May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 983 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Thursday, May 28, 1981 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, today it's my honor and privilege to be able to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly four guests who are in your gallery, Dr. and Mrs. Vasquez and Dr. and Mrs. Bowman. Dr. Vasquez is the present president of INTEVEP, the na­ tional petroleum research institute of Venezuela. Of course as members of the Assembly know, Dr.

Bowman is the chairman of the Alberta Oil Sands Technology and Research Authority. Again as members of the Assembly would be aware, there are agreements between INTEVEP and AOSTRA dealing with research and development of new technolo­ gies in respect of the development of heavy oil and the oil sands. Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that as a result of the co-operative work between those two agencies, there will be a great mutual advantage to both Alberta and Vene­ zuela. Dr. Vasquez is here to take

part in a conference on advances in petroleum technology, and I'm told that the role he played in that conference was very significant and helpful. Finally I'd simply like to express my personal apprecia­ tion of the visit of Dr. and Mrs. Vasquez because of the outstanding hospitality we were shown on a recent trip, when some colleagues and I spent a week in Venezuela and were very appreciative of the welcome and hospitality we received, particularly from Dr. Vasquez.

I now ask that they rise and receive the welcome of the Assembly. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 58 The Alberta Energy Company Amendment Act, 1981 MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a Bill, The Alberta Energy Company Amendment Act, 1981. The purpose of this Bill is to update the legislation establishing the Alberta Energy Company to ensure that the company has the legislative capacity to meet the needs of the 1980s, including specifically the ability to create an issue of preferred shares. [Leave granted; Bill 58 read a first time] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I move that Bill No. 58 be placed on the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the annual report of the Department of Housing and Public Works for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1980. MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the response to Motion for a Return No. 130. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table four copies of the response to Motion for a Return No. 137 concerning the successful Alberta petroleum exploration program. MR. PLANCHE: Mr.

Speaker, I'm pleased to table the first annual report of Alberta Economic Development for the year ended March 31, 1980. MR. SHABEN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the annual report of the Department of Utilities and Telephones for the year ended March 31, 1980. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to intro­ duce to you and to members of this Assembly the winner of this year's Premier's Award for excellence and dedica­ tion as a 4-H member.

Of the 11,000 young people involved in 4-H in communities in all parts of Alberta, this young lady is to be commended for her dedication to the principles of 4-H: to learn by doing and, through this learning, the application of her head, heart, hands, and health to make her community a better place in which to live. For over 60 years the involvement and contribution of 4-H to rural life in Alberta has helped to create the quality of life in rural Alberta we cherish today. Mr. Speaker, I ask that Miss Susan Kotovich rise and receive the recognition of this Assembly.

I might say she's accompanied by her family, in fairly large number, as we can see. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to the members of this Legisla­ tive Assembly, some 40 students from the Paul Rowe grade 7 class in a community that has a name quite familiar to the province of Alberta: Manning. The stu­ dents are accompanied by Mrs. Pat Coxen, Mr. Kerry Coxen, and Mr. Art Atkinson. Would they please rise and receive the welcome of this Assembly. DR. McCRIMMON: Mr.

Speaker, it's my privilege today to introduce to you, and through you to the members of the Assembly, 39 students from Mecca Glen school, located about 10 miles east of Ponoka. They are seated in the members gallery, accompanied by their group leader Mr. Garth Olsen, also by Mrs. Massing, a teacher, and Mrs. Jarrett, their bus driver. I'd ask that they rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. MR. COOK: Mr. Speaker, this afternoon it's a real pleasure for me to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, some 70 students from St. Cecilia school in my constituency, Edmonton Glengarry.

They're accompanied by three teachers, Mr. Del Fabbro, Mr. Wasylycia, and Mr. Grelli. I'd like to note that they're in grade 9 and now studying the Alberta government in the social studies curriculum.

984 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 They've gone on a tour of the building and are here to see the Assembly in action. I'd ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Rapid Transit MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my first question is to the Minister of Transportation with regard to the LRT feasibility study in Calgary. Could the minister clarify a matter which seems to be a misunderstanding between the mayor of Calgary and the minister with regard to the decision regarding further provincial funding for the LRT in Calgary within six months?

Is that an accurate figure or not? MR. KROEGER: Mr. Speaker, first of all, we're not doing a feasibility study. When I met with Mayor Klein, I suggested to him that we could set up a working group consisting of two people from each of Calgary and Edmonton, and one from the Department of Transporta­ tion. As part of their duties, these people would monitor the Calgary system. They would be able to assess LRT operations in other cities or out of the country. They would be able to respond to either the cities or the Department of Transportation with any information they might gather during the work they do.

It really does not have anything to do specifically with changing the fund­ ing pattern. We were trying to deal with an information objective. I've made it very clear to the mayors of both Edmonton and Calgary that, as far as the department is concerned, our funding is set for 1981. Any consideration beyond that would not be a departmental decision; it would be a government decision. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion. The minister indicated a working group in general. Has the minister selected the six individuals to sit on that working group committee? MR. KROEGER: Mr.

Speaker, the two from Edmonton will be selected by either the mayor or council, and the same would apply for Calgary. We have selected two people from the department to act for us. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the minister. Will the studies already done by the city of Calgary with regard to feasibility of LRT — and it was my

interpretation they were looking at feasibility — be one of the matters under consideration? As well, what weight will be given to the findings of the committee? Are they advisory or will they be adhered to by the minister as a more formal, authoritative body? MR. KROEGER: Mr. Speaker, the terms of reference will probably be drawn next week. It will be information that we're looking for. We're not necessarily asking for recommendations from the group. They'll be available to the three jurisdictions during the time of their work.

Because the committee has not been set up totally, to my knowledge, we have not developed terms of reference and therefore couldn't deal with a reporting procedure until we get all that cleared up. I think the information we're looking for would differ slightly from the feasibility study referred to by the Leader of the Opposition, in that one of the things we'll be trying to do is assess the performance of a new line.

So a feasibility study in the past would not give us the kind of information we're looking for now, given the fact that the system has just started to operate and I think we want to see how it performs on site. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion. Could the minister indicate what deadlines or tar­ gets have been established for the committee to report? Secondly, would the committee report prior to the 1982- 83 fiscal year so that if funds are recommended the government could supply the same? MR. KROEGER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, because the com­ mittee has not been formally structured and terms of reference have not been drawn, we have not discussed a reporting procedure. I would certainly expect to talk on an ongoing basis with the two people representing the department, perhaps once every two or three weeks. But if there is to be a formal report from that working group and what form it will take have not been discussed as yet. MR. ZAOZIRNY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Given the minister's statement that one function of the committee will be to assess the success or otherwise of the south leg of the Calgary LRT system, could the minister indicate what progress he has made in determin­ ing what criteria will be used to assess whether or not it's a success, or could he at least indicate how the committee will make that assessment? What criteria will be used to make such an assessment? MR. KROEGER: Mr. Speaker, in addition to the work­ ing group I described, part of the discussion Mr.

Hynd- man and I had with the mayor was a suggestion to work with Advanced Education and Manpower, possibly as­ signing three or four people through STEP to actually ride the LRT system, doing an assessment in that way. This is a very informal thing, nevertheless they could do counts and talk to people as to why they were on the system, why they liked it. They could probably identify people who weren't using it, to find out why they weren't — this sort of thing. That's a very unstructured and informal kind of thing, in addition to the work the group of six will do.

If the question is what we are looking for, that's a valid point. Because nothing has really been formally struc­ tured, the kinds of information that will be useful to us have not been identified. What we do know is that we need to know, first of all, how people respond to the system. I guess there'll be a reflection from the kind of work the city itself will be doing. I'm sure they'll be interested in how the system performs. Of course one yardstick will be comparing it to Edmonton, where we now identify a ridership of about 15 per cent of capacity.

We would be worried if the Calgary system were to come in below that. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary for clarification. Under the present ground rules, any further financing for LRT in Edmonton or Calgary will not proceed until it's recommended by this committee being established by the minister? MR. KROEGER: Mr. Speaker, in the case of the Edmonton system, a two-year trial period was formally prescribed. In the case of the Calgary system, I wrote a letter last September to then Mayor Alger, suggesting the

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 985 same formula be used in Calgary, although it wasn't part of the firm prescription. But it was a useful route to go as far as we were concerned. In answer to an earlier ques­ tion, I said we haven't prescribed the exact ground rules for this group to work to, and they may not report with any recommendations. They will just supply information to us to use as we see fit, with the object of assisting both the cities and us to make the assessment. MRS. EMBURY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Would the minister please confirm if it would be within the terms of reference of this committee to consid­ er which of the second legs of the LRT would be appro­ priate, the northeast or the northwest part of the system? MR. KROEGER: No, Mr. Speaker. We would not do that because that's an option of the city that falls in a similar category as to whether they should go under­ ground or use surface transportation. Research Facilities MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, my second question is to the Minister of Housing and Public Works and is a follow-up to yesterday, when I asked questions with re­ gard to the research facilities in the Edmonton area. The minister indicated there was going to be a meeting be­ tween the county of Strathcona and the department with regard to conditions of the building at Clover Bar. I wonder if the minister has had that meeting and could report at this time. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, I'd be happy to re­ spond to those questions yesterday of considerable detail. There is a lot of detail.

Perhaps if I could just do it in the order I have it here, it would be appropriate. First, I'd like to come back to the question asked by the Member for Olds-Didsbury with regard to the meet­ ing with officials of the county of Strathcona regarding the engineering report. I think I answered that that meeting was scheduled for either May 26 or 27. In checking, it turned out that the meeting was scheduled to take place on May 26. However, officials of the county of Strathcona cancelled the meeting, for the reason that they wished to have a formalized agenda established before entering into such a meeting.

At this point, the date of a future meeting has not yet actually been determined. The second question by the Member for Olds-Didsbury was: "Is the minister in a position to table the consultant's report . . .?" Secondly, "Does the minister just offhand happen to recall who the consultants were, and how much the report cost?" Since I've indicated that the report has not yet been discussed with officials of the county of Strathcona — that was one of the objectives of the meeting. Therefore I don't think it would be appropriate to table the document at this time.

I might say, though, that the report was prepared by Kasten Eadie Engineer­ ing Ltd., at a total cost of $10,000. Another question by the Leader of the Opposition was: Could the minister indicate whether renovations are being completed on the 87th Avenue Research Council building adjacent to the university campus at the present time? Has the minister funds available for those renovations? Of course, that data was available in my budget esti­ mates. Yes, construction is under way for renovations to the 87th Avenue building. Construction work started late in 1980, and will be completed by the end of 1981.

Funds for this work are available through the normal budgeting process. No special warrant is required, if that was the inference. A further question by the Member for Olds-Didsbury was: . . . the total cost of the renovation at the 87th Avenue research centre, and secondly how many years the Research Council plans to be using that project. What future use has the government for the project after the Research Council moves to its new facility here in Edmonton? The total budgeting cost of the renovation work to the 87th Avenue Research Council building is $1,920,000, which appeared in my estimates.

The length of the occu­ pancy by the Research Council is projected to be some­ where between seven and 10 years. The question of the future use of this facility after it's vacated by the Research Council has not been decided because of the projected length of occupancy of this facility. MR. R. SPEAKER: I appreciate the obliging manner in which we have gained that information. Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister with regard to concerns about hazards that occur within research facilities such as this.

I would like the minister to give assurance to the House that the minister has re­ viewed the plans with regard to the Devon coal research centre and the Edmonton research and industrial park, to assure himself, his department and, in turn, this Assembly that no situations will occur in those facilities which are hazardous to residents who may live in the vicinity or to employees who will work in those facilities. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, those criteria are ob­ viously an objective of government. At this point, with the preliminary nature of the design of the Devon facility, I obviously haven't seen the plans.

I intend to review them at such time in the future as they are fully developed. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the minister. Has the minister established that as a written policy directive to officials in his department to ensure that that directive is carried out? What steps will the minister be taking if those are not established prac­ tices at present? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, those are established practices. The department always looks at the safety cri­ teria in any building project we do. High Prairie School Division Inquiry MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct this ques­ tion to the hon. Minister of Education. It concerns the announcement last Friday of an investigation into the operation of the High Prairie School Division. Is the minister in a position to outline to the Assembly why no formal consultation took place with the board members, including the chairman of the board, to discuss the complaints that the led the government to the conclusion that an inquiry was necessary? MR. KING: Because there had been informal consulta­ tion, Mr. Speaker. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Is the minister in a position to

986 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 outline to the Assembly what the nature of that informal consultation was, and whether or not it included any discussion between the minister and the chairman of the board with respect to the specifics of the complaints that led the government to the conclusion that an inquiry was justified? MR. KING: I had a discussion with the chairman of the board. It did not include a discussion of specifics. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. What was the nature of the informal discussion with the chairman of the board?

In view of the precedent set here, is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly why there was no discussion with the board of the specifics of the complaint? MR. KING: No precedent has been set here that I am aware of, Mr. Speaker. There was no discussion of speci­ fics because in the context of the conversation it didn't appear that that was necessary. There was no request on the part of the chairman of the board for a discussion of specifics. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

After receiving complaints, did the minister consider that perhaps the complainants might be directed to the board in the first instance? In discussions with the chairman of the board, it's my understanding that the complainants did not come before the board. Would it not be a normal policy of the minister to request complainants to go to the board first of all to make representation and discuss their complaints formally at a board meeting? MR. KING: That is the normal policy of my office, Mr. Speaker. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Bearing in mind what the minister has just stated as the normal policy, why was that not followed in this case? Or in fact was it? Did the minister say to the people who complained to the minister about the operation of the board — was advice given by the minister in every instance that they should make repre­ sentation to board meetings, which have opportunities in the normal course of the meeting for delegation and representation? Did the minister specifically request com­ plainants to do that? MR. KING: No I did not, Mr.

Speaker, because there was evidence that they had already followed that course without any advice from my office. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. The chairman of the board seems to be unaware that they followed this course, because they hadn't made representation.

How many complaints did the minister receive, and what was the basis of the complaints that caused the minister to announce a very far-reaching and wide-ranging inquiry, which includes the scope of the instructional program, the process by which policy is established, the decision-making and administra­ tive practices of the board, and the utilization of person­ nel? What were the nature of the complaints, and how many complaints did the minister receive? MR. KING: I can't recall precisely how many communi­ cations I received, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to make it clear that not all the communications I received were in the nature of complaints. Some were simply expressions of concern about various aspects of the delivery of educa­ tional services in that school division. So I wouldn't like to characterize all the communications to me as com­ plaints. In light of the fact that an inquiry is established and under way pursuant to

Section 10 of The Depart­ ment of Education Act, I don't think any benefit would be served by my describing specific complaints to the House at this time. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Without getting into the specifics, my question really relates to the process.

Bearing in mind the consideration the government should always be con­ cerned about with respect to the autonomy of local boards, why did the minister, after receiving the com­ plaints and before the announcement of an inquiry with far-reaching powers under the education Act, not take the opportunity to seek first a formal meeting with the board to discuss the reasons the minister felt an inquiry was necessary? MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, as his question suggests, the hon. member is describing a procedure which we conven­ tionally follow in the Department of Education.

It is absolutely true that we did not follow precisely that prac­ tice in this particular situation. That was the result of a considered judgment which I made, having consideration for the facts as I knew them and having the benefit of communications with local MLAs, members of the school board, citizens of the community, and executive and management staff of the Alberta School Trustees' Asso­ ciation. I can only say that the decision was the result of a judgment I made in the situation to depart from the conventional practice of the office of the Minister of Education. Grain Transportation MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture is with regard to the recent large sale of Canadian wheat to Russia. Could the minis­ ter indicate whether he will be meeting with the federal Grain Transportation Authority or officials of the federal government with regard to seeing that we don't have any difficulties when we start moving that large sale of grain to the docks? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, I think the indications of future problems that might exist in transportation, not only of the announcement of the special five-year sale and shipment on an annual base to Russia but also the transportation system itself as it pertains to agricultural products for the future — we have had that opportunity to voice some concern and will be doing so on an ongoing base, not only because of the announcement of the sale but because of future problems we see in the transporta­ tion system for this province, and indeed for western Canada, in moving agricultural products over the next five years.

I would say the answer is yes, but not specifically because of the announcement. It certainly will add to the concern that already exists.

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 987 MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Economic Development. What steps will the minister be taking toward seeing we have a free flow when we start moving this grain? I'm thinking of meeting with federal officials with regard to twinning the rail lines, and other areas as far as improving the transporta­ tion system is concerned. MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, as near as we can deter­ mine from this new agreement with the Soviet Union, the traditional pattern of freight will be about 25 per cent west and 75 per cent east.

In fact from time to time we have shipped to that country more than the average 5 million tons a year projected for the next five years. The question still persists as to whether this is an additional load on what we had forecast. In terms of what the province will do, of course the province can do very little. As the member may recall, Mr. Speaker, last year in addition to the energy presenta­ tion our Premier made, a $2 billion unconditional grant was to be used to service and upgrade the railroad system. The specifics were left to the judgment of the prairie provinces and the federal government.

That was summarily rejected. We've consistently and continually met with them, indicating that they can't have all the authority and not accept the responsibility to upgrade the system. It's clear to everyone involved that the system is rapidly approaching difficulty. One factor that has to be addressed is that someone is going to have to stand up and accept the responsibility for compensatory rates for grain. It will be our purpose to continue pressing that issue. Hopefully we will have more formal presentations signed by my colleagues across the west in the middle of the summer.

The issue continues, and it's getting worse. It's general­ ly accepted by everyone that by 1985 the projections for commodities out of the prairie regions will show a short­ fall in the ability to deliver rail systems. MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Economic Development. Could the minister indicate what progress has been made with the Prince Rupert terminal and when it will be completed? Will it be completed on time to handle this grain sale? MR. PLANCHE: In terms of what the completion date will be and whether it can handle this grain sale, I can't answer.

We expect the terminal will be on stream in the middle '80s. Aside from the National Harbours Board having to resite the terminal because of insufficient soil sampling, that delay, everything seems to be on schedule. It should be stressed again that this government had a great deal to do with that terminal in terms of both debt and grants. So from that perspective we were farseeing. The difficulty still persists between Red Pass Junction and Rupert, and that's a function of the CN's ability to service the debt from cash flow to four-track and upgrade that line. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, supplementary question.

The minister raised the question of compensatory rates for grain. Is either the Minister of Economic Develop­ ment or the Minister of Agriculture in a position to advise the Assembly whether the government has formal­ ly developed a position on this matter, or is there still a review between some measure of keeping the Crow rate and compensatory rates? MR. PLANCHE: I'm going to refer also to my colleague the Minister of Agriculture, but we have spoken before in the House on that issue.

As a government we have a policy that revolves around seeing that the Crow benefit stays with the agricultural community, and there are a variety of other caveats. But the answer isn't the province alone having a position. We have to have a position that encompasses the whole grain-growing areas and those provinces. I think we have made some significant pro­ gress in that area and, being a perennial optimist, I hope that sometime this summer we'll do better in terms of coming to a consensus we can present with unanimity to the federal government. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the Minister of Agriculture. In terms of developing the government's policy on the Crow benefit that the hon. Minister of Economic Development alluded to, has the government developed a formal position with respect to whether the Crow benefit will be paid to individual producers or to the railroads? While the minister has indicated in the past that this would be a statutory approach — statutes can be changed federally — has there been any consideration of the problems of the Crow benefit in terms of longevity over a period of time? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, my colleague the Minis­ ter of Economic Development stated that we have arrived at a policy. That policy was announced in this House a year ago during the debate on the government's stand in regard to the Crow rate issue and during the estimates. Suffice to say again that we have agreed, as a policy over the period stated, that the benefit of the Crow rate should remain with the producer.

At the time the province's preferred choice was that the differential be paid directly to the producer, recognizing, as my colleague has stated, that the position in regard to the payment as to whom and how has changed throughout not only producer groups throughout the province but differences of opin­ ion in western Canada. Perhaps that's one area where some degree of flexibility may have to be shown to arrive at a consensus whereby the total transportation package may be upgraded. That happens to be in the area of who receives how much and whether it goes directly to the producer or to the railroad itself. MR.

NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, supplementary question to the minister. Bearing in mind the position of the govern­ ment of Saskatchewan on this matter, which is retention of the Crow, how open is the government of Alberta on the issue of the mechanics of the question? The minister has indicated that the government's preference would be that the money go to producers. However, as I recall, the Hall report recommended that it be paid directly to the railroad. Does the government consider that a serious option at this stage? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, I think we as a govern­ ment have stated, not only in the House but publicly, that recognizing the various stands taken by various commod­ ity groups in regard to the issue, that may have to be one of the flexible aspects in achieving a total transportation package. As was stated, if we had a preference it should be paid directly to the producer. However, if that were the only negotiating stance to be taken to achieve a total transportation package, certainly government should have that flexibility.

988 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture. As a result of a legal rail strike going on at Revelstoke, what steps is the minister taking to see that we don't lose any sales of grain from Alberta as a result of not being able to load ships, and paying the demurrage at Vancouver at the present time? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, labor strikes in British Columbia — it's difficult for the province to take any steps other than to review the routes for the shipment of grain from the province.

I have no indication that we as producers within the province of Alberta are suffering any inconvenience because of the strike, recognizing of course that the movement of grain at present is limited other than some rape. Public Institutions — Deficits MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question initially to the Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower, but it will touch two or three other departments because it deals with the practice the gov­ ernment follows in picking up deficits incurred by institu­ tions that receive a major portion of their revenue from the province.

I'd like to ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower for the practice followed last year at the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology when in fact NAIT ran short of money from their budget because of the justifiable salary increases awarded to the staff at NAIT. How was that deficit picked up by the province? MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure which fiscal year the hon. member is referring to. The just concluded fiscal year? I'd have to take that question as notice, Mr. Speaker. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the minister.

Could the minister confirm for the Assembly that in fact one of the special warrants already dealt with by the Assembly was for the Department of Advanced Education and Manpower, dealing with making increased money availa­ ble to NAIT as a result of the salary settlements? MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I don't have that ma­ terial with me today. I'll take the question as notice. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. What is the practice within the Depart­ ment of Advanced Education and Manpower for meeting deficits at the public colleges in the province? MR. HORSMAN: Mr.

Speaker, from time to time defi­ cits have been run by public colleges. In those cases, we normally ask the college to budget appropriately in the next fiscal year to pick up or reduce the outstanding deficit. Some considerable detail would have to be re­ searched as to the number of times that has happened, which I can perhaps find for the hon. member and get to him as soon as possible. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, another supplementary question to the hon. minister. What is the practice now for universities in Alberta that in fact end up with deficits at the end of their year of operation? MR.

HORSMAN: The same principle has applied. As a matter of fact, I don't think there are any universities in the province with accumulated deficits. Of course there are institutions that have accumulated surpluses. If they have, we except the deficit in any given year to be set off against those accumulated surpluses. I think that is the situation in most cases. But once again, I'd have to check to clarify that matter. MR. R. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct a ques­ tion to the Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care and ask him what practice that department follows for a hospital board which has its members appointed by the province. A good example might be the Calgary Foothills hospital. What is the practice for a deficit at that particu­ lar hospital? Is that deficit in fact picked up by the province in the next fiscal year? MR. RUSSELL: For the past few years that has been the practice, Mr. Speaker.

Usually it doesn't occur in the same fiscal year for the reason that they wait until the final audited statement is received from the board's audi­ tors, which shows the exact amount of the accrued defi­ cit. The special warrants which were passed yesterday show the government's response to those warrants. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Is the same practice followed for hospital boards that have elected members? MR. RUSSELL: Yes, the practice is identical for all hospitals, Mr. Speaker. MR. R. CLARK: One last area, and that would be to the Minister of Social Services and Community Health.

What practice does the province follow when health units have a deficit at the end of their operation year? MR. BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, if a deficit is a result of extremely high settlements and those settlements can be justified — as an example, the settlements of the United Nurses of Alberta during the past fiscal year, or other such bargaining units representing part of the staff in the health units — then of course the extra moneys would be forwarded to the health units, as was the case last year. MR. R. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, is the minister in a position to indicate to the Assembly if during the minis­ ter's tenure in office any health units have been left with deficits? MR. BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, I'd have to take that ques­ tion as notice. I do not recall any special funding being forwarded to health units during the 1979-80 year. I would like to take the question as notice to ensure that I have an accurate answer for the hon. member. MR. R.

CLARK: In light of the minister going to check the matter out, and I appreciate that, I might make it very clear that I'm asking if in fact the minister would be able to check to see if any health units have been left with deficits during the minister's tenure in office. MR. BOGLE: I want to make it very clear, Mr. Speaker, that if funds have been expended in an area that have not been approved, it certainly would not be my intent to recommend to my colleagues in Executive Council that the government should cover such expenditures. I do recall one such instance with a particular health unit.

But I will certainly check on the broader question of operat­

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 989 ing expenses, which I believe was the thrust of the hon. member's question. Emission Standards MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct this ques­ tion to the hon. Minister responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compensation. Yesterday the Minis­ ter of Environment indicated that readings of 0.5 parts per million of vinyl chloride were detected 800 or 900 metres from the plant following the explosion at Dow Chemical plant.

Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly whether the department's officials have con­ tacted Dow as to the reading within the plant after the explosion? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, as of about 2 o'clock this afternoon, the information was that the workers in the plant were not exposed to any dangerous level of poly­ vinyl chloride. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. What consideration is being given to lowering the level of worker exposure to vinyl chloride monomer to the American level of 1 part per million?

My understanding is that we're looking at 5 parts per million in the province of Alberta. The normal standard set by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration is 1 part per million. What steps is the government of Alberta taking to reduce that exposure level? MR. DIACHUK: Mr.

Speaker, the supplementary ques­ tion really is a general question that's not related to the incident, but I'd be pleased to advise the hon. member that, yes, my officials are co-operating with industry and other departments of this government to work out a standard that would be acceptable for both health pur­ poses and the economics of the industry. We're also in consultation and communication with the same industries and the department of Labour in Ontario, and expect to be able to announce a standard here in Alberta that will be acceptable to all parties. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Now that the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration is considering moving from the 1 part per million to the least detectable limits, will the government, in its review, be assessing the current standards of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the background data that is leading that particular administration to go one step beyond? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, at all times we take into consideration information that comes from the American authorities.

From the information the hon. member indi­ cated, I'm aware that this information is before my offi­ cials. Part of that is the consideration being given to a standard that, as I indicated, we hope to be able to announce sometime later this year. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary question to the minister. The minister has indicated that one of the factors would be the economic capacity of the companies.

Will there be any formal discussion with the companies in this province, particularly Dow but others as well, comparing the standards here with the American standards, which are much lower but have been imposed on older plants where the costs of bringing the standard down would be greater? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is con­ cluding that the U.S. standards are being met. My under­ standing is that that is a standard the U.S. industries are asked to achieve. Because our plants in Alberta are newer, they are meeting a far safer standard and level than the U.S. plants are reaching presently. Yes, Mr.

Speaker, the economics are always consid­ ered. Unless the hon. member wishes to see unemploy­ ment, the economics of all industries have to be consid­ ered in a safe standard in this province and this country. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Labour would like to deal further with a point which previously came up in the question period. Suncor Plant MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview asked a question in connection with an alleged explosion in a transformer at Suncor and asked what reports the Department of Labour might have.

On checking, the department does not have a report because there was in fact no explosion. As my colleague the Minister responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compensation reported this week, there was thought to have been an arc in the transformer, which caused some gasification. The pressure from that appears to have placed a bearing in a position that allowed a very minute amount of gas to escape. The transformer was taken out of service at that point, and there was no hazard in terms of electrical problem or burn, and no spill of liquid. So there was nothing signifi­ cant to report.

The excitation transformer had been in service for 15 years. Mr. Speaker, for hon. members to appreciate, arcing can be likened to, and is often referred to in terminology as, a burp in the transformer. It's very similar to a burp in a human except — in both cases they're involuntary, I understand — the one occurs much more quickly and the gas build-up is much faster. Grain Transportation (continued) MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, after that supplementary information, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Economic Development.

It flows from the comment the minister made in response to my colleague from Bow Valley concerning the amount of freight that could be moved primarily on the main line between Calgary and Vancouver. What's the policy position of the Alberta government concerning when decisions must be made and construction must start, so that in fact we won't have car rationing? What are the time lines? MR. PLANCHE: Mr.

Speaker, again these are only fore­ casts, but we think it's important that the Beaver Tunnel and the 11 miles of surface on either side of it on the CP begin this fall, and sometime next summer for the four- tracking on the CN, in order to avert what we see as the crossover in the supply/demand curve in early '85. MR. R. CLARK: A supplementary question to the minis­ ter. Having regard for the projections which the province has in place, will this mean rationing of grain cars, be

990 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 they Alberta cars, Saskatchewan cars, Wheat Board cars, and the other 80 per cent of volume that is on trackage? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, that's a hypothetical question, but I'd like to answer it. It would be our best judgment that the things that compensate the railroads least would be the last ones hauled. That's why we're sorely concerned about the future ability to ship agricul­ tural products. That's also why we're concentrating right now on looking for alternative modes to take coal out of the province. If you can't control one part of it, we have to try to control another.

But our judgment would be that agricultural products would suffer first. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Member for Edmonton Whitemud revert to Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SELECT COMMITTEES MR. KNAAK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As chairman of the private Bills committee, I'd like to report that the committee has had certain Bills under consideration and recommends that Bill Pr. 6, The Eau Claire Trust Company Act, and Bill Pr. 12, The Burns Memorial Trust Amendment Act, 1981, be proceeded with, and that Bill Pr. 1, The Katherine Jean Jackson Adoption Act, and Bill Pr. 5, The Calgary Research and Development Authority Act, be proceeded with, with some amendments. head: MOTIONS FOR RETURNS MR. HORSMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I move that motions for returns 135 and 137 stand and retain their places on the Order Paper. [Motion carried] head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS 218. Moved by Mr. Notley:

Be it resolved that this Assembly urge the government to proceed to establish by way of statute and regulation, and under the jurisdiction of a single government department, a comprehensive policy governing the generation, use, transportation, storage, and disposal of hazardous ma­ terials in the province of Alberta. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, in moving this motion, perhaps it might be useful to look just for a moment at some of the problems we've had over the last four years with accidents involving the transportation of hazardous materials.

On April 19, 1977, 12,000 gallons of gasoline spilled from a tank car following a three-car derailment in the Clover Bar yards in Edmonton. November 24, 1977, about 16 kilometres north of Suffield, a propane tanker explodes and burns after 19 cars are derailed, fortunately with no injuries. December 11, 1977, at Wildwood: four motorists in hospital after inhaling chlorine from a tank car ruptured during derailment near this community, 120 kilometres west of Edmonton. March 17, 1978, Crossfield: two propane-loaded tank cars derailed near the community north of Calgary, no leaks reported.

On April 20, 1978, a large area near Breton was cordoned off while 25,000 gallons of liquid propane leaked from one of five derailed tank cars. There was no fire and, fortunately, no injuries. July 20, 1978: an 11-car derailment near Blairmore, including a methanol tank car, fortunately no leakage. On September 11, 600 people flee five derailed and leaking tank cars carrying 130,000 gallons of butane less than 1 kilometre from Stirl­ ing, Alberta; again, fortunately no injuries, but a massive evacuation of the people in the area.

September 19, 1978, a runaway butane tank car in Edmonton rams and derails three propane tankers north of 101st Avenue and east of 17th Street; no leaks and no injuries. And on it goes, Mr. Speaker. We could cite other examples. The point I want to make in citing those examples — perhaps we'll just very quickly conclude: October 18, 1980, Hughenden, truck and train collide near propane loading station; three engines and 21 rail cars derailed, fire-threatened tank cars on the railway siding. November 14, 1980, Edmonton: chlorine gas leak during loading operation; three taken to hospital for observation.

May 21, 1981, an Edmonton tanker truck crashes with a train, spills 34,000 litres of gasoline and diesel fuel; fire threa­ tens 25 tank cars on the train, four full of vinyl acetate and . . . [inaudible]. Mr. Speaker, I cited just some examples to illustrate that virtually every day of the year, thousands of Alberta residents are exposed to the danger of the movement of hazardous goods in this province.

During question period, when this matter was raised by both the official opposition and me, the government responded by saying that Bill C-18 has now been passed by the federal Parlia­ ment, regulations are in the process of being developed under Bill C-18, and therefore it would be inappropriate for us in this province to rush into some kind of legislation. Mr. Speaker, after reviewing Bill C-18, it seems to me that there certain deficiencies in Bill C-18 that must be addressed by this Legislature when we consider the reso­ lution this afternoon.

First of all, the question of truck inspection: regulations under the federal Act will cover container specifications for vehicles transporting hazar­ dous goods, but they will not address the mechanical aspects of motor vehicles involved. This is, and will have to be, covered by independent provincial legislation. I think it's worth noting that according to the department of highways in their vehicle inspection test of 1980, 44 per cent of the trucks carrying hazardous goods checked by the department of highways were considered unroadwor- thy. The question of who has jurisdiction is very clear.

It's not the federal government. Regulations under C-18 aren't going to do anything as far as truck inspection is concerned; that's provincial jurisdiction. Therefore it just isn't an answer to this resolution to say, well, C-18 is going to be brought into effect, therefore let's not rush. Similarly, training drivers and the question of compen­ sation in case of an accident: under C-18 there is no provision for any compensation for the victims of an accident. I think this is important, Mr. Speaker, because in the Mississauga example in Ontario, it was just a matter of a short time before the CPR was attempting to

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 991 get people to sign away their rights, as far as future claims were concerned, for instant payment. C-18 isn't going to deal with the compensation question, nor is it going to deal with the issue of damage to the environment.

B.C. has an Environmental Compensation Corporation and fund: The Corporation is given the power to administer [the] fund to provide compensation to persons who incurred loss or damage as a direct result of a spill that causes or is likely to cause adverse effects or who has accrued such loss or damage as a direct result of the exercise of a governmental authority in cleaning up [the spill]. The corporation is given the assistance of inspectors who have a duty to make investigations in respect of spills of pollutants, in order to assist the corporation in assessing applications for payment. Mr.

Speaker, that matter is not clearly dealt with in Bill C-18. Finally, Bill C-18 does not establish safety standards and procedures respecting safe operation of any mode or any industrial activity. In other words, the legislation will not, for example, require adequate maintenance of rail­ way lines, et cetera. Mr.

Speaker, for those reasons I say to hon. members this afternoon that members can argue the case as they choose, but I say to Albertans and to members of this Assembly that simply reciting the fact that there is a federal Bill, which was passed last summer, and regula­ tions are now being negotiated, is not an answer to the time bomb that is awaiting us in this province with the day by day movement of very hazardous materials. I think we have to look at the dimension of the problem. Over 78,000 tons a year of hazardous wastes are generated in Alberta, 46,000 tons alone in the Edmonton area.

There has been a 35 per cent increase in volume during the last five years. The Environment Council of Alberta has proposed li­ censing of waste producers and a manifest system to track waste from the point of generation to disposal. That includes, in a very detailed way, the handling, labelling, vehicle types, routes, contingency plans, and treatment and disposal methods. Mr. Speaker, I think we have to look at some of the government initiatives possible. Members will point out that under The Hazardous Chemicals Act, sections 4 and 9, the minister may establish a

schedule of hazardous chemicals and a body of regulations to obtain informa­ tion from any person who manufactures, uses, sells, transfers, or stores a hazardous chemical. However, the problem is that while the Act has been in existence since 1978, there is still no

schedule of regulations. As a consequence the Act is not effective. Dealing with the transportation element of this particu­ lar resolution, I mentioned that the 1980 truck inspection report of the department of highways indicated that 44 per cent of the trucks checked carrying hazardous com­ modities were listed as unroadworthy. I think the prob­ lems are fairly clear, Mr. Speaker. Again, to a very large extent they are problems that rest in provincial jurisdic­ tion.

There are no government regulations to ensure adequate driver training, vehicle design, vehicle inspec­ tion, emergency response procedures, or the carrying of safety equipment such as firefighting equipment, respira­ tors, and absorbent materials to help contain spills. Another problem is that drivers are often unaware of the properties of the hazardous material they are carrying or the possible effects of an accident. Hazardous transportation routes in this province have not been established.

If we're going to talk about estab­ lishing hazardous materials transportation routes, we have to sit down with the cities. It's going to cost money. We can't expect the major cities, or any communities in the province of Alberta for that matter, to pick up these costs themselves. If we're going to talk about routes to transport hazardous materials, we have to talk about money, and that clearly involves the provincial government.

The Environment Council of Alberta has proposed li­ censing of waste hauling companies and vehicles, which would include standards for vehicle design, running equipment, emergency response equipment, trucks to be subject to semi-annual inspection, and drivers to include training in defensive driving, spill and accident avoidance, knowledge of basic waste types, equipment operation for emergency response procedures. While that seems like a tall order, we are dealing with a very important responsi­ bility.

When some of these accidents I just itemized a moment ago when I began my speech — had it not been for more good luck than good management, we could have had literally many scores of people killed or serious­ ly injured. It's fine for members to say, well, there are economic costs; that's true. But I think one of the economic costs we have to bear in North American socie­ ty at this stage is the safe — at least as safe as possible — transportation of hazardous goods. Mr. Speaker, what are some of the initiatives the government could undertake?

In my view the government could commit itself to establishing at the earliest possible date a comprehensive program of vehicle inspection and driver training for hazardous materials vehicles whose business originates in Alberta. Such a move would com­ plement the federal legislation. Driver training and the inspection program could be jointly developed by the departments of Environment and Transportation. Such a move would assist industry in providing lead-in time. I want to move for a moment from the transportation of hazardous commodities to mention storage.

In examin­ ing the problems here — and there are problems in the storage of hazardous materials — we have little or no knowledge of safety precautions in place at storage and bulk station areas. There's infrequent testing of tanks and lines for leaks. Over the last couple of years we've seen examples of that, that one might mention. Many storage and transfer stations have no containment walls to stop the product from migrating in the event of a spill. Again, Mr.

Speaker, the Environment Council of Alberta has proposed that an on- and off-site storage facility for waste be subject to the same standards; that is, secure storage with berms to contain total tank capacities, and that similar standards could be extended to storage areas for particularly dangerous goods. What could the government do in order to follow up on the ECA proposal? Perhaps in co-operation with industry the Department of Environment could further develop standards for the storage of hazardous goods.

If The Hazardous Chemicals Act is augmented by a sched­ ule of hazardous products, the minister could obtain in­ formation from the companies about present storage fa­ cilities and safety programs in effect. Mr. Speaker, moving from the storage of hazardous goods to treatment and disposal. Again, the problems with landfill sites: we really don't have secure landfill sites in Alberta. There's inadequate monitoring of ground water leaving the sites; no accurate records of what wastes are buried in the sites. One example we might look

992 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 at is Forest Lawn in Calgary. The site has an imperme­ able clay liner, but no detailed hydrogeologic survey has been completed. The best recording of waste systems is in this particular site — no question about that, in fairness. But the reporting is on an honor basis and limited to liquid wastes, the monitoring is inadequate to detect changes in ground water leaving the site, and there's no back-up collection system to collect contaminants.

The Environment Council of Alberta has recommend­ ed that all landfill sites discontinue receiving hazardous materials once the waste disposal facility is operative. What might the government consider doing? The gov­ ernment could commit itself to a comprehensive program of monitoring existing landfill sites and could determine which sites require a clean-up, that could proceed once a waste disposal facility is operative. Moving from that matter to deal with the question of spills, I think one of the all too obvious problems is that we don't have a really effective system of reporting spills. Mr.

Speaker, I suppose the best way to look at this is just to examine some of the disparity in figures. We have the Department of Environment telling us that there were 132 spills in 1979. The Edmonton police report indicated 279 accidents in which spills occurred. The Edmonton fire department concluded that there were 526 gas spills in the same year. I'm suggesting that at this stage we don't have any effective method of reporting on spills once they occur. Even the Minister of Environment has indicated that spills reported to the department are just a fraction of the spills that actually occur in this province.

The Environment Council of Alberta has recommend­ ed that there be compulsory reporting to Alberta Envi­ ronment of any spills of hazardous materials in excess of 50 litres, and spills of any size for difficult to handle waste, such as PCBs. In addition to that particular proposal, I would just add that we should have a provi­ sion in The Department of the Environment Act that where hazardous materials have been spilled, the in­ terested public should be advised. I don't believe it is correct procedure at all to keep people in the dark.

If there is any lesson to be learned from the 1974 and 1978 spills in Grande Prairie, particularly the 1978 spill — we can debate these particular spills at some length — it is that once information is made available to the depart­ ment, the department should advise people who are either directly or indirectly affected. I remind hon. members that in a similar situation in the province of Saskatchewan, once a PCB spill had been uncovered and the department had not notified the city of Regina, the deputy minister apologized.

We now have legislation, brought into effect in the last several weeks, that forces the government of Saskatchewan to advise the public who will be affected by a spill. So it's not just a question of the spill being reported to the government. That's certainly the place it has to start, Mr. Speaker. But in my judgment, in addition to reporting to the govern­ ment, there is an obligation on the part of the govern­ ment to make information available to the public on matters such as these.

Just briefly concluding my remarks so that other members will have an opportunity to participate in the debate, the fact is that we are now dealing with a large quantity of hazardous substances. Despite the fact that federal legislation is passed, there are serious deficiencies in that legislation. We have no way of knowing how long it will be before the federal regulations are in effect, especially if those regulations become once again part of the ongoing federal/provincial confrontation which exists in this country. We have little reason to hope it will be soon, and it could be too late for some Albertans.

Because we have a problem which is more serious in Alberta than in other parts of the country — not all parts of the country, but certainly most parts of the country — it seems to me that we have an obligation to move. We've had a good deal of attention paid to this by the Environ­ ment Council of Alberta. We've had some recommenda­ tions made. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that Alberta should take the lead within the area of provincial jurisdic­ tion. For that reason I have placed the resolution on the Order Paper, and I look forward to the debate on it this afternoon. MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to join in this debate on what I view as a very important motion put before this Assembly by the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview. While the hon. member and I are of a different political stripe, this is one of those rare occasions perhaps when I'm able to say that, having reviewed the motion carefully, I am in agreement with the principle embodied in it. One might take issue with some of the specifics of the motion as it's put forward, and I'd like to deal with those specifics a little later.

But to the extent that the hon. member is suggest­ ing to this Assembly — in fact, urging that the Assembly urge the government to ensure that we have a compre­ hensive policy in this province that's going to ensure the maximum degree of safety in the handling of hazardous materials — I don't think there's a member in the Assembly who would disagree with that in principle. [some applause] Certainly the hon. Member for Edmon­ ton Kingsway doesn't disagree with it in principle. At the outset I should declare something of a bias, if you will.

My interest in this subject was stimulated in 1980, when, as the elected member for the constituency of Calgary Forest Lawn, it came to my attention that some 37 tons of PCBs, technically referred to as polych- lorinated biphenyls, had been dumped some years ago in the Forest Lawn landfill site, which of course is dead- centre, if you'll excuse the pun, in the constituency I represent. At that time, early in 1980, it was also dis­ closed that some 6,000 tons of hazardous wastes are deposited annually in the Forest Lawn landfill site.

Hearing of the existence of PCBs in the Forest Lawn landfill site, I persuaded the then mayor of the city of Calgary to attend with me at an actual on-site inspection. I was quite dismayed with the results of that inspection, insofar as it disclosed the way some hazardous wastes were dealt with. They had dug a very large hole in the ground, separate and apart from where other garbage and refuse was disposed of, and into that hole they poured various types of liquids, from oil sludges to God knows what else. That's one technique by which they dealt with their hazardous wastes: they put it in a hole in the ground.

As a result of that visitation at the landfill site, one official of the city of Calgary described the present waste-disposal techniques employed as in the horse and buggy era. There's little doubt that description is quite accurate.

While the city of Calgary has taken considerable initia­ tive in attempting to monitor the disposal of hazardous wastes at the Forest Lawn landfill site, I was further dismayed by a more recent disclosure that a city commit­ tee was advised in a city commissioners' report that wastes that can't be safely disposed of at that site are turned over to the Department of Environment for storage. That's not what dismayed me. What dismayed

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 993 me was the fact that a representative, the head of the Environment Department's waste management branch, said the province will only recommend ways to dispose of hazardous wastes but that's as far as they go. In fact they aren't accepting them either, which leads one to ask what is happening with wastes that ought not end up in the Forest Lawn landfill site but have really no other place to be deposited, given the fact that the United States is no longer accepting any of our hazardous wastes.

I think it's appropriate to recognize the efforts of the city of Calgary in attempting to monitor disposal of hazardous wastes at the Forest Lawn landfill site. On other occasions, the Minister of Environment has advised this Assembly that the Department of Environment is involved to some extent in monitoring as well. However, I share the concern that what monitoring is occurring appears to be on less than a consistent basis.

When the minister has the opportunity to review the debate on this subject in Hansard, I urge him to look seriously at estab­ lishing a far more rigorous monitoring system on the part of the Department of Environment at the earliest possible opportunity, because there's no question about the need for that kind of action now. We presently have considerable legislation on the books dealing with this area, and the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview has outlined that quite comprehen­ sively. He referred to The Public Health Act and The Hazardous Chemicals Act.

But just to indicate the pre­ sent inadequacy of some of that legislation: while The Public Health Act requires the obtaining of a licence by a municipal authority to deposit waste at a landfill site, it requires no special licensing with respect to hazardous wastes; it's simply not dealt with. So we have concern, which I think is buttressed by the recent experiences we have had in this province. As the hon.

Member for Spirit River-Fairview pointed out, I think we've been extremely fortunate in that the number of accidents the province has seen occur within its borders has been fairly minimal, and we can't just hope our luck will last. Additionally, I believe it's important to take cognizance of the significant efforts being made by this government to attempt to diversify and strengthen the economic base of this province: a most laudable object.

However, while we're pursuing that most laudable object, we must be aware that the industry which will be growing — for example, the petrochemical industry — is undoubtedly going to create a tremendously higher volume of poten­ tially hazardous wastes and materials than we've had to deal with in the past. According to information this member has been provided with, some 100,000 tons of hazardous wastes are generated annually at present, and that figure is certainly going to increase dramatically in years to come.

At the present time, clearly no comprehensive system or special facilities are in existence for disposal of these wastes. I could very quickly review the history of our research, if you will, as a government on this important subject. In 1972 the government received two reports from Associated Engineering Services Limited. At that time, that report called for centralized treatment and disposal facilities. But regrettably at that time, there appeared to be much less public concern, if you will, about the potential problems and no dramatic action, if you will, was taken at that time.

Moving the clock ahead and by-passing some other events, in January 1980 the Minister of Environment received the report from the Hazardous Waste Management Committee which made a number of recommendations to the government, one of which emphasized the need for an integrated waste treat­ ment system and implored that we take a look at the best available technology, as demonstrated in Europe, and establish the same in this province to manage industrial and other special waste generated.

The report went on to implore the government to play a leadership role in the management of industrial wastes through the develop­ ment of comprehensive legislation. As well we have the report of the Reid, Crowther group which gave us a very detailed analysis of the present volume of hazardous wastes being deposited in this province and outlined, sometimes with disappoint­ ment, the present disposal methods. There's no question that they are not adequate and, again, the Reid, Crowther report called for centralized and specialized facilities.

As a result or, I suppose one would say, contem­ poraneous with presentation of that report by the Hazar­ dous Waste Management Committee, the Minister of Environment, in a press release of December 18, 1980, advised of the establishment of a hazardous wastes team which will have the siting of waste facilities as one of its most important tasks. At that time the minister indicated they would work with other departments — in particular, Transportation, Economic Development, Municipal Af­ fairs, Social Services and Community Health, Labour, and Disaster Services — to come up with specific recom­ mendations.

I commend the government and the minister, because I believe there is a sincere intention to move in this important area. It's my understanding that the ha­ zardous wastes team will make its utmost effort to report as quickly as possible to the minister. I think we as members should not underestimate the very difficult decisions that will have to be made upon presentation of that report. Because the fact is that while citizens are concerned about disposal of hazardous wastes, I think it's fair to say there is a natural reticence to have the location of such facility or facilities in one's own backyard.

Without wishing to bias the decision of the hazardous waste team, it would be my hope that the proposed location of hazardous waste facilities will not be immediately adjacent to populated areas. Because if that is the case, I think one can expect some very considerable public concern, and perhaps rightly so. At this time, I would like to throw my support behind the need for some dramatic moves in this area. I do happen to believe that we should be moving quickly with what has been referred to as cradle-to-grave legislation dealing with waste management.

Even if the report of the hazardous wastes team comes before the minister within the next six to 12 months, I think the fact remains that there is going to be perhaps a period of some five years before we have a central disposal facility in place in this province. Members of this Assembly must be concerned about what is going to happen during that interim period of some five years. I certainly don't believe it's appropri­ ate that we forestall the introduction of comprehensive waste management legislation until that central facility or set of facilities is in place. We simply can't wait that long.

As was outlined earlier, there are just too many gaps in existing legislation to allow us that luxury. The type of waste management legislation proposed by this hon. member would include the licensing of haulers, and would look very specifically at the licensing and monitoring of landfill sites. As well in such legislation we should be looking at a manifest system for tracking the transportation of hazardous wastes. Another very impor­ tant ingredient has to be sufficiently strong and substan­ tial penalties for abuse and contravention, so that the

994 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 legislation will have some teeth in it. As legislators it does us very little good to adopt legislation that, while it has the right principles in it, can simply be ignored at will because the penalties are not sufficient to ensure that it will be followed. The other point I'd like to deal with is the reference in the resolution to establishing such a statute, or regulation if you will, under the jurisdiction of a single government department. Back in October 1980 we had a similar resolution put forward by the hon.

Member for Clover Bar, calling for the government to increase its commit­ ment as far as this area is concerned. At that time I went on record as supporting the concept of consolidating the responsibility and the legislation in this area within one department. But I placed a caveat on it. I would like to reiterate that caveat this afternoon: simply to the extent that such is practicable. I'm advised that some 18 gov­ ernment departments or agencies are presently involved in the whole question of hazardous wastes.

Frankly it just may not be feasible to bring all of this responsibility and jurisdiction under one department. But to the extent it is possible, it seems to me that the logical department is the Department of Environment. I think the mere existence of 18 departments involved in this subject matter says two things. Number one, it speaks to its importance. But number two is perhaps an argument in favor of some consolidation.

Because in such an important subject area, how can we possibly hope to move as dramatically and swiftly as we must, in this member's opinion, if we are trying to co-ordinate our activities amongst 18 departments? So I think the gov­ ernment's attempts to consolidate these activities within one department, to the extent that it is feasible, are very, very important. Mr. Speaker, I simply conclude my remarks in much the same fashion I did speaking to this same subject back in October 1980.

I made the comment that in this Assembly we as legislators speak a great deal about the preservation of our heritage, and properly so. But when we're speaking of the preservation of heritage, what more important heritage have we than the environmental herit­ age that we have the obligation and, in this province, the opportunity to pass on to our children? Thank you very much. MR. PURDY: Mr. Speaker, in rising to participate in the debate, I'd like to spend a couple of minutes this after­ noon on the particular motion.

I'm going to put my remarks around the handling of dangerous goods if you're in that type of accident on the highway, the rail­ roads, or whatever the case may be. I believe that the remarks by the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview and the Member for Calgary Forest Lawn are timely. As a member of a fire department west of Edmonton, I think I have some knowledge in the handling of emergen­ cies.

I didn't have that knowledge six weeks or two months ago, when we were fortunate to have the Edmon­ ton fire commissioner's office, under the office of the Minister of Labour, instruct three fire departments in the county of Parkland on the handling of dangerous goods in various situations. The Department of Labour has adopted a manual, called Handling Dangerous Goods Emergencies. It was prepared by the county of Strath­ cona fire department, the Alberta fire prevention branch, Alberta Disaster Services, the Edmonton fire department, and the Grande Prairie fire department.

The information in it is of a lot of value to the members of fire depart­ ments who may be called in to assist in some of the near tragedies we've had. We have found, and I can speak from experience, that many people were not adequately trained in situations where dangerous goods are being handled. We've had a number of events take place in this province over the last number of years where people just haven't known how to respond to that particular event. We can share with hon. members an incident of January 1979: A tanker unit overturns entering the Imperial Oil Refinery in the County of Strathcona.

Immediately, the incident was reported to the County of Strath­ cona Fire Department. A pumper was dispatched to the scene. The RCMP were notified and responded as well. The first Officer on the scene was [the] Chief Officer [of the Department]. The information he re­ ceived was that a tanker had overturned, the tank was not [ruptured] and there were no leaks. The Chief then advised the Captain on the pumper to standby and to be prepared while the tanker was being righted. The RCMP was re-routing traffic at the same time.

Noticing the anhydrous ammonia sign on the tank, all emergency personnel were notified of this. Only to find out later, that the tanker was loaded with butane. There was no visible placarding indicating that butane was carried in this tank . . . . This is another incident where improper identification of dangerous goods was so vital to the emergency personnel at the scene that particular day. The province, along with the people I earlier outlined, then moved to adopt the United Nations classification system for dangerous goods. That's been adopted throughout Canada.

There are literally tens of thousands of substances that fit the definition of dangerous goods. Furthermore, hundreds more are being introduced each year. It is obviously impractical and impossible for emer­ gency response personnel to become familiar with the hazardous properties of each individual substance and the proper emergency response where these properties are involved. The United Nations classification system came up with eight various classifications: explosives, compressed gases, flammable liquids, flammable solids, oxidizing substances, poisons, radio-activity, and corrosive ma­ terials.

Each class has an identification of its own, which is supposed to be placed on the respective rail car, truck, or whatever is being used. With that, each has a classifi­ cation within its own. If you look at explosives, there are four classifications: one that's an immediate problem, one that's not so immediate, and so on, and each placard should show that. Members of the various fire departments who have completed the course have been issued this emergency response book.

If our Wabamun fire department gets called to a highway or railroad accident and can immedi­ ately identify what that car has is in — say, it says "sulphuric acid". We look at the corresponding number in the book and can turn to the respective page which gives the member of the fire department the exact proce­ dure to follow. There's a heading: potential hazards.

If there's a fire or explosion, it will say [if] it can catch fire or not; what happens if you put water on it; do you put the water on with fog, a straight stream, or other things; what emergency action you should take for sulphuric acid, like keeping people away, keeping your own people upwind, isolating the area. It tells exactly what type of protective clothing you have to wear until the incident is cleaned up. It also goes so far to tell how to eliminate a leak or spill — should it be washed down with water or

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 995 pumped into another tanker — and another

section on first aid. I think the booklet is very, very useful. I hope we never get called to an incident on that very busy highway west of here or on the rail line. But with the knowledge a number of our people now have, I'm very confident we can relate any incident in any dangerous material spilled and know the necessary action to be taken to correct that situation. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I thought I'd just speak on what the province has done to aid and assist fire depart­ ments and emergency response crews in those situations where dangerous goods are being handled. Thank you. DR. REID: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to rise today and speak to the motion presented by the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview. I'd like to thank him for bringing this matter before the House once more. It's been here before and is an ongoing concern to many of us. It's a particular concern to me because I represent a constituency with four medium-sized towns. Three of those four towns lie on a transcontinental railroad that carries many toxic chemicals, the transmountain pipeline runs through three of the towns, and we also have the same major highway mentioned by the hon. Member for Stony Plain.

As I said, I would like to thank the member for bringing this whole concern in front of the House. But on this occasion maybe he has broadened it out to the extent that the trees are almost lost in the wood. He's mentioned the generation, use, transportation, storage, and disposal not only of hazardous wastes but also of hazardous materials. In this province, Mr. Speaker, we do not just have wastes, although by my figures we have 90,000 tons of hazardous waste a year. I notice that's a bit more than the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview and a bit less than the hon. Member for Calgary Forest Lawn men­ tioned.

Maybe the amounts are related to when the fig­ ures were obtained, as we have a rapidly growing chemic­ al industry in this province and therefore a rapidly in­ creasing amount of chemical waste. [Mr. Purdy in the Chair] For a moment I'd like to look at the problem other than just the waste products. As I said, in this province we have a rapidly growing chemical industry. But we also have an agricultural industry and other industries which use or produce hazardous chemicals.

If we consider just a few, we have anhydrous ammonia, vinyl chloride, all the hydrocarbons and other inflammable materials, chlorine in liquid form, sodium chlorate, strong acids, strong alka­ lies, pesticides, herbicides, and many others. The ones I've specifically mentioned are manufactured, transported, stored, and used in this province in large quantity. The use of some disposes of them, and the use of others makes them even more dangerous by converting them into even more hazardous materials. In the manufacturing process alone we cover several possibilities.

Some of these toxic chemicals can be pro­ duced in apparently safe ways. One example is vinyl chloride, that's been brought up in this House on more than one occasion, including today. Vinyl chloride can be produced in a totally closed system. It is then theoretical­ ly possible to have no exposure and therefore a safe level set at zero. That's an idealistic situation, but it is possible. But what does one do when one wants to move the vinyl chloride elsewhere?

Of course it is possible to polymerize it into polyvinyl chloride, which is a relatively safe sub­ stance from the standpoint of being a chemical hazard to the human being. It's possible to do that within the same closed system. But one then has the problem of trying to market that chemical in large quantity in one location. There are indeed reasons for moving vinyl chloride in liquid form by truck and train. Sodium chlorate is another example of a chemical that varies vastly according to how it is handled and the state it is in. It's a very safe chemical when it's dissolved in water.

As soon as it dries out, it becomes explosive with almost any hydrocarbon chemical, and we know how many of those are around our province. The manufacture of chlorine by electrolysis of sodium chloride, or common salt, can be extremely dangerous or extremely safe, de­ pending on whose hands it is done in. Having produced these chemicals with varying degrees of safety or danger, we then have the transportation. Again, some are very easy to transport and some very difficult. If some are leaked — and the polychlorinated biphenyls mentioned by the hon.

Member for Calgary Forest Lawn are a classic example — there is probably no safe level. Storage again presents difficulties. Some are safe when stored by themselves but if stored beside others have the same difficulty of transporting, say, a car of butane next to a car of sodium chlorate. Each by itself is dangerous enough, but the combination is extremely ha­ zardous. The same applies to storage and use of chemi­ cals. We then have the difficulty that even apparently safe chemicals — and our homes are full of them now — produce extremely toxic gases if there is a fire.

But I think the main concern of the members of the Legislature and of the general public is indeed the dispos­ al of hazardous wastes. Once more we may get into the problem of storage and safe transportation. When we get to hazardous wastes, we get to some extremely difficult problems. For instance, we have recently had the diffi­ culty of finding that asbestos has been used in schools, libraries, public buildings, housing, and everything else. We're trying to get rid of the asbestos hazard, but what do we do with it when we get it out of the building? Asbestos is an extremely stable mineral.

In North America there's an incredible quantity of polychlorinated biphenyls, which until very recently have appeared to be such a problem. There are some 700 million pounds of PCBs in North America, and until recently it seemed the only way to get rid of them was to transport them to central disposal areas and to literally burn them. Of course the transportation brought up some extreme hazards to people. Only in the matter of the last few months has a chemical process been developed for breaking down polychlorinated biphenyls by a mobile plant.

That will enable us to break down those chemicals on site and avoid the transportation hazards. Again this indicates rapidly changing technology. I haven't been listing these difficulties just to use up time or to give a big list, but to indicate the all-pervasive nature of this problem in a highly complex modern socie­ ty. It's a concern of many agencies and governments. The United Nations has had a hazardous materials classifica­ tion for some years. In the U.S.A., the Environmental Protection Agency is also very busy.

In Germany, which has a very large chemical industry and has had this problem for a considerable length of time, they've ap­ proached it from many different ways, and we could perhaps learn lessons from them. For instance, at Eben- hausen in Bavaria there is a centre for the disposal of chemicals. Bavaria is a much smaller state within the German federation than Alberta is a province within

996 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 Canada. It's about a tenth the size of Alberta, but has 11 million people and a large chemical industry. It therefore becomes economic to develop disposal techniques which are possibly not economic in Alberta. Indeed their system is owned partly by government, partly by municipalities, and partly by industry. Their system even does its own trucking. In Canada we have a national dangerous goods Act, the Railway Act, and other Acts. We also have provincial Acts that look after it.

But in spite of all these efforts and attempts to deal with the problem, we have not dealt with it very adequately so far. We have some 20 agencies and departments of government that are involved in this prov­ ince, in addition to the federal ones. We have the problem that standards for transportation and disposal have to be reasonably uniform in a federation like Canada, and preferably of course should have some uniformity with American and offshore standards. The answers are not easy, Mr. Speaker. Some answers have been put forward already.

Indeed in the press release of December 18 last year, the Minister of Environment mentioned the moratorium on new disposal sites. At least we're not spreading the problem around the province any more. But I would like to put before the House some other answers that should be looked at. I think all new industries should have to function to the state of the art technologically. Possibly every five years, every industry handling dangerous goods should be reviewed to see if its processes can be updated to decrease exposures of the general public. As far as possible we should attempt to detoxify wastes on site.

An example is the polych- lorinated biphenyls I just mentioned, which now can be detoxified to avoid transportation risks. I would certainly recommend that all transportation of dangerous chemi­ cals be done by specialists and not by the general trucking industry. These people would then be doing nothing else. They would have tremendous interest in doing it proper­ ly. They would be able to keep up to date on the hazards of the chemicals they were carrying. Certainly trucking from any regional collection centres for toxic chemicals to a central disposal site should only be done by special­ ists.

I think the Germans have proven that in Bavaria. I would certainly encourage early development of central disposal facilities. But until then, toxic chemicals should only be stored in approved sites by approved agencies. I do not feel that the proposal of the hon. member on this occasion is a sufficient answer to the problems. When one looks at all the agencies involved, to try to roll them into one department and one minister might cause us further difficulties.

I doubt if he is suggesting, for in­ stance, that the occupational health and safety controls for industrial exposure should be put under the Minister of Environment, or that truck inspection should be put under the Minister of Environment, or indeed that the Minister of Environment should be the person who nego­ tiates with other provinces and the federal government. That alone would indicate that this is not an adequate answer. Apart from that, Mr. Speaker, I certainly approve its being brought before the Legislature.

I've been interested in the proposals and remarks by other members, and I would like to listen to those of subsequent speakers. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, in rising to make very few comments on the resolution before the House today, I suspect the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview finds himself in a somewhat unique position, where in fact members on virtually all sides of the House are agreeing with the him.

I'm very tempted — in fact I plan to only speak for about two or three minutes, so that when we're in such an agreeable mood in the Chamber this afternoon on a matter that's been before the House on several occasions, perhaps we can have a vote on the matter and have it dealt with. I would like to make three points very, very quickly. Number one — and I've pursued this matter with the Minister of Environment earlier in question period. I notice the Minister of Labour is perhaps arranging the next speaker; I hope not.

In 1972 the government was presented with a master plan by officials of the Depart­ ment of Environment to handle hazardous wastes in Alberta. I think it's regrettable that that wasn't put in place. We now have the report of the ECA, and right at this time a task force of people in the Department of Environment is working on the matter. I would simply say it seems to me that we have studied the matter enough. There's no sense waiting for Ottawa or the feder­ al government because there are specific responsibilities in the area of Alberta that we should move on, and we should move on them now.

I found the comments by members on both sides of the House very much to the point, from the standpoint of let's get on with the job, let's protect the environment. We've got an opportunity to do that right now, while we're at a relatively young stage in the period of our development here in the province. I urge the members of the Assembly to pass the resolu­ tion and then to urge the government to move with haste. Frankly it would be my very sincere hope that we would be able to deal with the legislation which would emanate from this resolution in the fall session. MRS. EMBURY: Mr.

Speaker, I'm very pleased to have the opportunity this afternoon to participate in this de­ bate. Unfortunately, contrary to the Member for Olds- Didsbury, I feel it might just be a little too soon to pass this motion at this time. In view of the fact that I am pleased that it has come before us again, this is not a topic I have addressed myself to or spoken on before in the Assembly. But there's no doubt that no matter what part of Alberta you live in, this is a concern to all Albertans. It's been before us for a long time, and of course it will continue to be an ongoing concern.

As I mentioned, it is not as pertinent to my area in Calgary as it probably is to the Member for Calgary Forest Lawn. But I suspect that many responsible citizens in my con­ stituency, who either through seeing what happens on television when we have these incidents — and the Member for Spirit River-Fairview gave us a fairly good overview of many examples of situations we've had right in this province.

Between that and knowing that since 1971 it's been one of the major thrusts of our government to diversify our economy, we're certainly going to find that situations can arise with this fine objective that are going to create more hazardous waste problems in our province. So, I would just like to say that basically I agree in principle with the idea presented today and concur with the Member for Calgary Forest Lawn when looking at some of the specifics we deal with.

One of the problems I have in regard to the comments made by the Member for Spirit River-Fairview is that this is possibly perceived — I may certainly have misin­ terpreted his remarks — as the answer to everything. There is certainly no doubt in any of our minds that someday there will be legislation regarding this topic. Many of the specific concerns have been identified today.

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 997 It was very interesting when he mentioned truck inspec­ tion. There are statistics to prove that a lot of vehicles on the road probably should not be there. But I guess my problem is, how much do we regulate people, and is it really the ultimate answer to everything? So I would basically like to debate this motion on the philosophical premise: does it mean we're going to have more and more people filling out more and more forms, and will that actually achieve what we want to achieve?

I think the Member for Edson directed his comments specifically to the complexity of the topic before us, as did the Member for Stony Plain. It's very difficult to say that this is the exact answer. In view of the time, Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to adjourn the debate. head: PUBLIC BILLS AND ORDERS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill 213

An Act to Amend The Wills Act MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, in moving second reading of Bill 213,

An Act to Amend the Wills Act, I would like to say that not many things in life are certain, but amongst them of course are the end of life, called death, and for some people, not necessarily those in this Assembly, taxes. AN HON. MEMBER. We're not amused. MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, each year in the province of Alberta, even with about 9 per cent of the population of Canada, about 25,000 people die and I think about 13,000 new Albertans are born.

It seems to me that one of the calls I have received as an MLA — I don't know how frequently — is questions relating to assisting somebody left as a result of the death of a loved one or their children, or with reference to their estates. In that regard I think it's very applicable that in Bill 213 today we're dealing with an amendment to The Wills Act in the province of Alberta. Obviously the biggest problem, Mr. Speaker, is that death is something no one likes to think about.

For example, those of us who have read Jessica Mitford's book, a substantial book written in the late '60s and early '70s called the high cost of dying, have found that wherever there appeared to be industrial insurance throughout North America, the funeral was always within about $3 or $4 of that. That led to the birth of memorial societies which, depending on your point of view, whether you were an undertaker in good standing — pardon me, a funeral director; "undertaker" is a poor word, I suppose — were a bad thing. They were bad because they offered funeral services at low cost.

One would think they would automatically be very popular. Yet year after year in our major cities, we see memorial societies holding their annual meetings with about a dozen people in attendance. One would wonder why. The only reason I can think of is that when you look at a $300, $400, or $500 funeral compared to a $1,000 to $3,000 funeral, they're not popular because people don't like either to think or talk about death. Mr. Speaker, I think that in many ways that same argument is applicable to wills. People don't like to think about wills.

As a matter of fact, I don't know how many wills are executed annually in the province of Alberta, but I would venture to say that the greatest single number are done in December or January when people are going away. That's when they seem to think about these things. We know that they go by aircraft, statistically the safest of all ways to travel. But it just seems that they really don't like to think about that subject. I look across the way at the Member for St. Paul. He smiles and nods his head, as though he either agrees with me or he envies those who have the freedom to go away to warmer climates each year.

None the less it is a fact, Mr. Speaker, that there's a high increase in the number of people who seem to think that the only time they should address themselves to looking after those very important matters of what happens when I'm gone, and I want to make sure I know what's going to happen to my worldly possessions after I'm gone, is when they're going on holidays. Mr.

Speaker, I think we are all cognizant of not only the obituary column but the columns put in the daily and weekly papers throughout Alberta by those in the legal profession looking for various people, descendants of various people, or any knowledge of people who have known various people. They generally relate to the execu­ tion of a will or the settling of an estate. So obviously many people in Alberta either do not draft or execute a will or, if they do, not many people know where those wills are.

Fort McMurray, our second newest city in the province of Alberta and probably the city of the future, is a lovely place to visit and has a couple of things that are unique to it. One is the average age, which I think is about 23. It has a population around 30,000. Of that, probably 20,000 to 24,000 haven't been there more than five, six, or seven years. In other words, they're people who, though past the age of majority for the most part, obviously weren't born there; they moved there. If they did a survey in the McMurray area on how many people had wills and, if they had wills, where they were executed . . .

My infor­ mation indicates that about 25 to 30 per cent of the people in Fort McMurray come from eastern Canada. Based on what I've said, it would be logical to assume that, people not liking to think about death and wills in the context of death, many of the people from the maritime provinces have likely not bothered even to con­ sider the whereabouts of the will. For most of us, the normal location of a will would be in our solicitors' office.

When we have those wills drafted, he generally advises on the one hand that you take the original and put it in a safe place — and we all know what a safe place is; it's some place you can never find when you want to locate it — and a copy goes into the lawyer's files. Heaven only knows how many lawyers in Corner Brook, Newfoundland, or Digby, Nova Scotia, would have copies of wills of people who now live in McMurray. Mr. Speaker, the sole intent of Bill 213 is to establish a central registry system whereby people could lodge not the will physically but the details of the will, which are described in Bill 213.

People would say, is there not another way of doing it? Well, there is. Under The Surrogate Court Act in the province of Alberta, we now have provision whereby you can go into any courthouse in Alberta and physically lodge your will, in an envelope that can be sealed, given to you by the Clerk of the Court, for the payment of $3. Within three working days, I believe, the Clerk of the Court would have to notify the Deputy Attorney General, who would make note of that. That's already in the

998 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 statutes. My information tells me that at the present time, 12 such wills are registered, although we have only 2 million people in Alberta. I talked to two of the courts in the province, neither of which knew that provision ex­ isted, which probably indicates how well known it is by the general public. In addition, Mr. Speaker, I took it upon myself to write to 20 or 30 lawyers and send them a copy of the Bill. The response from several is kind of interesting. Far be it from me to discuss lawyers' practices. I don't know how deeply they're involved in wills.

Obviously some of them are in the courts every day on other matters, others are conveyancing lands, others are doing this, others are doing that. But about half the responses I received are unaware that there is provision in the court system. Certainly my colleague from Forest Lawn not only knows about this provision but is very well versed in it. I don't know if he deals much in wills, but he is certainly well aware of the provision in our court system to do this. The responses from the lawyers, though — I don't know whether to call them barristers, solicitors, notaries, or just plain lawyers.

When I mention lawyers, I'm always accused of being critical. If I mention barristers, people shake their heads because they think I'm talking about England, the mother country. If I talk about notaries, I'm obviously talking about Quebec. So I frankly don't know how to address. If I look at the letterheads, they're all the same: they're all barristers, solicitors, and notaries. The response from several of them: "I feel that the principle enounced in Bill 213 is an excellent idea." That's from one lawyer. I received an excellent, three-page letter from another lawyer in a law firm and two from ben­ chers.

Most of them point out that it's an excellent idea to have this provision. A further two point out that it would only be good if it were mandatory. That's some­ thing I frankly hadn't addressed my mind to. Being on the government side of the House, we really don't feel too strongly about mandatory programs. Unless it's drunken driving or something of that nature, we feel kind of strongly about mandatory programs. I would also point out that registry systems similar to the one proposed in this Bill are in existence in various other jurisdictions. The closest one to us is the province of British Columbia.

The latest information I have, which is somewhat current, dated May 20, indicates that in British Columbia 650,000 wills are now registered in their central registry system, that has been in place for a reasonable period of time — 39 years. It commenced in 1942. They presently have about 50,000 wills a year regis­ tered there. The most significant part of it — and for this amendment to be workable, obviously people would have to use it. Although trust companies or corporate execu­ tors may draft some wills in this province, undoubtedly 95 or 97 per cent would be done by lawyers.

In the province of British Columbia the program is heavily endorsed by lawyers. In other words, they believe it is a good thing. Presently in British Columbia they have about 15,000 searches a year made through their central registry system, of which 6,000 to 7,000 a year are suc­ cessful in locating a will. Mr. Speaker, speaking to the Bill specifically, it is proposed that there be an amendment to the [Act]. I should point out to members of the House that five years ago the hon. Mr.

Foster, the Attorney General at that time, in an omnibus Bill, The Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, made provision to The Wills Act in the form of an international will, which I think was a great sign of progress in recognition of so many people not only travelling internationally but serving internationally. The specific amendment to The Wills Act proposed by Bill 213 mentions that a central registry system be created in the province of Alberta, that place being the Vital Statistics department of the Department of Social Serv­ ices and Community Health. My information from their director Mr.

Hersom is that they could presently institute this program with no additional manpower. Now that has to be encouraging to members of the Assembly. They could institute this amendment to The Wills Act at this time, and they would require no additional staff. In Brit­ ish Columbia it presently takes four people. However, if it were to be made mandatory, it would require addition­ al staff. I don't think that's unreasonable, because if it were to be made mandatory the inflow would probably be very high.

A concern some people would have with regard to the Bill, with having a central registry system, would deal with the area of confidentiality. People would feel that if and when they registered their will, people other than themselves, their lawyer, or perhaps their families, would be aware of the contents. The will does not, in effect, leave the hands of the testator. All that happens is that a form is filled out, that is then sent to Vital Statistics.

On that form is the following information: the name, address, and occupation of the testator; the location of the will — really the prime motivation for my sponsoring this amendment is so that we know where the will is — and the names and addresses of the witnesses. That's about all that's given, in terms of information. The only people who would have access to that would be a member of the Law Society and/or a person with a vested interest.

For example, if we talk about a person in Fort McMurray who came from Corner Brook, Newfoundland, and passed away in McMurray: if he had used the central registry system of Vital Statistics and a brother arrives from Corner Brook to administer the affairs of the person who passed away, he could simply phone Vital Stats, say who he is, be informed that yes, indeed, they have a registration of that particular person and if he or she would show up in person with the following information, they would then disclose the will and its location, and the witnesses' names and addresses.

I think it's a very timely amendment to The Wills Act. I seem to recall the previous Minister of Social Services and Community Health, the hon. Helen Hunley, was in­ clined to endorse this type of program. Obviously I'm not saying it should be adopted for that reason. But my information from the people who would be required to carry out the plan is that they have already looked into it and could certainly handle it. With that, Mr. Speaker, I welcome the participation in Bill 213 of other members in the Assembly. Thank you very much. MRS. FYFE: I'd like to congratulate the member for bringing forth this Bill.

As he said, perhaps it's a subject we don't often give a whole lot of thought to. If we've already completed a will, it's tucked safely away and, hopefully, the appropriate person would find it at the appropriate time. If not, as the member said, it's some­ times a subject that individuals tend to avoid. I've always attached the same importance to a will as to insurance.

Rather than attaching it to an imminent end to one's life, it's a provision you take to put a mechanism in place that in case something happens at some point, you've pro­ vided security, like insurance, or a way that makes it easier for your family. I don't think it can really be

May 28, 1981 ALBERTA HANSARD 999 compared to the annual meeting of the Memorial Society. While I think it's also rather important that we plan our funerals, many people tend not to like to face their own mortality in that way. Some excellent brochures and publications have come out related to the writing of a will and the necessity of individuals to have a will. I think that sometimes individ­ uals feel that their assets aren't worth while writing a will. Perhaps that's changed with inflation, as the goods we own become more valuable.

Perhaps more people begin to realize that what they have has a certain value, that is not only important in a monetary sense but also in the sense that it has sentimental or values important to that family. I'm sure we have all heard the horror stories of families that have gone on for a very long time trying to determine which item, which article, which part of the estate would be their share. Those are things I'm sure each of us would like to do without and not have that problem at some point in the future.

No doubt this Bill would be to the beneficiary's benefit, as it sets into motion a situation whereby the executor of the will would know where to turn to find the will. Even though we have taken the time to legally write out a document and have that document filed in an appropriate place, unless we have also set out where that place is, it may cause some concern and anxiety, particularly in an extremely mobile society. Many people have moved across the country and perhaps have not even closed out a safety deposit box or left a copy with a legal office in a place where they used to live.

So this would provide a service which could update not only the will itself and the provisions of it; the changes and location can also be included within this registry. I think that's very important in a society such as ours. In a time of bereavement, there's no doubt that families feel emotional, and often a member of the family is the executor. I think it's very difficult, very unfair to ask a person who is close to the deceased to go through a procedure of searching for a will. If there are ways we can make it easier for those people who succeed us, then I think that is really a responsibility we have.

The mem­ ber's Bill would certainly enhance that process. A number of benefits are related to the Bill. One certainly relates to cost. If we're going through the legal process and hiring another person to do a search and to do the advertisement, obviously that has an effect on the estate. I had an experience in my own family, where I received a letter in the mail from a legal firm in Minneso­ ta. It had about three full pages of the descendants of this relative I had not heard of before.

While it was an extremely interesting process to see all the family line and descendants from this individual, there was no monetary benefit for any of the beneficiaries, as what little there was in the estate was used up in the process of determin­ ing who the beneficiaries were. I think most of us really would not like to see our estate go to that research process. If many people would take advantage of filing their wills, another factor related to this Bill would certainly be the time element involved.

Once again the time of bere­ avement is often a very critical factor for those dependent upon the estate for their income. If the will has to be probated, this can mean that transactions that would normally take place — sale of stocks and bonds, or transactions of properties — can be held up. If it's a time when it's critical to move in this area, it would certainly be of great advantage to the estate and the beneficiaries to have that will probated as soon as possible, and have the matters cleared up.

The last point I would like to make in supporting this Bill is that if, as the member says, we now have a situa­ tion where wills can be filed in the surrogate court — and obviously very few of us were aware of this, including me — communication has left a lot to be desired. Perhaps the passage of this Bill and implementation of the pro­ gram might serve as an incentive to those individuals who haven't, to go ahead and make out a will. As I said, some excellent brochures have been develop­ ed on how to make a will, and the need to make a will.

But often these don't get out to the people who don't think of it on their own or, for some reason or other, tend to put it off. I believe there may be a tendency in younger people not to consider the fact that their life may end earlier than they anticipate, or that they simply postpone for some point in the future. If this Bill and the imple­ mentation of this would serve to encourage people, in the event of their own demise, to provide a system that would assist the executor and the beneficiaries, I think it's well worth while. I support the Bill, and I urge other hon. members to do so. DR. C. ANDERSON: Mr.

Speaker, it's indeed a pleasure to rise and speak on Bill No. 213,

An Act to Amend The Wills Act. I'd like to thank the Member for Lethbridge West for presenting this Bill. In preparing for my speech, it's given me an opportunity to look at the purpose of a will, why one should have one, and to re-evaluate what my own particular situation has been. Performing my work in the medical profession, I don't like to think about death because, in a way, death is an admission of defeat. Therefore this gives me another opportunity to think about that and to deal with the problem.

I'd like to reassure the Member for Lethbridge West that I wasn't thinking about myself on holidays and whatnot, because I haven't yet taken the opportunity to do those trips to Hawaii. What is the purpose of a will? I wonder how many people realize what the purpose really is. I feel that the purpose is to see that your intentions are carried out with a minimum of expense and delay, in an orderly and efficient manner for your dependents left behind.

As elected officials, I think every one of us has had to deal with some request from some relative within our constit­ uency for help in trying to solve a particular will problem. I've been dealing with one for some time now: a teacher who was single, had attempted to write her own will, and hadn't put in the particulars. That has left a lot of problems for her mother, her friends, and her brothers and sisters. Why should we have a will? I think it's fair to say that in a great majority of cases a properly drawn up will, will save considerable administration expense and difficulties for your family.

If there is no will, means are available to have the property distributed in accordance with the law of the land that most of us aren't aware of. In Alberta, if there are no children and only a spouse, the possessions automatically go to the spouse. However, if there's a spouse and one child, the first $20,000 and half the remaining property goes to the spouse, with the remaind­ er of the property going to the child. If there is more than one child, the first $20,000, followed by one-third of the remainder, go to the spouse, and the remaining two- thirds goes to the children.

In this Legislature we've just taken a step, in The Public Trustee Amendment Act, 1981, to ensure that we protect the interests of the unborn child. If a mother is

1000 ALBERTA HANSARD May 28, 1981 pregnant and her husband died, there was no protection for that child who would be born at a later date. We've just ensured that that is protected. I'd like to encourage everyone to have a professional person draw up a will, so it's not confused in any way. With the complexity of society today, it's almost essential that we have a profes­ sional do it.

Society has created conditions which make it impossible to draw up a simple will that deals with all kinds of problems: joint deaths, tax legislation, adminis­ tration of assets and benefits to minors; and the complex­ ity of the estate left, with bonds, securities, and all those things dealing with joint tenancy. At the present time we have a situation where we have a written will, regardless if it's a simple one written at home by yourself or written professionally. We advise people to make sure these wills are stored in a safe place.

But when you hide or secure something, if you're as forgetful as me, you can't find it a week from now, let alone several years. How do we expect our loved ones to come up with it at that time. When we find a will, how do we know it's the last will? Even if it's found, we still have to go through the expense of advertising and searches to come up with a will. This often entails an expense that involves a considerable proportion of the estate. The Member for Lethbridge West mentioned the mobility of the population we have at the present time, and people moving from one part of the country to another.

This also increases the complexity of finding the will and the costs involved. At the present time we have several situations through­ out the world. In Denmark, all wills are registered in a central registry. England permits disposition of a will with the Supreme Court [inaudible]. The Netherlands has had compulsory registration since 1918. The U.S. has a probate court that has a will depository. Alberta, Mani­ toba, and Newfoundland have compulsory life informa­ tion for international wills, mentioned by the Member for Lethbridge West.

Ontario has a surrogate court that holds wills in safekeeping; and in Quebec, the board of notaries registers information about notarial wills. I think the Member for Lethbridge West recommended the B.C. situation, with their voluntary register. With over 50,000 wills registered every year, I think that has proven itself. However, with the voluntary aspect, I don't think that eliminates all the problems. Several pros and cons are related to the suggested registry.

The pros for having the registry are, first, that it will assist members of our families to locate wills and should reduce the costs of settling an estate. But I don't think that will happen unless it's compulsory registration. If we don't have it compulsory, we are still going to have to go through the expense of advertising and searching for that will. Even if we find one that's been registered, another may be filed. I know of several cases where you have a patient in the hospital who wants to make some final adjustments and changes at that time.

However, the suggested legislation should make it convenient and should eliminate some of the time involved in searches and advertising. One thing I think is important with the registry is that it will help to prevent suppression of wills. That may not be a major problem now; I'm not sure. But suppression of a will by somebody who is not going to benefit from it could be a problem. This would help overcome that, because the will would be registered. I've already dealt with the voluntary aspect. I feel that is negative in that we still have to go through the expense and time of searches and advertising.

The cons presented against the Bill have been that it would increase bureaucracy and increase the tax burden on all taxpayers, regardless of whether they used the registry. However, the member stated that in a voluntary situation the number of employees needed to do that would be minimal, and therefore not of much conse­ quence. Of course the other aspect is that whenever government becomes involved, it becomes another ex­ ample of Big Brother. I'm concerned about how things have moved on what's happening with the book 1984. What can we do from here?

I generally support the Bill and recommend that it be made compulsory, though, for the reasons I have stated. I think we would have to have a large-scale public information campaign about wills, so people know and understand what they are. Although brochures are available, I don't think many people are using them. Also with the information campaign and provisions to make information available to people, it would help to educate the testator to ensure that his or her wishes are carried out with a minimum of difficulty and expense.

Further, we need to make sure the will registry simplifies registration in that the enactment of such a registry would make it simpler and easier for a lawyer to carry out, support, and implement it. I'd just like to say that a will that's properly docu­ mented and drawn up can be of benefit to the family. It can ease the bereavement problem. I can cite an example of my wife's aunt, who recently died, had everything well documented, had the will registered so that people knew where it was, had even drawn up a eulogy for herself, and had drawn up a message for her family at her passing away.

I think that brought a peace and hope to the family, and gave them some hope in life after death. With that, I'd like to support the Bill, and suggest that we go on to compulsory enactment. MR. ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: May the hon. Minister of Tourism and Small Business have permission to revert to introduction of visitors? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS (reversion) MR. ADAIR: Thanks very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly. It's a pleasure for me to introduce to you today 21 students from the Cadotte Lake school in the beautiful Peace River constit­ uency.

The Cadotte Lake school is a member of the Northland School Division, under the Minister of Educa­ tion. The st