safe and cost-effective choice for women to make and makes an excellent argument for covering midwifery services in Alberta. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this chance to also table five copies of a statement released today outlining the NDP opposition’s support for midwifery services and the important choices that such services make available to women. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1315 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to table the appropriate number of copies of a booklet produced by the Maternity Center Association entitled What Every Pregnant Woman Needs to Know About Cesarean Section, 2004. The Maternity Center Association is the oldest national U.S. organization advocating on behalf of mothers and babies.

This booklet is available online at no cost at the web address www.maternitywise.org and is a good source of information on the pros and cons of both Cesarean sections and natural vaginal births. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table the letter that I referred to during question period from the Solicitor General to the mayor of Crowsnest Pass stating that “no police grant funding will be provided . . . until a grant agreement has been signed.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have two tablings here today and the requisite five copies of each. One is a study from the Alberta Federation of Labour which comes from Alberta Workers’ Compensation Board statistics about the workplace fatalities in the last century, a total of 9,219 in Alberta. The other is another quick fact sheet which outlines some of the facts regarding worker injury and the fact that deaths from work- place injuries really haven’t fallen in the last 15 years. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Projected Government Business The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to Standing Order 7(5) I would ask the Government House Leader if he would please share with the House the projected government business for the upcoming week of May 9 to May 12. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On Monday, May 9, at 9 p.m. in Committee of Supply, day 20 of 24, Innovation and Science estimates; second reading of bills 40, 38; third reading of bills 24, 25; and in Committee of the Whole Bill 36; and as per the Order Paper.

On Tuesday, May 10, in the afternoon under Committee of Supply the estimates for the Department of the Solicitor General, day 21 of 24. On Tuesday, May 10, at 8 p.m. under Committee of Supply Government Services; at 10 p.m. or as soon as we’re finished, under Committee of the Whole bills 36, 38, 15, 26, 35, 40, and 39; and as per the Order Paper. On Wednesday, May 11, in the afternoon in Committee of Supply the estimates of the Department of Health and Wellness; at 8 p.m. in Committee of Supply the estimates of the Department of Community Development.

At that time we would anticipate asking for unani- mous consent of the House to revert to Introduction of Bills to introduce the appropriation supply act, main estimates, and thereaf- ter deal in Committee of the Whole with such of the following bills as remain in committee: bills 36, 38, 15, 35, 26, 40, 39; and as per the Order Paper.

On Thursday, May 12, in the afternoon introduction of miscella- neous statutes for first reading; second reading of bills Pr. 1, Pr. 2, Pr. 3; Committee of the Whole on Pr. 1, Pr. 2, Pr. 3; and third reading of bills 8, 10, 17, 26, 29, 31, 34; and as per the Order Paper. head: 3:20 Request for Emergency Debate The Speaker: Hon. members, we have a Standing Order 30 application. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Securities Commission Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to make the following motion:

Be it resolved that this Assembly adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly to discuss a matter of urgent public importance; namely, the dangerous precedent set by the Alberta Secur ities Commission, an agent of the Crown, challenging the legitimate authority of the Auditor General, an officer of this Assembly charged to conduct an investigation vital to the public interest. I have several points I’d like to make. I understand they need to address issues of urgency at this point, and I will do my best to do that.

The case for setting aside today’s ordinary business of the day contains some of the same elements as the Standing Order 30 we’ve called before, but as you indicated, Mr. Speaker, at that time, this is a fluid situation that bears watching and may warrant reconsidera- tion. There have been a number of dramatic events since that last Standing Order 30, events that make a debate of this Assembly more imperative and urgent than ever.

The Alberta Securities Commission has not only continued its active resistance to an unfettered investigation of it by the Auditor General but has ended the supposed negotiations over something that should not in fact be negotiable and has forced the Auditor General, an officer of this Assembly, to go to court to have the office and authority of the Auditor General respected. We need immediate information from this government on how they are dealing with not only this issue but also with the potential threat to other ongoing or future investigations by the Auditor General.

This issue continues to garner the attention of the nation, as evidenced by recent and increasing media coverage. I take full note of the comment by the Speaker last week, but I’m not requiring any minister to comment on the truth or falsity of the reports. I’m referencing the coverage of the media to suggest that many of the leading newspapers of this country, read avidly by the business and investment communities, continue to cover the controversy at the Alberta Securities Commission.

The continuing coverage about both lingering and fresh issues raises serious questions about whether this issue really is being dealt with adequately. It is urgent – it is urgent – that we restore the confidence of the public in the Alberta Securities Commission. There is no other opportunity to debate this. The debate on the estimates for the Ministry of Finance has concluded. The debate on the estimates for Executive Council has also concluded. There are no bills on the Order Paper that would provide an opportunity to raise these issues.

Written questions and motions for returns are not adequate nor are they timely for this. Given the legislative schedules at this time, there is simply no other mechanism or procedure to enable discus- sion. There are no other reasonable opportunities to have the necessary debate, and I believe that this, therefore, satisfies the requirements of Beauchesne 387 as well as Beauchesne 392. Further, question period itself is not an appropriate forum to

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051316 debate complex issues such as this. The hon. Finance minister previously claimed that the issue had been discussed in question period and therefore, in her view, needed no further discussion. But question period does not provide for the kind of substantive discussion we need on this complex issue; 45-second exchanges simply don’t do it. The Minister of Finance and the hon. Government House Leader claim that there is no problem on the regulatory side and that there is no evidence of a loss of investor confidence. Here we have something particularly, dramatically new.

Yet many of the very staff responsible for investor confidence have publicly stated that they cannot do their jobs effectively, that this, quote: will negatively impact the future of the organization and the health of the Alberta capital markets. End quote. Furthermore, just today – just today – the outgoing chair of the commission said the following, quote: the continual onslaught of anonymous complaints is really beginning to take its toll. End quote. He went on to describe the tarnishing of the reputation of the Vancouver Stock Exchange some years ago by an

article in the U.S. business journal Forbes. Then he noted, and I quote: the same sort of thing could happen here; I’m becoming very concerned – this is the chairman of the Securities Commission today – that the attacks on the integrity of the Alberta Securities Commission will weaken investor confidence in the Alberta capital market and Alberta-based issuers. This in turn, he said, could have very serious consequences for the Alberta economy. End quote. The Alberta Securities Commission’s chairman is substantiating the fact that a genuine crisis in investor confidence exists.

It remains true that every day that passes with questions, uncer- tainty, and controversy shakes the public’s confidence further and makes a speedy, satisfactory resolution more difficult. I have already made points, and I think they all satisfy the requirement of Beauchesne 389; namely, that the public interest will suffer if the issue is not given immediate attention. I would remind the House, all members of this Assembly, that the Auditor General, whose authority is being challenged by the commissioners, is an officer of this Assembly and reports to us.

I would also remind the Assembly that where crises continue or fester because of alleged conflicts in legislation passed by this House, we have a special obligation to pay particular and immediate attention. Mr. Speaker, the motion requesting th is debate also satisfies the requirements of Montpetit 587, 588 with respect to the matter falling within the administrative competence of the government and within the scope of ministerial action.

The Lieutenant Governor in Council appoints the commission, the chairman, and the part-time commis- sioners, and the statutes in dispute next Wednesday are under the auspices of the Minister of Finance. I believe it also meets all of the other conditions of these sections, both proscriptive and prescriptive. The Minister of Finance indicated on April 27 that this Assembly should be assured by the fact that the office of the Auditor General will begin its audit “almost immediately.” The hon. Government House Leader claimed that the Auditor General’s report was ongoing. Those assurances can no longer be made.

This Assembly needs additional clarification, additional information immediately. The so-called negotiations have broken down, and the Alberta Securities Commission has stepped up its stonewalling by going to court. This should undermine any faith the government or this Assembly has in the ability or willingness of the commission, an agent of the Crown, or its employee, the executive director of the commission, to get to the bottom of this. The minister has in the past assured this House of that, but we can no longer have such faith.

The Auditor General, an officer of this Assembly and an official of high official station, is being stonewalled by an agent of the Crown and its employee. This is an affront to the authority of this Assembly. This kind of affront to an officer of this Assembly requires immediate discussion, i mmediate attention. We cannot afford to have it appear – and I th ink this is very important – that other organizations which are currently or which might in the future be subject to audits or investiga tions by the Auditor General think that they also can stonewall the Auditor General.

We cannot allow the crisis of confidence to spread from an agent of the Crown, the Alberta Securities Commission, to an officer of this Assembly. The commission has requested a court ruling on May 10. We have today and only one additional sitting day before then. The Auditor General is an officer of this Assembly. It is entirely appropriate and indeed, I argue, pressing that this Assembly discuss this matter prior to the Auditor General’s office making his represen- tations to the judge. Clearly, if this Assembly is to have any substantial opportunity to discuss this issue before this hearing, we must do so now.

It is my submission that this clearly meets the standards for urgency under Beauchesne 390. The Government House Leader also indicated during debate on April 27 that “there will be a new chair appointed to the Securities Commission imminently.” This provides additional reasons to have an immediate debate in this Assembly. The commissioner’s term, in fact, ends the day after tomorrow, May 7. The hon. Minister of Finance is already receiving r ecommendations from the Securities Commission board to appoint an existing member, one who is defending the current obstruction, as acting chair.

Today is the last day before the vacancy occurs for this Assembly to discuss this matter. Given the toxic work environment as well as the allegations of enforcement irregularities and the concerns raised today by the outgoing chair about investor confidence, it’s absolutely vital that the next step is taken very carefully and with the full knowledge and input of this Assembly. 3:30 Mr. Speaker, in

summary, I believe this motion satisfies all of the requirements of the Standing Orders of this Assembly. I also submit that it meets all of the criteria set out in the other authorities of this House. I would note in closing that the ability of this Assembly to promote and defend the public interest by means of a free, open, substantive debate on pressing matters should be our guiding principle. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Astounding. Two weeks ago the hon.

Leader of the Official Opposition was challenging the credibility of the Auditor General, and now he’s bringing a Standing Order 30 motion to so-called assist him. He has yet to apologize for the affront to the integrity of the Auditor General, and I would hope that before the end of the day today he would have the good grace to get up and do that. This notice of motion ought not even to go forward pursuant to Standing Order 23(g), which indicates that we should not refer to “any matter pending in a court or before a judge for judicial determination,” and it goes on to outline the circum- stances.

The fact of the matter is that there are two independent organiza- tions: the Auditor General, an officer of this Legislative Assembly, and the Securities Commission, which operates under the authority of this Legislative Assembly through

an act that’s been passed. There is a question between the two of them as to the respective authorities under each of their acts. Both of those authorities

May 5, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1317 originate with us, as do virtually all other authorities under acts, and when there are determinations to be made with respect to differences of viewpoint as to how the acts interrelate, then the court, another independent authority, is the appropriate place to resolve that kind of a determination. This matter is before the court to be heard, as I understand it and as the hon. Leader of the Opposition indicated, next Wednesday. It would be inappropriate for us, and, in fact, it would violate rule 23(

g) under sub judice to actually have a debate on whose authority is stronger or any of those issues that are quite properly before the court. Now, the hon. Leader of the Opposition goes further, though, than actually is outlined in the notice of motion because the notice of motion is about challenging the authority of the Auditor General. As I say, Mr. Speaker, it’s not about challenging the legitimate authority of the Auditor General but defining the rules and the guidance provided by both the Auditor General Act and the Securities Act with respect to defining the scope of the audit.

In fact, as I under- stand it, the application to the c ourt is a reference to assist in defining the scope of the audit. So it’s quite appropriately before an independent party. Now, Mr. Speaker, I would go on, though, to say, as I’ve indicated in the House this afternoon in question period, that an interim chair for the Securities Commission will be appointed as early as tomor- row. I can make this commitmen t to the House: that independent chair is expected to be independent and fair and will not be a current member of the commission.

The person who is very soon to be appointed will provide leadership and direction to the Securities Commission during the transitional period and will be able to work with the Securities Commission a nd the Auditor General to deter- mine whether the issues with respect to the scope of the audit can be resolved without the necessity of the court application. In any event, Mr. Speaker, the very question in this notice of motion, although badly worded, is the precedent set by the Securities Commission, an agent of the Crown, challenging the legitimate authority of the Auditor General.

Obviously, that refers to a matter which is before the court because that’s the challenge that they’re referring to. In fact, the hon. Leader of the Opposition specifically mentioned the reference being heard next Wednesday. The only other thing I would add to this issue, Mr. Speaker – these are important issues and subjudice but not urgent, not urgent.

In fact, the only effect that will be had by adjourning the ordinary course of business of this House this afternoon, declaring this emergent and necessitating a debate this afternoon, will be to cause the exact result that the hon. leader opposite is trying to avoid: to create fear in the public. If some thing is so urgent and important that this Legislature determines it to be so and gets the debate on, it’s basically saying that there is an issue that needs to be dealt with that the public and the investment community should fear. In fact, we’re not hearing that from the investment community.

I think the investment community and others in the community, although it’s an issue certainly in the public – it’s an issue that certainly needs to be dealt with and resolved, that the Minister of Finance has indicated she is dea ling with and resolving. The Auditor General is in place. The scope of the audit is to be deter- mined. That’s before the courts. The issue between what authorities and what confidentialities and how that does will be determined by an independent court, as appropriately so. We ought not to fear monger, Mr. Speaker. We ought not to raise the specter of fear in the community .

We ought to let this process work. The interim chair will be an independent chair appointed from outside the commission to carry out the process, to work with the Auditor General, to get to the bottom of things, not to raise fear and scare investor confidence in this province. It’s not urgent because it’s being dealt with, because the appropri- ate processes are in place, and because the very issue that’s being raised in the notice of motion is sub judice. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The government’s attitude and the House Leader’s seems to be: see no evil, hear no evil, therefore, there’s no evil. To say that to have an emergency debate, we’d lose confidence in the S ecurities Commission is absolutely ridiculous. That confidence has been long gone, if I may say so, for many years if he’s been paying any attention at all. Speaking to the urgency. I mean, I saw the House leader the other day, and he alluded to going after the Leader of the Opposition. He was very exercised when he thought that an officer of this Legisla- ture was being attacked. I remember the debate.

Now we’re saying that it’s okay for this same officer. This is why I think it’s urgent. I believe that the Securities Commission is thumbing their nose at an officer of the Legislature, and I think that should be very serious by all matters here. Certainly, the Minister of Finance should take it seriously. I would suggest that all Members of the Legislative Assembly should take that very seriously. If we allow this to go on and we say that one of our officers cannot be given the documents that he needs – every Auditor General, right across Canada, has access to everything the govern- ment does.

For them now to say, “Well, no, you can’t have that,” and, then, when he says, “No, that’s not acceptable,” then they say “Well, the heck with you; we’re go ing to court,” to me that is just absolutely wrong. If our Securities Act allows them to do that, the first thing we probably should be doing is changing our Securities Act right away. For the minister to say that there are not problems, that all investors are happy, I don’t know who he’s listening to because that’s certainly not the impression I’m getting. To say that having an emergency debate here would hurt the Securities Commission, come on.

The Bre-Xs and the Boyle brothers and the whole works of them down through the years have done that already. We have some serious problems here. We’ve got to clean it up. I said yesterday that I think we should get rid of the whole group of them and bring in an interim trustee. That would probably give more confidence to investors right across Canada and Alberta than what we’re doing here. The other reason this is an emergency. He talks about sub judice; it’s not in the courts yet. The problem is with the reputation of the Securities Commission. If it gets wrapped up in courts, this could go on forever.

One of the things the Minister of Finance said at the time was that she wanted the Auditor General to move on this quickly, and I think he said that at the latest he’d have a report in July. Well, we may still be in court in July while this thing goes on. So I think we have to send a very serious message here. The urgency to me is how many other boards are there in government that are going to do the same thing to the Auditor General and say to you: well, we don’t need to bother with this b ecause we have our own little act here, we have our own little act there, and we’re not going to give you the information.

I think that the House Leader should be as mad about this as he was at the Leader of the Opposi- tion the other day. They’re thumbing their nose at him, and they’re thumbing their noses at all of us, Mr. Speaker. If one of the top officers of this Legislature cannot do his job, we’re all in serious difficulty. I think we need that discussion, Mr. Speaker. As it now stands, I mean, to try to hide and say that there hasn’t been publicity about this and how, you know, this is going to bring it down and that there will be all sorts of terrible things if this

Alberta Hansard May 5, 20051318 Legislature has a debate about it, well, it’s been in all the national papers. It’s been in the American papers. We’ve had calls from American investors. It’s all over now. The biggest way we could deal with it – as I say, I think we should have done it a long time ago – is to have an interim trustee and get rid of it and start again. At the very minimum, we can send a message that this Legislature takes it very seriously when one of our officers cannot do their job. I think the Government House Leader should be the first one up saying that and not opposing this. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. 3:40 The Speaker: Hon. members, Standing Order 30(2) states the following: The member may briefly state the arguments in favour of the request for leave and the Speaker may allow such debate as he considers relevant to the question of urgency of debate and shall then rule on whether or not the request for leave is in order. So now we’ve heard three speakers. Are there additional members who would like to participate? The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar would. Any others? I suspect that would be conditional upon what the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar might say, so I’ll recognize the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, and then be prepared to recognize one additional speaker from the government caucus, and then we’ll have to bring this to an end. The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate an opportunity to participate in this urgent debate this afternoon. I’ve been listening with interest to the three speakers. I would like to briefly remind the entire House, and in particular the Government House Leader, of Beauchesne 505 through to 510.

First, 505 indicates that this is a voluntary restriction, sub judice, imposed by the House itself to protect the interest of parties to a case “in the interest of justice and fair play.” Sure, we have the potential of an issue before the courts, but justice and fair play appear to be compromised, and a debate in the House may be of some use in re- establishing these and other public interests here. Also with 506 and 507 it indicates in Beauchesne that the convention is consistently invoked only in criminal matters, presumably for reasons that are cited above in Beauchesne 505.

Now, it’s most important with Beauchesne 510, and 510 indicates that “the House has never allowed the sub judice convention to stand in the way of its consideration of a matter vital to the public interest or to the effective operation of the House.” It would be my view that both apply here as a result of the arguments that have been made earlier by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was hanging on every word from the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar because I want to just point out to the House first and foremost that this is not an urgent debate at this time. This is a debate on Standing Order 30 as to whether or not there should be an urgent debate. I would say, Mr. Speaker, in reviewing Standing Order 30 and in particular Standing Order 30(7), where it says: “A motion under this Standing Order is subject to the following conditions: (

a) the matter proposed for discussion must relate to a genuine emergency,” and it goes on. I would argue that there isn’t a genuine emergency at this time. We see no impact on the markets so far. The markets are working and responding well. Investments are happening. All systems are functioning. There’s no evidence of any lack of consumer confi- dence going on out there. Yes, th ere’s a lot of interest in what’s happening, but there certainly isn’t any erosion of consumer confidence or consumer participation, so I don’t see any sense of urgency in that respect.

The Government House Leader has quite accurately indicated already that the issue stands before the court – we all know what sub judice is – in order to help define the scope of the audit. That particular point has been covered. An interim chair will be ap- pointed I believe he indicated as early as tomorrow or not later than tomorrow or whatever the words were. It would be a very independ- ent choice and so on. So there is no real emergency other than what might exist in the minds of certain members here.

I would just also remind the hon. members of Standing Order 30(6), where it says, “An emergency debate does not entail any decision of the Assembly.” That’s so correct because this decision will be rendered for the most part right there in the court, where it belongs. With that, I would argue strongly that this is not a matter of genuine emergency, which is the first requirement, in fact, of Standing Order 30. Thank you. The Speaker: Hon. members, the chair is prepared to rule on whether the request for leave for this motion to proceed is in order under Standing Order 30(2).

The chair did let the debate continue on the question of urgency because of what the chair considers to be a serious matter. First, the chair confirms that the Leader of the Official Opposition has given proper notice of his intention to seek permission to present this motion under Standing Order 30. Notice was r eceived by the Speaker’s office today at 11:25, and the requirements under Standing Order 30(1) have been met.

Secondly, before the question as to whether this motion should proceed can be put to the Assembly, the chair must rule whether the motion meets the requirements of Standing Order 30(7), which requires that “the matter proposed for discussion must relate to a genuine emergency, calling for immediate and urgent consider- ation.” The Leader of the Official Opposition’s motion reads as follows, and I think it’s important, again.

Be it resolved that this Assembly adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly to discuss a matter of urgent public importance; namely, the dangerous precedent set by the Alberta Securities Commission, an agent of the Crown, challenging the legitimate authority of the Auditor General, an officer of this Assembly charged to conduct an investigation vital to the public interest. The relevant parliamentary authorities: Beauchesne’s paragraphs 387 and 390 and the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, pages 587 to 589. Now, there has been great attention provided from the chair to this, and the chair has been studying

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20050505
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L26 S1 20050505 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	f55ad135458f4646b3a360a112cced1a682b7103

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