Before deregulation, Albertans enjoyed some of the lowest electricity rates in the world.

Today, our rates are among the highest in Canada.

The Alberta Liberal Caucus believes that government has a role to play in regulating essential services like electricity, where market forces are insufficient to protect consumers from price instability.

We will move Alberta forward by restoring affordable, stable electricity rates for homeowners and businesses, and return common sense and order to Albertans’ monthly power bills.

The Largest Power Bill in Alberta History: $13.8 Billion

In six years, deregulation has added $13.8 billion dollars extra to the cost of generating power in this province - not including transmission, distribution and billing costs.

The Alberta Liberal Caucus Plan for Electricity

Re-regulate the electricity system for all Albertans.

Simplify power bills to eliminate customer confusion.

Establish a Planning Council on Electricity to help predict and prepare for future energy requirements using the lowest-cost options.

Keep prices as low as possible by ensuring the lowest-cost power generators are used first.

Actively promote energy conservation, and encourage electricity generation from renewable resources and alternative energy sources.

Here’s how our power plan stacks up against deregulation:

[direct link to this article]

To download the Alberta Liberal Opposition Land Use Strategy, click here.

[direct link to this article]

The Liberal Opposition’s major accomplishments in Seniors and Community Supports this session included the government’s long-overdue increase to AISH levels, in response to the Liberals’ repeated calls for more help for AISH recipients. The 2005 provincial budget included an $80-million annual injection to the program, raising spending to $488 million per year for severely disabled Albertans who cannot work full time to support themselves. This is exactly what the Liberal Caucus had been calling for. However, we continued to criticize the government’s inability to conduct long-term planning when they failed to set a plan to ensure regular increases to the monthly living allowance.

The recommendations in the Auditor General’s Report on Long-Term Care Facilities echoed many of the measures the Alberta Liberal Opposition has proposed for years regarding all those in continuing care.  Liberal policy supports the establishment of provincial standards for:

• Minimum staff training requirements,
• Resident care, including resident rights in all continuing care facilities,
• Accommodation,
• Nutrition and food

As well as:

• The establishment of an independent Ombudsman for residents in continuing care facilities,
• Restoring universal dental and optical benefits for seniors under the Alberta Seniors Benefits program.

The Liberal Opposition identified problems and pressed the government for action, long before the Auditor General’s report was released. We drew attention to the high rate of sedative and antipsychotic drug use in Alberta, which is almost double the rate in Europe and the U.S., and the possible connection to staff shortages. The Alberta Liberal Opposition repeated these concerns when the AG presented similar findings.

Accountability was a theme that was emphasized throughout this spring session as we planted seeds of democratic reform by proposing the establishment of all-party committees. The cooperation and openness that all-party committees create, make the democratic process open, transparent, and accountable.  Bridget Pastoor offered her expertise to the Task Force on Continuing Care Health Service and Accommodation Standards in reviewing the substandard care levels at continuing care facilities across the province.  She urged the government to put partisan politics aside in an effort to do what is best for Albertans in care.

[direct link to this article]

Today’s seniors are not content to watch life from the sidelines – they are actively involved in their communities and most are fully aware and engaged in the issues that affect them.

The cutbacks of the Tory government over the past 10 years have hurt seniors. Many have seen their ability to pay the bills and enjoy their retirement decline sharply.

While eliminating health care premiums and gaining the modest benefits promised by the Tory government will provide some relief for seniors, more needs to be done.

The Alberta Liberal Opposition would:

• Restore universal dental and optical benefits for seniors
• Index the Alberta Seniors Benefit to the Alberta consumer price index
• Reduce costs for independent seniors by re-regulating electricity and introducing public auto insurance
• Provide incentives to build affordable housing for seniors
• Increase the number of long-term care spaces
• Provide stable and equitable funding for seniors’ lodges
• Establish Standards of Care for organizations caring for frail or ill seniors
• Implement Standards of Training for seniors care attendants so staff are equipped with appropriate knowledge and skills
• Establish a body to investigate complaints of elder abuse and other seniors’ issues

[direct link to this article]

View our brochure (PDF format) that outlines the Liberal plan for public health care.

[direct link to this article]

Coal Bed Methane (CBM), a new energy source, could result in enormous long-term payoffs.  But because of its environmental risks, CBM could be a blessing or a curse for this province.

CBM is a natural gas found in coal seams.  It is extracted by drilling multiple wells into coal seams and allowing the gas to flow to the surface.  CBM requires a higher density of wells than other natural gas projects because of the low concentration of gas in coal seams.  During CBM extraction, water may be used, and this water contains contaminants.

Alberta must get it right

Coal bed methane poses risks to land and water and can generate significant noise pollution and flaring. American landowners have met with members of the Alberta Surface Rights Federation to relate their experiences. In Colorado, methane leaked into local water wells. Water from CBM extraction also leaked out and with its high mineral content made the local land uncultivable. The Alberta government should learn some lessons from the American experience before proceeding with CBM development here.

There are currently about 1,000 CBM wells in Alberta. They’ve been dubbed “experimental” by Alberta Energy meaning they don’t have to undergo environmental impact assessments.

Albertans deserve better. All CBM developments should undergo comprehensive environmental impact assessments. Resource development has to be balanced against its potential to harm the environment and nearby residents.

[direct link to this article]

Looking for a particular policy?  Select your topic area here to see our policy in that area.

[direct link to this article]

Our policy for dealing with climate change in a fair and effective way.

The Climate Change Risk

Over the past 100 years, greenhouse-gas emissions have been steadily increasing.

Scientists believe these emissions are causing the earth’s temperature to rise.  They predict an increase between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius by the end of this century.

The effects of this temperature change would be devastating.  Some effects could include:

• an increased incidence of severe weather, such as drought and forest fires, which have already cost Alberta over $2.3 billion in the past five years;
• glacial shrinkage, resulting in less available drinking water;
• a decline in biological diversity crucial to the environment;
• adverse effects on Alberta tourism such as skiing and fishing; and decreasing water quality for human consumption.

Clearly it is in the best interests of Albertans to act now and avoid these consequences.

Tackling Climate Change

Climate change is a real risk to Albertans and our environment.  As a contributor to this problem and as stewards of the environment, we must act now to counter this growing threat.

The Alberta Liberal Caucus has established a set of principles to guide our solution the problem of climate change.

• A strategy that unfairly targets any single province, region, or economic sector is unacceptable.
• The climate change strategy must respect the goal of economic growth in Canada and the provinces.
• Any strategy to reduce emissions must be a cooperative effort between the provinces, the federal government, and Canadians.
• Climate change demands immediate action.
• We must reduce greenhouse gas emissions – not just slow their increase – to stop climate change.
• Protecting our environment and the air we breathe is an important element of long-term economic growth.
• Climate change initiatives provide growth opportunities for environmental technology companies in Alberta.

At What Cost?

The Alberta Government claims that meeting Kyoto reduction targets would cripple Alberta’s economy.  However, the government’s numbers fail to consider many important factors, such as:

• the cost of climate change, such as drought and other severe weather conditions;
• savings to consumers and businesses through energy efficiency;
• economic growth and job creation from the increased demand for clean energy (solar and wind) and new technology;
• an increased quality of life for Albertans through a cleaner environment; the ability of future technological innovation to help meet emissions targets economically.

A Strong Plan Of Action

The key to slowing down climate change is a strong plan of action created through consultation between all orders of government, the public and industry stakeholders.

• Emissions standards should be set for different emissions categories.
• In other words, different industries should reduce emissions proportional to their ability to do so.
• CO₂ should be defined as a commodity and placed on a national exchange where emitters could buy and sell emissions credits.
• The federal government should be able to buy international emissions credits when the domestic price becomes too high.
• The primary cause of greenhouse gas emissions, consumer energy use, should be addressed through consumer awareness and incentive programs.

Innovative Solutions

Storing CO₂ underground

One possibility is the storage of CO₂ underground, including exhausted oil wells.  This would also provide industry a supply of CO₂ to help recover oil from wells.

Coal-bed CO₂ injection

One specific kind of geological storage is coal-bed methane enhancement with CO₂.  This technique assists in recovering valuable methane from coal deposits while storing CO₂ underground.

An Energy Efficiency Fund

By allocating just ½ of one percent of our royalty revenues (about $20 million) the government could create a revolving fund for energy efficiency to help Albertans make their homes more energy efficient.  The low-interest loans would be paid back over time with the money saved on energy bills.

CO₂ should be defined as a commodity and placed on a national exchange where greenhouse gas emitters would be able to buy and sell emissions credits.  This market would ensure that emissions levels are reduced in the most efficient manner possible for our country.

[direct link to this article]

The water policy for the Liberal Caucus.

More than gold, more than silver, more than the province’s oil and gas reserves … water is our most precious natural resource.  And now, more than ever, we must take steps to protect it.

The Alberta Liberal Caucus Water Policy is guided by the following principles:

• The government holds our water in trust to ensure a healthy environment and healthy people.
• Sustainability of our water resource is paramount, and decisions on use or allocation will involve environmental protection of and conservation.
• The public has a reasonable expectation to be involved in decisions about water supply.
• New water management legislation must recognize the environmental values of this precious provincial resource.

That means:

• Ensuring water quality.
• Preserving biological diversity.
• Ensuring an ample supply of pure drinking water.
• Determining, restoring and protecting in-stream needs.
• Developing and sustaining healthy aquatic ecosystems.
• Protecting heritage, aesthetic and recreational values and the role water plays in economic growth.

Ensuring water quality

Provincial testing processes for drinking water need to be reviewed.

Alberta needs safe drinking water, access to testing facilities, and prompt turnaround for test results.

Watershed Stakeholders

The following stakeholders must work together to reduce the impact of development, economic activities and land use on water quality:

• wastewater operators
• drinking-water treatment-plant operators
• livestock and crop producers
• rural residents
• land owners
• industries

Clear lines of communication and co-operation between health authorities and Environment must be established to ensure water quality issues are dealt with promptly.

The process for notifying the public about water quality concerns must be improved.

Sustainability and Conservation

We recognize that water is a scarce and valuable resource.  The Alberta Liberal Caucus vision for water management includes:

• Alberta’s ground water resources are mapped so we understand how much water we have and where it is located.
• All connections to a public water supply are metered.
• Equipment meets efficiency guidelines.
• Water-intensive industries are reviewed to ensure they are using the best available technology.
• Watershed management plans are published on a scheduled timeline.
• Priorities for use of water are given to users on the condition that strict conservation measures are implemented.

Environmental Protection

Protecting our water resource and the landscape it sustains ensures a healthy environment.

That means:

• Saying no to bulk water sales and no to interbasin transfers.
• Ensuring that crown resource dispositions (forestry, mines, minerals, and public land resources) are registered.
• Establishing and protecting in-stream flows before allocating any excess.

Public Participation

The Alberta Liberal Caucus vision for water management includes:

• Published applications for diversions or withdrawals and new uses, prior to approval.
• Fair and open public hearings, with intervener funding made available.
• Advance notice of meetings, information used by decision-makers, and meaningful input into decision-making given to all Albertans, not just those directly affected.

Environment Policy

• We must recognize the value of wetlands to our ecosystem.
• We must not reduce our potential to regulate wetland drainage.
• Biodiversity protection must be included in legislation as required by the Biodiversity Convention, which Canada has signed. That means the protection species and organisms whenever possible.
• Aesthetic aspects, such as appearance and smells, economic, and tourism interests, must be included in the provincial water policy.

[direct link to this article]

1. Don’t feel pressured. You don’t ever have to sign a contract. A default electricity price is always available to consumers who haven’t signed contracts.
2. Find out how much extra charges will cost you. Make sure you ask the salesperson about extra charges and add-ons, not just about the electricity or natural gas prices. Those extras add up!
3. Check the cancellation penalties. Ask about the contract’s cancellation clause. There may be large fees or penalties for moving or canceling for other reasons.
4. Ask about one-time charges. Make sure you don’t get a nasty surprise on your first bill! Ask the salesperson if there are any additional, up-front, or one-time charges that new customers have to pay.
5. Take all the time you need. Remember that you don’t have to sign a contract on the spot. Always get the facts and check the competition before you lock in.
6. Shop around. Under energy deregulation, you do not have to buy electricity and natural gas from the same retailer. Make sure you get the lowest price you can for every utility.
7. Ask marketers for i.d. All door-to-door energy salespeople must carry identification, so ask for it.
8. Protect yourself against scams. Before you sign a contract, always call Alberta Government Services at 1-877-427-4088 to make sure the retailer is licensed.
9. Go over your contract again after you sign. You have 10 days from when you receive your signed copy of the contract to cancel without paying any fees or facing any penalties. Always double-check the contract to make sure the terms are what you expected!
10. Know whom to call when things go wrong. Before you sign a contract, find out whom to call when there’s a problem with your bill and when your power or natural gas isn’t working. Often, it will be two different companies.

[direct link to this article]

Electricity. It’s something we use every day. It’s something we can’t live without.

THE WAY TO LOW-COST POWER FOR ALBERTA

Do you “choose” to buy electricity for your home?

If you’re like most Albertans, it’s not a matter of choice.

It’s a matter of necessity.

For many years, Albertans enjoyed some of the lowest power rates in North America.

For many years, we didn’t even need to think about electricity - unless the power went out and we were counting the minutes or hours until service was restored.

Unfortunately, those days are gone.

DEREGULATION HAS FAILED

The efficient, reliable, affordable system that once served us so well was dismantled by the Alberta government with no rhyme or reason.

The government traded in a perfectly functional, customer-friendly system - for a complex, confusing, and worst of all - expensive - mistake.

And Albertans are paying the price.

The government has spent billions of our hard-earned tax dollars trying to fix this costly mistake - called deregulation.

But the mess just gets worse.

DO YOU WANT TO SHOP AROUND FOR POWER?

As if high confusing bills aren’t enough, Albertans will be forced to shop around for electricity service, starting in 2006 when the Regulated Rate Option expires.

How do you feel about the prospect of facing door-to-door salespeople selling contracts for electricity?

Isn’t there a better way to do things?

Why can’t we have cheap, reliable power like we used to?

The answer is - yes - there is a better way. Yes, we can have cheap, reliable power like we used to.

LOW-COST POWER FOR ALBERTA

Electricity is an essential service - not a commodity that’s subject to radical price swings.

The Alberta Liberal Opposition, in consultation with electricity experts, has designed a superior new system for electricity service in Alberta.

Under our Low-Cost Power for Alberta plan:

• You will save money. 
• Power bills will be easier to understand.
• You won’t be forced to shop around for the best deal.
• You’ll get one low rate, with no contracts to sign and no complicated calculations to make.
• You will be able to budget more easily each month because the rate will be stable.
• You can count on a steady supply of low-cost power for years to come.

DEREGULATION HAS NOT WORKED FOR ALBERTA

The Tories promised that the changes would bring lower power bills - but we’ve seen just the opposite.

It’s no wonder other jurisdictions have rejected energy deregulation.

California’s disastrous experiment with deregulation, which also started with promises of cheaper power, ended in early 2003 after eight years of economic misery for consumers.

In announcing this decision, a California Public Utilities Commissioner said deregulation was “a disaster for ratepayers, utilities and their employees.”

He called deregulation “the most expensive public policy mistake in the history of California.”

Can Alberta be far behind?

THE LOW-COST POWER FOR ALBERTA PLAN—HOW IT WORKS

The Low-Cost Power for Alberta plan is based on a centralized, streamlined system that minimizes capital and operating costs.

Alberta is already well-equipped to adopt such a system.

All we need is political will.

Our plan is based on the following principles:

• Electricity is an essential service-not a commodity subject to radical price swings.
• Instantaneous balance of supply and demand throughout the delivery system is a physical requirement of electricity.
• The lowest possible cost occurs when the amortized capital costs and variable operating costs are minimized.
• Capital costs are minimized when generation and transmission are added to provide just enough capacity to maintain an acceptable level of reliability.
• Operating costs are minimized when generators are dispatched in ascending order of marginal cost.

UNTANGLING THE DEREGULATION MESS—SEVEN STEPS TO LOW-COST POWER SYSTEM

1. DISPATCH GENERATION AT MARGINAL-COST

In Alberta, electricity is dispatched based on the “bid” price of power in the Power Pool. All generators are paid the bid price, even if they previously “bid in” at a lower price.

This system is open to price manipulation and leads to higher prices.

Bringing generators online on a marginal-cost basis is much more cost-effective.

Our plan would see generators with the lowest cost used first. The higher-cost generators would come on line only as more demand is placed on the system.

And the cost savings would be passed on to Albertans.

2. FIXED-RATE COMPENSATION

Electricity generators are currently paid according to the daily Power Pool Price. Because this price is set through a bidding process, it is unstable and often much higher than the actual cost of producing electricity.

Compensating generators with a fixed rate based on fuel costs, depreciation, operation and maintenance, and a fair return on investment would give Albertans affordable electricity and generators fair compensation.

Investors would also be more likely to build new generation because the risk has been removed with a guaranteed return on investment.

3. ONE LOW RATE

Under the current system, the Regulated Rate Option will end in 2006 and consumers will have to shop around for the best rate.

Our plan would see the Power Pool set one low rate for all customers.

Commercial, industrial, farm and REA customers with a metering device could buy directly from the Power Pool.

4. ONE POWER COMPANY

Under our plan, residential customers would be billed by the same company that maintains the wires and reads the meter.

The one low rate would be offered by all wire-service providers so Albertans would only have to deal with one company for meter readings, bill payments, and power outages.

5. STREAMLINE THE SYSTEM

• Eliminate the Balancing Pool and roll its functions into the Power Pool.
• Eliminate the Transmission Administrator and replace with a Transmission Department created as part of the Power Pool to deal with ongoing electricity wire issues.
• Eliminate the Market Surveillance Administration. (The need to monitor for manipulation will disappear.)

6. INCORPORATE LONG-TERM PLANNING

Add a Planning Council under the direction of the Power Pool to:

• forecast future energy requirements and ensure they are met
• establish the reliability criteria for generation and transmission
• design options for meeting long-term capacity and energy requirements
• identify the lowest cost option for new generation

7. CUT OUT THE MIDDLEMAN

The Power Purchase Arrangements (PPAs) transferred the rights to use the generating plants that existed before 1995 to new “ownership” for 20 years. In 2000 industry paid $2.1-billion for the rights.

PPA holders currently supply electricity to the pool at spot prices, which are much higher than the marginal cost of producing the electricity.

Our plan would see the Power Pool take over the PPA holders’ obligation to pay the fixed and variable costs to the plant owners, eliminating the middleman.

It doesn’t make economic sense to have PPAs. They drive up costs. They don’t make the market more competitive. And they don’t result in lower costs.

Our plan un-bungles the mess created by deregulation.

[direct link to this article]

What are these energy contracts they’re now selling?

As of June 2003, Alberta’s electricity and natural gas industries are fully deregulated. For consumers, this means that you must decide whether to sign electricity and natural gas contracts. An energy contract is an agreement between you and an energy retailer (also called an energy marketer) to provide you with electricity or natural gas at a fixed price for a certain period of time. In other words, the price you pay for electricity will be the same every month for the duration of your contract. Contracts have benefits, but they also have drawbacks. Read on to find out more.

Do I have to sign an energy contract?

No! If you don’t sign a contract, you can remain on the RRO (or regulated rate option) for electricity prices until 2006. The RRO is fixed – you pay the same price for electricity every month. After 2006, if you haven’t signed a contract, you will pay a “flow-through” or “spot market” price for electricity. This means that you will pay the market price for electricity every month. The market price changes rapidly, so your bills will change, too.

What are the drawbacks of signing a contract?

Contracts give you certainty, but certainty comes at a price. Energy retailers will charge you a premium (built into the price they charge for electricity or natural gas) in exchange for guaranteeing stable prices. The price you pay will be the same every month, but in the long run there’s a good chance you will be paying more than someone who chose to pay the market price.

Why do I feel like I am choosing between a rock and a hard place?

Because you are! Deregulation picks winner and losers. The ‘choice’ between volatile monthly rates and energy contracts (with premiums built right in!) proves consumers lose and industry wins.

Who should sign a contract?

The Alberta Liberal Opposition believes that no Albertan should have to sign a contract and that there should be one low electricity rate for all Albertans. Unfortunately, deregulation doesn’t offer this. If you need to plan ahead and cannot afford wild ups and downs in your bills, you should consider locking into a contract to give yourself certainty.

What’s a better deal, the default option or an energy contract?

It is anybody’s guess! No one knows for certain whether the spot electricity price will average out to more or less than contract prices. The best deal is the Alberta Liberal Low-Cost Power for Alberta plan, which guarantees that everyone pays the lowest possible prices.

Air miles or two months free? How do I know which one is right for me?

Don’t get caught up in gimmicks that only disguise higher prices. The best way to choose a contract is to go back through your old bills and see what rate you paid for electricity (on average) over the last year. Try to find a contract that offers you a similar rate. Albertans are finding that regardless of what retailers offer to dress it up, electricity prices are still higher than what they should be. That’s the great rip-off of deregulation.

How can I be sure the company I am dealing with is reliable?

You can take action to protect yourself from scams. All energy retailers and door-to-door marketers must show identification, so ask for it. Before you sign a contract, you should also call Alberta Government Services (toll-free) at 1–877–427–4088 to make sure the retailer is licensed. You can also check the retailer registry online at http://www.customerchoice.gov.ab.ca.

If I don’t sign a contract will my power get cut-off?

No. As long as your payments are up-to-date, energy retailers cannot adjust, discontinue, disconnect, change or in any way alter your electricity service until after you send them a signed copy of an energy contract.

Do I have to sign on the spot?

No! The energy retailer must give you time to look over the contract and compare prices. You never have to sign on the spot.

Do I need separate contracts for electricity and natural gas?

No. You can choose whether you want separate contracts or whether you want to “bundle” your utilities together. Choose the option that gives you the best possible deal on both electricity and natural gas.

How can I be sure I am not paying too much?

The only way to guarantee that you don’t pay too much is to unplug deregulation. The Alberta Liberal Opposition’s Low-Cost Power for Alberta Plan guarantees that you always pay the lowest rate possible. Under deregulation, there is always the possibility of additional rate riders, premiums and hidden fees.

Why is the Alberta Liberal Opposition explaining contracts when they want to unplug deregulation?

The Alberta Liberal Opposition knows that deregulation in Alberta has failed and should be unplugged. However, only the Alberta government can decide to unplug. We won’t let Albertans struggle in the dark until the Alberta government realizes, like the government in California, that unplugging is the only solution to skyrocketing utility bills. Alberta consumers are entitled to the information they need to make wise decisions. We are committed to providing this information.

If there is a problem, who should I call?

Nothing is simple under deregulation. Here’s a quick guide to sorting out the confusion:

• If you experience a problem with a retailer or a door-to-door marketer, call Alberta Government Services at 1-877-427-4088 to report them.
• If you have a problem with your power service (such as an outage or fallen wire), you need to call your wire services provider (WSP). Their contact information should be listed somewhere on your power bill.
• If there is a problem with you power bill, call the energy retailer. Your retailer’s name and contact information should be printed prominently on the bill.

Wouldn’t it be easier if you only had to call one number?

With the Alberta Liberal Low-Cost Power for Alberta plan, Albertans would only have to deal with one power company for all their electricity needs.

What if I have a question that is not answered here?

Here are two places to call for help:

• You can call the government’s Public Information Centre at (780) 427-0265. You can call toll-free from anywhere in Alberta by first dialing the Rite Number, 310-0000.
• You can contact the Alberta Liberal Opposition through our website at http://www.albertaunplugged.com by calling the Rite Number, 310-0000, and asking to speak to the Official Opposition. We would be more than happy to listen to your concerns about energy deregulation and offer our solutions.



[direct link to this article]

[direct link to this article]

It’s time for the province to support Alberta’s cattle ranchers by loosening the stranglehold of the “big three” meat packers. 

Loosening the Stranglehold of the Packers

• There are only three packing companies: Cargill, Lakeside, and XL foods; these packers owned 13.4 % of the cattle in Alberta in 2003.
• The three packing companies process at least 90% of the cattle slaughtered in Alberta ( Auditor General Report on BSE assistance July 27,2004)
• These three packing plants have received over $12 million in grants from 1987 to 2000.
• From 1992-1995 Cargill received almost $2.5 million of the $12 million in grants. (Alberta Government Public Accounts Grants Books)
• These three packing companies received $45 million of the $400 million in compensation funds.

The Alberta Liberal Plan

The Alberta Liberals believe there is an alternative by supporting Alberta entrepreneurs:

• An Alberta Government should provide infrastructure for water, roads and land to help get small packing plants off the ground.
• Appoint a “beef czar” reporting directly to the Premier– an Albertan with an ear to the ground in the cattle industry, the environment, trade and the needs of local authorities – instructed to move the industry forward.
• Set a 10 per cent cap on the slaughter of the big three coming from their self-owned herds.
• Restrict market share and control of Lakside, Cargill, and XL Packers until healthy market conditions return.  This may require capping processing capacity of these companies and placing a moratorium on the purchase of Alberta-based processing companies.

The Existing Environment

• The Alberta Government forced the Tender Beef Co-op to establish its plant in B.C. due to bureaucratic red tape.
• The Tender Beef Co-op in Alberta ran into land purchasing and provincial support problems with its original location in Beaverlodge, Alberta.(Herald Tribune Grande Prairie Aug 30/04)
• The Government of B.C. lured away the packing plant and the 60 full time jobs from Beaverlodge when they offered land, 15 acres of low cost city property and a government promise to help remove any obstacles in development.
• There are groups starting packing plants across Alberta; we should support them and the jobs they create instead of forcing them to other provinces offering a better business environment to ranchers.

Capping the Lakeside Cargill and XL Foods Plant Operations

• Alberta currently has no legislation to cap the size of the herd that packers can own.
• Cargill has bought up a packing plant Caravelle in Spruce Grove this is not helping diversify the sale of beef and therefore allows the big 3 packing plants to control even more of the beef market.
• Lakeside is planning a large expansion to its plant in Brooks which will further consolidate ownership of cattle processing among the big 3 packing plants.

Packers and the Necessary Controls

• A 10% cap would allow packers to always have stock on hand for processing, however, not enough to control the market price of cattle by flooding the markets.(Approved by the Alberta Cattle Feeder annual meeting) (Source The Western Producer March 4/04)
• The distinction of the 10% of the slaughter rather than the size of the herd insures that packers are processing 90% of cattle owned by Albertans out of their total monthly amount.
• Albertans require legal protection from packer monopolies similar to the U.S. in order to support a strong open economy in the trade of cattle.
• In the United States, the 1921 U.S. Packers and Stockyards Act protects livestock and poultry producers by prohibiting monopolistic or predatory practices that force sellers to accept lower prices than would be available through free competition.

Control in the Market

• The BSE Crisis has demonstrated we cannot have all of our focus on the U.S. and we need to seek out new markets for the high amount of product we have to export
• Canadian Beef exports of $633 million to the United States were down just $78 million ($711 million) for the same market period (Jan to May) 2004 over 2003. (The Western Producer August 26/04)
• Total Canadian beef exports were down a total $72,584,698 in 2003 due to an increase in sales to Macau, Poland, Philippines, and the Caribbean. (The Western Producer August 26/04)
• The value of Canadian beef exports remained surprisingly strong during the BSE crisis; significant questions remain on how Alberta ranchers were hit so hard while large processing companies saw profit rise by over 280 per cent.
• “The frustration is that had we have been self sufficient in processing capacity coming into this, Canada would by–and–large have recovered from its BSE cattle price crisis,” Ted Haney, Canadian Beef Export Federation.
• The Alberta Government needs to support increased research into all markets along with the development of the new packing plants so that we can have demand for the product before it is completed.

[direct link to this article]

Dear Premier Stelmach,

I’m currently examining the flood damage here in Medicine Hat and Irvine. I have spent the last couple of days speaking to citizens here about their government’s response to the flood disaster that has ruined their personal property, disrupted their routines, and in the worst cases, put them out of their homes and drained their savings.

Premier, the people of Medicine Hat and Irvine have explained to me at length the depths of their frustration, disappointment and even anger at your administration’s inadequate response to this disaster. They need your help, and so far they’re getting the runaround from your bureaucracy, forced to deal with a distant call centre in Lethbridge when help is urgently needed on the scene in the flood-damaged communities.

It’s been a month since the initial flood, and Albertans are still waiting for assistance. One senior citizen I spoke with has lost everything; she has no home, there’s no money left, and she doesn’t know how she’ll care for her aging husband. She showed me a photograph of the water still surrounding her home – a home she’s worried she’ll never return to. The pain and frustration in her eyes is hard to watch, especially when she says she’s received the standard bureaucratic response from your government – no compassion, no kindness, but most importantly, no help.

Premier, these people feel that you’ve forgotten the role of government: to take care of people in distress. A representative of the Red Cross said it looked like a tsunami had hit Medicine Hat, and from everything I’ve heard, only the city government’s response prevented more extensive damage. In contrast, the provincial government’s response – or lack of response – has been shockingly callous and inept. If I were in your position, I would have ensured that on-site assistance was immediately on the scene in Medicine Hat and Irvine, to provide financial, material and emotional support for flood victims. That’s what a responsible government would do.

Winter is coming. These people want to be back in their homes, back on their feet, before it comes. It’s time to act. I urge you to really listen to the concerns and address the urgent needs of the flood victims. Listen to people like Patty and Jerry Swanson. Or Murray Heisler. Or Cheryl Finnie, James Chatfield, Geoff Watson, Joanne Spinks, and so many others. And once you’ve listened, send real help. It’s not too late to make a difference.

Sincerely,

David Swann
Leader of the Official Opposition

Read the original letter.

[direct link to this article]

But they also show we now need a hiring spree

Edmonton – Despite a nursing shortage that is hurting health care quality across the province, the Stelmach administration bought out 448 nurses in 2009/10 at a cost of $23.6 million, according to documents unearthed by Alberta Liberal Health Critic Kevin Taft. The documents also show that the Stelmach administration will soon hire back more than twice as many nurses as they’ve laid off – another confusing flip-flop from a government that’s struggling to manage health care.

The loss of nearly 450 nurses was revealed in the 2009/10 Alberta Health Services (AHS) Consolidated Financial Statements. Ironically, AHS’ 2010 Business Plan admits that “many…vacancies will need to be filled in 2010/11 in order to maintain service levels.” (AHS Business Plan, page 13.) Under the new contract with the United Nurses of Alberta, the Stelmach administration will hire 70 percent of new nursing graduates – or about 1260 out of 1800 nursing graduates per year.

“At first, I could barely believe what I was reading. But the evidence is clear: Ed Stelmach’s administration laid off 448 nurses, left countless vacancies unfilled, and now admit they’re going to have to hire hundreds of nurses to keep the system going,” Taft says. “If this situation weren’t so serious, I’d think our own government were playing head games with Albertans. How does any of this make sense?”

Taft points out another troubling aspect of the severance numbers.

“448 nurses jumped at the first opportunity to leave,” Taft says. “Given mismanagement like this, who can blame them? Morale in our public health care system has dropped into the basement, and spending over $23 million to lay off nurses desperately needed by the system is just another example of the backwards thinking that’s undermining public health care.”

An Alberta Liberal administration would have reassigned these nurses to any number of positions that desperately need to be staffed, such as emergency rooms and cancer care.

Relevant excerpts of AHS Business Plan and Consolidated Financial Statements

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

One year ago today, the Stelmach administration established a panel to help build a stronger child intervention system. 

At the time I welcomed the news, since at-risk children in Alberta are in desperate need of more protection and support, as evidenced by regular news stories of children in care suffering terrible abuse and even losing their lives. Though the Government of Alberta has failed in its duty to protect at-risk children, the panel was, at least, a step forward, and I looked forward to the release of their report, due in spring 2010.

But one year later, the panel has yet to provide the report – a report that’s even more urgently needed in the wake of the Stelmach administration’s cruel $26.5 million cut from the child intervention portion of the Children and Youth Services budget. When I raised the issue during budget debates in the Legislature, the Minister made no mention of the panel’s report and refused to answer several questions on the issue.

Vulnerable children remain at risk – and in fact the Stelmach administration’s lack of attention is increasing the risk even more. For the sake of the countless children in the province’s care, I urge the Premier and the Minister of Children and Youth Services to expedite the release of the child intervention review panel report and to follow up immediately with action to provide a safer, more nurturing environment for at-risk children and youth.

Office of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Bonus scheme not a commitment to fairness
Edmonton – Labour Critic Hugh MacDonald says that the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) gives bonuses to employees that reduce the number of Alberta workers receiving benefits and for increasing the number of companies registered in a flawed provincial safety program.

WCB documents provided to the Official Opposition show that the bonus program has been in effect for at least a decade. Each year, WCB employees receive a letter from the President outlining the bonus they’ll get for the last year’s work; a typical bonus can be as high as $5000.

How some bonuses are calculated

• In 2005, a maximum six percent bonus was granted for decreasing the number of claims where time lost from work exceeded six months.
• In 2007, a maximum eight percent bonus was granted for decreasing the number of claims where time lost from work exceeded three months.
• Bonuses were paid to increase the number of expedited surgical procedures.
• Bonuses were paid to sign up companies into improperly monitored safety programs. While millions in rebates were provided to these companies ($71 million in 2009), the government failed to ensure they met all Occupational Health and Safety laws.
• Finally, bonuses were paid to WCB employees for crafting polite “fit to work” letters to injured workers. These letters, of course, often terminated benefits to injured workers.
“This bonus policy completely distorts the objectivity of the WCB,” MacDonald says. “They have a financial interest in reducing benefits to injured workers. How can they be objective about whether or not an injured worker needs benefits when the WCB is offering them bonuses worth thousands of dollars if they reduce the number of Albertans claiming compensation?”

We demand that the Minister of Employment and Immigration, who is responsible for the Workers’ Compensation Act:

• immediately stop the million-dollar bonus scheme;
• identify claim files of injured workers cut off from benefits as a result of this bonus scheme and review their files;
• pay premium rebates only to employers who comply with all safety laws.
MacDonald notes that the WCB’s board of directors voted to remove references to the bonus scheme from their 2009 corporate objectives and performance measures.

“The decision to hide this tells me that the WCB feels a degree of shame about this program, as they should,” MacDonald says. “This bonus program shows that the government is not interested in treating injured workers fairly. The Minister must do the right thing and halt the bonus scheme immediately.”

Attached: Charts showing how WCB bonus system has impacted time-lost claims and Partners in Injury Reduction enrolment
Sample goal sharing letters

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Laurie Blakeman, Alberta Liberal Critic for Culture and Community Spirit, says that the Stelmach administration has mismanaged the planned upgrade to the Royal Alberta Museum – and that as a result, the museum’s collections will be locked away from the public for years.

The Royal Alberta Museum has needed an upgrade for many years. There is insufficient room to display and store collections, collections that serve vital educational and historical purposes. But plans to expand the museum’s capacity have gone off the rails. The ambitious first plan was dropped with no explanation, replaced by a second plan that never moved forward, again without explanation. And now Culture Minister Lindsay Blackett says they’re looking at building a second museum on the Alberta Legislature grounds.

However, there has been no official announcement regarding timelines for renovations or a construction start for the new site, and the human history collections are being boxed away from public view right now. It will be years before the public has access to these vital collections again.

“A competent administration wouldn’t need to put Alberta’s heritage in a box for an indeterminate number of years,” Blakeman says. “The ramifications of this – or rather, the consequences of government indecision – are tremendous. Thousands of students will miss important educational opportunities. Our students could go through junior high or high school without seeing their museum. And what about the well-trained, hard to find museum staff? What are they going to do for three years? What about new Canadians eager to learn the history and heritage of their new home?”

Blakeman says that an Alberta Liberal administration would have organized an alternate venue for the collections during the renovations, like the Art Gallery of Alberta did. Blakeman is also skeptical about Culture Minister Blackett’s claims that his government plans to build a second museum.

“There’s no money in the budget for a second museum, and without an official announcement, there’s no way to tell how long the public will be denied access to our shared history,” Blakeman says. “At this point, I have no confidence that the Tories really know what they’re doing, or even understand how their dithering is hurting Alberta.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Canada and Alberta need more markets for our oil and gas, and Enbridge’s plan to construct a pipeline to Kitimat would open up those markets for us. Combined with the Alberta Liberal plan to increase bitumen upgrading here in Alberta and western Canada, the pipeline would guarantee greater prosperity and economic security for all Canadians.

The federal Liberal plan to ban oil supertankers off Canada’s northwestern coast, diverting them to the port at Vancouver, is well-intentioned, but it would make the Kitimat project impossible. And even worse, the ban doesn’t serve the supposed goal of protecting the environment. Vancouver’s harbour is incredibly busy– a far riskier environment for spills than the less-used port at Kitimat.

If I were Premier, I would work with British Columbia to ensure this pipeline is built to the highest environmental and safety standards. And I would work with all Western Premiers to keep the economic benefits of upgrading here in Canada.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Appearance at committee hearing unmasks WRA as complainers with no solutions

Edmonton – The Wildrose Alliance party’s inability to take a clear stand on openness and transparency in leadership races shows that the party has no answers to Alberta’s challenges, according to Alberta Liberal Leader David Swann. 

Last week, the Standing Committee on Public Safety and Services met to hear presentations from five political parties on the issue of party leadership contests – whether or not such contests should fall under the authority of Elections Alberta and if donors’ names should be a matter of public record.

Alberta Liberals believe that the answer to both questions is “yes,” for the sake of openness. Leadership candidates for any party should have nothing to hide. The Alberta Liberal Party required leadership candidates to disclose the names of their donors during the last race, held in late 2008.

But the delegation from the Wildrose Alliance doesn’t approach leadership contests with any openness or transparency; they did not require their leadership candidates to disclose the names of their donors, and Danielle Smith took advantage of the freedom to be secretive.

“The Wildrose Alliance position on this issue is that we have no position,” Wildrose Alliance spokesman Vitor Marciano said at the committee meeting. “[T]he area in which the issue is important is not equally relevant or equally important across all political parties.” (Alberta Hansard, Public Safety and Services, July 8, 2010.)

Swann points out that candidates for the Alberta Liberal leadership race had to disclose their lists of donors in accordance with the party’s rules, and that he was happy to comply.

“There has never been any question in my mind that openness and honesty is the best policy, and a government under my leadership would insist on such,” Swann says. “Any leader that aspires to be Premier must be scrupulously transparent about where his or her money is coming from. Mr. Marciano is wrong – this issue is important to all political parties, and all people. The time for backroom deals and secret agendas is over in this province.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Official Opposition Health Critic Kevin Taft says bonuses at Alberta Health Services should come to an end.

Recent documents show Alberta Health Services (AHS) handed out nearly $1 million in bonuses during the 09/10 fiscal year. Overall, nearly $6 million in compensation was doled out to AHS executives.

Taft is continuing his long standing call for the Tory administration to abolish this wasteful practice. “While many Albertans have lost jobs and are struggling to make ends meet, Ed Stelmach and Gene Zwozdesky are paying AHS executives bonuses up to three times the annual salary of a typical Albertan,” Taft says. “That’s appalling.”

During the spring session of the Legislature, Taft released secret AHS letters that show bonuses for 08/09 were granted despite an admission that performance measures were difficult to assess.
“How can you hand out five- and six-figure bonuses when you can’t even measure performance?” says Taft. 

These latest documents show the 09/10 bonuses ranged from $14,000 to $139,000. Some of these executives make salaries just under $600,000 a year. In the past the Premier and Health Minister Gene Zwozdesky have defended these bonuses by saying we need better incentives to draw quality people to Alberta.

Taft wholly rejects that claim. “As I’ve said before, AHS executives who are already earning generous six-figure salaries shouldn’t need additional incentives to do their jobs, especially when most public servants are facing wage freezes.”

Taft thinks it’s especially ironic that huge bonuses are being given to senior officials when AHS’ own workforce engagement survey shows that only ten percent of physicians have trust and confidence that AHS can achieve its goals.

Taft also warned that the current bonus structure can easily distort decision-making, favouring short-term solutions over long-term planning.

“Medical decisions about resource allocation should not be tainted by the prospect of bonuses,” Taft says. “People inside the system are telling me that some crucial services are getting short-changed because resources are being put into areas that will ensure executives get their bonuses. That’s not fair to Albertans, and it’s not good for our public health care system in the long term.”

Taft says it’s high time the Premier did his job as leader, and put and end to this nonsense, “We need to stop this wasteful practice now. A Liberal government wouldn’t allow this to happen.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

On behalf of my colleagues in the Official Opposition, I wish all Albertans a very safe and happy Canada Day.

Today, Canada turns 143 years old. I hope Albertans can take a moment to celebrate our heritage, remember our successes and look to our future.

For some Albertans, this will be their first Canada Day as Canadian citizens. Others will be continuing a longstanding family tradition. Whether new Canadian, First Nations or descendant of one of the many waves of immigrants from Confederation onward, I know that all Albertans will come together to celebrate Canada Day and Alberta’s contributions to our country.

On behalf of my caucus colleagues, again, I wish everyone a fun, invigorating and inspiring Canada Day.

[direct link to this article]

Calgary – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition and Critic for Energy, says that the Stelmach administration’s characteristic disregard for consumer protection in the electricity market has raised the cost of living for thousands of Albertans, and leaves people vulnerable to exploitation by power companies.

Starting today, electricity costs will fluctuate much more because of a change to the way prices are calculated. For the last five years, electricity prices were based on a mix of long-term and short-term market prices; tomorrow, prices will be based solely on next month’s projected market price. That means more volatility in power bills.

“For Albertans who don’t like to see wide swings in their power bills – for example, people on fixed incomes – they’ll be even more tempted to enter long-term contracts with power companies who guarantee a fixed rate,” Swann says. “But here’s the problem: these contracts often result in higher power bills, on average, than the variable rate option – and they also often come with excessive fees for changing or cancelling your contract, as well as hefty administration fees.”

Direct Energy, for example, charges $400 if you cancel their five-year fixed contract. They also charge $9.00 per month for administration costs. And their current rate is 7.99 cents per kilowatt hour, which is more expensive than the current regulated rate option of 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour. Just Energy charges $75 to cancel their contract, with a $6.90 per month administration fee.

Not every retailer charges these exorbitant fees, but not every consumer has the time to carefully pore over the details of electricity contracts. Swann worries that vulnerable people will be victimized by pushy marketing ploys.

“The Stelmach administration hasn’t done nearly enough to educate or protect consumers,” Swann says. “An Alberta Liberal government, on the other hand, would ensure that people don’t get taken advantage of. We’d limit exit fees and administrative fees. And we’d make it easier for Albertans to make the right choice by posting price forecasts where everyone can find them, and presenting that information in a way that’s easy for everyone to understand.”

“Alberta used to enjoy among the lowest electricity prices in the nation,” Swann says. “Thanks to Tory bungling, our prices are now among the highest. Deregulating the electricity market was a huge mistake, one that a Liberal administration would never have made.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Apply your exceptional research and analytical skills where you can make a difference…contributing to making the laws of the province.

Reporting to the Chief of Staff, the Director of Research provides research expertise to the Caucus as well as gives direction to and coordinates the caucus researcher staff in defining research topics, clarifying objectives and determining approaches, timelines and reporting methods. Drawing on your experience and expertise you will ensure that appropriate research methodologies and effective strategies are employed to support Caucus initiatives through the collection, compilation and communication of research information on current events and topics of interest. Your knowledge of diverse research methods, including statistical analysis, and your ability to draft findings into reports, briefings and speaking notes will be essential in supporting the Caucus to promote its goals and objectives.

Your background will include progressive responsible research and supervisory experience as well as post secondary studies in a related field. Exceptional communication, both oral and written and excellent interpersonal skills are essential.  Key attributes to this role are a strong use of judgment and a flexible attitude in handling situations that arise in a dynamic and complex political environment. A keen interest and awareness of politics is preferred. Salary is negotiable, dependent on qualifications.

Please submit your resumé by July 10, 2010, to:

Chief of Staff
Alberta Liberal Caucus
201, 9718 – 107 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T5K 1E4
Phone: (780) 427-2292 Fax: (780) 427-3697
Email:

We thank all applicants for their interest; however, only individuals selected for further consideration will be contacted.

For additional information visit our website at http://www.albertaliberalcaucus.com

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Finance Critic Hugh MacDonald says that the government’s quarterly update glosses over an important fact: it collected an additional $181 million from education property taxes, yet is still forcing public school boards to increase class sizes and lay off approximately 500 teachers.

Edmonton and Calgary’s public and separate school boards face shortfalls amounting to tens of millions of dollars – much less than the additional education property tax revenue. The additional revenue could be used to fund the three percent wage increase owed to teachers, eliminating the public school boards’ budget shortfall and allowing the government to live up to its contractual obligations.

“This money would undoubtedly ease the pressure on Alberta’s school boards if the government would actually use it for schools,” MacDonald says. “There’s no reason whatsoever to deprive our children of a good education, not when the additional revenues from education property taxes more than cover the government-created shortfall.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Alberta Liberal Deputy Leader Laurie Blakeman says that the just-released report of the Alberta Electoral Boundaries Commission (AEBC) shows that the considerable influence of the ruling Tories has resulted in the gerrymandering of many constituency boundaries. Blakeman also notes that Alberta’s urban areas are underrepresented in the Legislature.

“The Stelmach administration’s sticky fingerprints are all over this report,” Blakeman says. “There’s been major tinkering with boundaries in Edmonton to reflect personal requests from Tory MLAs. Edmonton-Southwest, for example, is a mess.”

Blakeman notes that this entire process would be much more fair, transparent and efficient if the Stelmach administration hadn’t forced the Commission to add four more constituencies – constituencies that Albertans have said the province doesn’t need.

“Edmonton should have received two additional seats, Calgary three, with the balance subtracted from sparsely populated rural ridings,” Blakeman says. “Our position all along has been that constituencies should be redistributed, not added. But the influence of the Premier’s office has preserved rural seats solely for the benefit of his party.”

Blakeman reminds Albertans that the Alberta Liberal Clean Government Initiative (CGI) would require governments to cede the power to redraw electoral boundaries to the Chief Electoral Officer, who would do so based solely on demographics and without political interference.

“Politicians should be held completely at arm’s length during this process. Unfortunately, in the absence of checks and balances like the ones we propose, political interference at the expense of transparency and accountability is the rule of the day,” Blakeman says.

Blakeman is pleased, however, with one aspect of the report, namely that the Commission opted to drop the matrix, the archaic and arbitrary point system used to allocate resources to constituency offices.

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Calgary – The city council of Bellingham, Washington recently voted to support a resolution targeting fuels derived from Alberta’s oil sands. Concerned that the Premier’s response has been inadequate and that attacks on the oil sands have been increasing, Official Opposition Leader David Swann spoke today to the city councillor who authored the resolution to defend Alberta’s energy industry and challenge the facts behind the initiative.

“Here we have a situation where a well-meaning and well-intentioned U.S. municipality is trying to do something positive for the environment. I get that,” says Swann. “The problem, however, is that they have chosen an easy and convenient target in the oil sands, and are making Alberta’s energy industry a scapegoat without acknowledging the facts.”

Swann notes that the technologies now being employed to extract Alberta bitumen are moving towards being the most sophisticated, least impactful, and cleanest in the world. Whether it’s the new dry tailings pond technology that’s just been unveiled by Suncor, or Petrobank’s new water saving Toe to Heel Air Injection (THAI) technology, people everywhere need to realize that the oft-used image of the oil sands as one large, dirty strip mining operation is largely outdated and unrepresentative of development taking place today.

Swann also questions the absurdity of singling out Alberta’s oil sands for condemnation when the alternative is often fuels produced from environmentally risky off shore drilling or politically unstable parts of the world. “Why are fuels derived from the oil sands seemingly the ugly duckling in this bunch?” says Swann. “Considering the devastation that has occurred recently in the Gulf of Mexico, it strikes me that U.S. jurisdictions like Bellingham should be looking more to Alberta’s oil sands as a stable, secure source of energy rather than vilifying it.”

Swann is challenging the Premier to do much more to defend Alberta’s oil sands against such attacks. “I’ve done my part. Now it’s time for the Premier to do his.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
Alberta Liberal Caucus Communications
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Recently Ted Morton and Ed Stelmach have followed the timeworn tactic of fighting with the federal government in a transparent attempt to bolster their own credibility in Alberta. Albertans aren’t fooled by such tactics. The Official Opposition supports the federal government’s efforts to improve the Canada Pension Plan. 

Albertans are deeply concerned about the financial security of their retirement years. There’s plenty of evidence that they are not feeling secure under the current system. The federal government and every other province in Canada are united in trying to provide Canadians with that security.

We dispute the provincial government’s position. We do not believe that a gradual and modest boost to CPP contributions will have a negative impact on small business; we believe that Albertans, like other Canadians, want a more secure retirement.

It’s time for the Stelmach administration to stop playing politics with Albertans’ futures. Alberta Liberals, unlike Ted Morton, support healthy and prosperous retirements for all our citizens – not just Jack Davis and other well-to-do Tory pensioners.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Laurie Blakeman, Alberta Liberal Critic for Culture and Community Spirit, says that Minister Lindsay Blackett should resign for denigrating Alberta’s film and television industry and failing in his duty to properly support a vital sector of Alberta’s economy.

Blackett asked “Why do I fund so much crap?” while attending the Banff World Television Festival on Monday. The funding in question refers to provincially-subsidized Alberta film and television productions.

“If the Minister of Health said our doctors and nurses were crap, that Minister would be fired. If the Minister of Education said our teachers were crap, that Minister would be fired. If the Minister of Energy said that the oil sands were crap, you can bet that Minister would be sitting on the backbenches faster than the Minister of Culture and Community Spirit can think of something stupid to say,” Blakeman says. “And that’s pretty fast.”

Blakeman says that if the Minister cannot promote or properly support this important sector, he should resign - or be fired.

“While on a taxpayer-funded trip, he took the opportunity to slam hardworking Albertans who are trying to tell Alberta stories and make greater contributions to our culture and economy,” Blakeman says. “You can’t expect Hollywood-level quality given chronic underfunding. It’s a testament to the talent and perseverance of the Alberta film and television industry that we get as much quality work as we do despite this administration’s and this Minister’s neglect.”

Blakeman notes that during Blackett’s tenure, film production in Alberta has fallen and thousands of film workers have been forced to relocate to neighbouring provinces to find work.

“He’s exporting good, well-paying jobs and contributing to a creative brain drain - just the opposite of what he should be doing in his role as Minister of Culture,” Blakeman says. “If the Minister thinks our film and TV sector is crap, he should look in the mirror to see who’s responsible. In a little over two years, he’s overseen the loss of millions of dollars in funding and managed to do more damage to the sector than any of his predecessors. That’s some legacy.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The Alberta government is currently fighting attempts by the federal Tories to force a National Securities Regulator on Alberta. Every once in a while, the Official Opposition must stand with the government. This is one of those times.

Alberta’s provincial securities industry made it possible for our oil and gas sector to help transform our province into one of the most prosperous jurisdictions in the world. And the presence of the Calgary Stock Exchange and local bankers who understand local investment opportunities continues to help Alberta’s entrepreneurs build a prosperous future.

Forcing a national securities regulator on Alberta threatens that future. Forcing Alberta startups to go hat in hand to Toronto for venture capital isn’t the way Albertans want to do business, and we support Finance Minister Ted Morton’s attempt to protect Alberta’s interests. Ted and I may not have much in common, but on this we can agree: standing up for Alberta is the duty of all our leaders, regardless of party affiliation.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Alberta Environment’s decision to forego an investigation of a serious fire that occurred last summer at the Swan Hills Treatment Centre stands in stark contrast to the ministry’s overzealous handling of other less significant environmental incidents over the last decade. It also raises some important and troubling questions.

“What is it about this particular incident that made the government turn a blind eye and not even bother to notify local residents when toxic fumes were released into the air?” asks Liberal Environment Critic Laurie Blakeman. “Why the sudden lax approach to environmental protection?”

Blakeman believes that the answer lies in the fact that the government wanted to avoid drawing any undue attention to the waste treatment plant’s increasingly questionable financial position.

“Let’s not forget that this is a facility that has been losing money for some time now,” notes Blakeman. “In the 2007-08 fiscal year, the operating deficit was almost $7.5 million and equipment and inventory purchases were close to $2 million over budget! In 2008-09, the operating deficit was just over $3 million. The big question is how this fire, which shut down operations for 10 months, will affect the facility’s bottom line.”

Blakeman also wants to know how the 2009 fire will affect the facility’s long term reclamation costs, which are already forecast to be somewhere in the range of $62 to $71 million – costs that will be borne by Alberta taxpayers.

“Alberta Environment’s unusual handling of the Swan Hills Treatment Centre fire is but the latest chapter in the ongoing saga of this controversial facility,” says Blakeman. “Albertans deserve an explanation as to why their government seemingly opted to ignore a serious environmental incident in favour of keeping the waste treatment plant out of the public eye.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Last week, it was revealed that the Cross Cancer Institute in Edmonton was turning away patients with advanced stages of cancer, and now the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in Calgary is doing the same.

“Cancer is an illness that will touch virtually every Albertan at some point in their lives, and the current hardship that is being experienced by patients who cannot get the care they need is heartbreaking,” said Liberal Health Critic Kevin Taft. “The Alberta Cancer Board needs to be reinstated to restore timely, efficient and effective cancer care in this province.”

The Alberta government’s only explanation for this latest cancer crisis is that it is due to staff shortages, which is ironic considering that it halted external recruitment of doctors and nurses in April of 2009. “We said very clearly that their short sighted hiring freeze would have serious long term consequences, and we are now seeing the results,” said Taft.

While cancer patients and their families continue to wait for proper treatment, Health Minister Gene Zwozdesky continues to believe that throwing money at the issue, rather than actually solving the problem, is the best course of action. Consider the following:

 Alberta Health Services’ (AHS) expenses for the 2009-10 fiscal year are forecasted to be $10.6 billion.
 AHS’ expenses for the 2008-09 fiscal year were $9.9 billion.
 Overall, during the last fiscal year (2009-10) AHS spent another $700 million, and is still not able to provide cancer care to patients who are in late stages of their illness.

Taft notes that the dissolution of the Alberta Cancer Board has introduced further new inefficiencies and delays – creating potentially life-threatening situations for cancer patients, making the recruitment of health care professionals more difficult, and making it harder than ever to reduce wait times for cancer treatment.

“Alberta clearly needs a more cohesive, efficient, and effective means of delivering cancer care,” said Taft. “The first step in resolving this problem is to reinstate the Alberta Cancer Board.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until this week, but the Tories pulled the plug in April, months early. While Tories are working the BBQ circuit, we’re still following the issues. This is one of the last questions we would have asked as the spring session came to a close: 

The Premier has talked about accountable and transparent government since 2006, but this administration’s actions fail to live up to the Premier’s rhetoric. Once again, Albertans with concerns about development in the industrial heartland have been spied on – and to make matters worse, armed security guards provided by the province were present until a public outcry forced the Solicitor General to withdraw them this morning.

To the Premier:
1) Can the Premier explain how the presence of armed sheriffs fostered democratic participation and dialogue in Strathcona County? Doesn’t the presence of provincially-provided armed guards give the province the appearance of endorsing the corporate position on the issue?

2) Can the Solicitor General offer definite proof that the ERCB or Alberta Sheriffs didn’t provide an undercover presence at public hearings in Fort Saskatchewan?

3) Mr. Speaker, the Official Opposition has called repeatedly for an independent Utilities Consumer Advocate to investigate this kind of corporate misconduct. When will you take steps to put the public interest ahead of private profits?

– 30 –
For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Is the Premier planning to eliminate elected school boards?
Calgary – Harry Chase, Alberta Liberal Education Critic, says that Albertans have provided visionary guidance to the Stelmach administration in the Inspiring Education report. But reading between the lines of the report shows that the Premier might eliminate elected school boards. 

The report refers to “governors,” people responsible for local control of public education. Page 10 of the report says “governors could be elected, appointed or recruited from the community.” In the 1990s, the Tories stripped school boards of their ability to raise revenues, hampering their ability to do their job; now it seems that the Tories are contemplating doing away with elected school boards altogether.

“First this administration gets rid of the health regions and puts decision-making in the hands of a central bureaucracy. We’ve seen how well that’s worked. Now it looks like they’re contemplating doing the same thing to education,” says Chase.

The report comes at a time when school boards are still reeling from the Education Minister’s funding claw back.

“How can parents, students, teachers and trustees have any faith in the government’s future direction given the administration’s recent betrayals?” Chase asks. “Calgary is facing the loss of over 300 teachers and nearly 100 other full-time personnel. Edmonton public school boards have a $12 million deficit and must consider layoffs and class size increases. Other school boards are seeing their reserve funding depleted to critical levels; some are compensating by cutting back on essential supplies or music and physical education programs. The current state of public education is far from inspiring – only two-thirds of our students complete Grade 12 – and the responsibility lies with this Tory administration.”

Chase says that stable funding is the key to providing students with the education they need and deserve. Restoring fiscal autonomy to school boards would be a good start.

“Cornerstone public services such as health care and education absolutely require stable, adequate funding in good times and bad,” Chase says. “An Alberta Liberal administration would really inspire people who care about public education by keeping school boards as democratically elected bodies and giving them back the ability to do their jobs. None of the excellent work done by the Albertans who contributed to this report will mean anything unless there’s a government in place with the ability to follow through with sensible policy and better management.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

On Friday, two Ahmadi Muslim mosques were bombed in Lahore, Pakistan.

Many lives were lost and many more people were injured. The Ahmadi Muslim community in Calgary is in mourning, and today I ask sympathetic citizens of all cultures, religions and philosophies to offer their prayers and thoughts for the suffering of the affected people.

Terrorism is a blight upon humanity, and these innocent victims did nothing to provoke this vicious attack. It is our duty as human beings to strongly condemn and resist these unspeakable acts.

Ahmadi Muslims have been persecuted in Pakistan for decades. I am grateful that here in Canada we have freedom of worship and respect for all cultures, religions and points of view. Let us hope that one day such freedoms will be upheld all over the world, and that these senseless acts of violence will end forever.

Office of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until June, but the Tories pulled the plug in April, months early. There are still many questions left unanswered. If the Legislature were still in session this week, as it should have been, this is one of the questions we would have asked:

Health care is still the main concern for many Albertans, especially in smaller and rural communities. Cold Lake is one community that is having serious difficulties recruiting and retaining physicians, finding enough registered nurses, and securing enough funding from Alberta Health Services for new stretchers, bedside monitors, a new CT scanner, and an updated fire and alarm system.
To the Premier

1. Every Albertan needs a family doctor, and Cold Lake is already short six full-time physicians.  Why is the Premier allowing medical school positions to be cut when it is clear that Alberta needs more doctors?

2. Why is Alberta Health Services not hiring the needed number of registered nurses for the Cold Lake Healthcare Centre, when this inaction is already having serious consequences for the people of Cold Lake?

3. Will the necessary funds for the Cold Lake Healthcare Centre’s needed equipment be included in the 2010 Health Capital Plan, which has already been delayed by almost 2 months?

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until June, but the Tories pulled the plug in April, months early. There are still many questions left unanswered. If the Legislature were still in session this week, as it should have been, this is one of the questions we would have asked:

Alberta’s metal fabrication industry has been hammered hard by the recession. Sales of fabricated metals have dropped by 27 percent between 2008 and 2009 and exports are at their lowest level in five years.

Despite the excess manufacturing capacity in Alberta’s metal fabrication industry, last October Imperial Oil awarded a 250 million dollar (US) contract to a South Korean metal fabrication firm to produce 200 large modules to be used for the Kearl Oil Sands Project. These wide, large, and heavy modules will be shipped from South Korea to Oregon. Then they will be transported by river barge up to Lewiston, Idaho and from there they will be loaded on trucks for the long, slow journey through Montana to Fort McMurray.

Hugh MacDonald, Critic for Employment and Immigration, has questions for Premier Stelmach about his government’s failure to stand up for Alberta’s metal fabrication industry:

1. Why doesn’t the government require metal fabrication jobs to be created in Alberta when it awards tax breaks and royalty concessions to oil sands developers?
2. Imperial Oil is willing to contribute 40 million dollars for public infrastructure in Montana to facilitate moving these modules. Is Imperial Oil providing any funds to offset the stress placed on Alberta’s roads and bridges from transporting these enormous modules to Fort McMurray?
3. There are at least fifteen separate module manufacturing yards for various oil sands projects located in the Edmonton area. What is so special about the Kearl Lake modules that they could not be built in Alberta?
– 30 –
For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until June, but the Tories pulled the plug in April, months early. While Tories are working the BBQ circuit, we’re still following the issues. If the Legislature were still in session this week, as it should have been, this is one of the questions we would have asked:

Yesterday the Official Opposition released our Clean Government Initiative – twelve steps to transparency, effectiveness and accountability. Step One of our plan would establish an independent commission with binding powers to set MLA pay, benefits and bonuses.

Despite the passage of Motion 501, which requires the government to establish an independent committee to set MLA pay, the Premier has refused to make the recommendation of that panel binding – effectively making the committee useless.

To the Premier:
1) When you and I met last week, why did you refuse to make the committee’s recommendations binding?

2) If the Premier is concerned that the committee will recommend a raise that would be too high for voters to accept, why not simply establish an upper limit to such raises – or decreases – in the legislation establishing the committee? Has the Premier no imagination?

3) Why is the Premier permitting such an obvious conflict of interest by allowing MLAs to play such a huge role in setting their own compensation? Why does he think people were so outraged when the Premier and his ministers received raises of tens of thousands of dollars in 2008?

– 30 –
For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Democratic reform package includes tax credit for Albertans who vote

Edmonton – Citing a need to address the ongoing culture of cronyism in Alberta, Alberta Liberal Leader David Swann is releasing his Clean Government Initiative (CGI) today – twelve steps to transparency, effectiveness and accountability. 

The Initiative begins with a pledge, signed by all Alberta Liberal MLAs, to “be the cleanest government in Alberta’s history.”

The pledge is reinforced by Swann’s ambitious program of reforms, including an independent commission with binding powers to set MLA pay, benefits and bonuses, a promise to ban all corporate and union donations, and whistleblower protection legislation.

Swann is hopeful about his plan to reward citizens who vote with tax credits.

“If you are engaged enough to head to the polls and vote, I believe that you deserve a tax cut,” Swann says. “I hope that this incentive will motivate more Albertans to vote. Forty percent turnout isn’t just embarrassing, it’s bad for democracy.”

Swann would like political leaders to be role models, something he feels is only possible if the changes in the CGI are implemented.

“I want to provide tools that will prevent MLAs from getting embroiled in conflicts of interest. After decades of one-party rule in Alberta, there is a culture of entitlement among our current leaders,” Swann says. “Influence peddling and backroom deals are commonplace, and it’s hurting us. We believe that government must be accountable to voters. That’s what this initiative is all about.”

Read the full policy here.

– 30 –

For more information, contact:
Alberta Liberal Caucus Communications
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

During the last 5 years, 30 Somali-Canadian men have been killed in Alberta. Despite repeated requests from the Somali community, the Stelmach administration has taken no action to remedy the issues surrounding these senseless deaths. 

Question of the Week: Somali-Canadian deaths in Alberta reaching fever pitch

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until June, but the Tories pulled the plug in April – months early. While Tories are working the barbecue circuit, we’re still following the issues. If the Legislature were still in session this week, as it should have been, this is a set of questions we would have asked:

During the last 5 years, 30 Somali-Canadian men have been killed in Alberta. Despite repeated requests from the Somali community, the Stelmach administration has taken no action to remedy the issues surrounding these senseless deaths. 

To the Premier:

1) The Premier insists this problem can be handled by conventional policing, but the facts tell a different story. This approach has clearly failed. Why won’t you appoint a task force to deal specifically with this issue?

2) The Ministry of Justice claims that no formal request for a task force has come from the Somali community, but why should they have to ask? The Alberta Liberal Caucus would strike such a task force instead of adding red-tape. Why won’t you?

3) In the name of protecting Alberta’s economy, this government has taken to blaming the victims. Do you think this is good governance, or good PR?

Aside from striking a task force, an Alberta Liberal government would:

 Provide a proper economic plan for boom towns such as Fort McMurray. This would allow ways to adequately equip social and community groups with proper resources to engage their youth in positive ways.
 Ensure the police to population ratio based on StatsCan crime statistics is upheld.

– 30 –

For more information, contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Laurie Blakeman, Alberta Liberal critic for culture, says recently announced cuts to the Community Presenting Grants will practically eliminate professional cultural events outside the big cities.

19 municipalities are no longer eligible for the Community Presenting Grants program, including St. Albert’s celebrated Arden Theatre and other highly regarded theatre programs across the province.

Apparently the public funding is being shifted to the ministry of municipal affairs, but Blakeman says that theatre groups will have a harder time getting grants from that ministry than one devoted to cultural pursuits.

“I don’t even see a mechanism that would allow these theatres to apply for grants under the Municipal Sustainability Initiative,” Blakeman says.

Many of Alberta’s smaller cities and towns host touring shows, creating opportunities for people outside Edmonton and Calgary to enjoy professional theatre, dance and music. Without the Community Presenting Grants, these tours won’t be able to operate.

“What the arts community needs is sustainable funding they can depend on,” Blakeman says. “Instead, this administration has cut funding from a vital program without consulting stakeholders, without giving them a chance to plan, and without setting up some kind of alternative.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Calgary - School boards across Alberta are struggling with rising costs, funding cutbacks, and dwindling reserves. Alberta Liberal Education Critic Harry Chase warns that this is just the beginning, as the impact of continued Conservative mismanagement begins to be felt in classrooms across Alberta.

Even as they mismanaged Alberta’s public finances into a black hole, the Stelmach Conservatives assured Albertans that they would not do it on the backs of the people who need government services the most. Yet, again and again we see a government taking funding from Albertans who really need it. 

The most recent targets are students, teachers, and school boards. By failing to live up to his five year contractual obligation to teachers, Education Minister Dave Hancock is bankrupting school boards, forcing them to cut front line staff and run deficits. The result will be larger class sizes and reduced support for students.

The source of the problem is an agreement signed between teachers and the province three years ago, whereby Premier Stelmach promised to fund yearly wage increases for educators. Now, his government is pleading poor, even as he brags about the multi-billion dollar Sustainability Fund. School boards are being forced to find the money to cover the wage increases, putting them in the red and risking layoffs.

Chase argues that if the government isn’t willing or capable of keeping its financial commitments when it comes to education, then the government should return control of the education portion of property taxes to locally elected trustees.

“Perhaps it’s time to admit that tying boards to the boom-and-bust provincial economy is destabilizing for our schools. We should explore ways to empower school boards so that communities have a real voice in how schools are run,” continues Chase.

“An Alberta Liberal government would honour every single cent promised to school boards and teachers under any agreement we’d sign,” says Chase. “Students, parents and trustees would be able to make real plans for the future – plans that would give Alberta the best school system in the country.”

The Alberta Liberals plan to raise this issue in the legislature when the government brings in amendments to the School Act this fall, legislation which is already late coming. “Albertans need to know that there is an option, a better way,” concludes Chase.

– 30 –

For more information, contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until June, but the Tories pulled the plug in April – months early. While Tories are working the barbecue circuit, we’re still following the issues. If the Legislature were still in session this week, as it should have been, this is a set of questions that Calgary-McCall MLA and Service Alberta Critic Darshan Kang would have asked:

Mortgage fraud is a serious crime that can leave its victims on the verge of financial ruin. The Official Opposition has been raising concerns about mortgage fraud for over five years. Recently, the Auditor General also identified problems in the land titles registry that could allow mortgage fraud to occur. And now, with the Bank of Montreal launching the largest mortgage fraud lawsuit in Canadian history in Alberta, people have had enough of this government’s failure to address Alberta’s vulnerability to fraudsters.

To Service Alberta Minister Heather Klimchuk:

1. Why is the Minister doing nothing to improve Alberta’s reputation as the mortgage fraud capital of Canada?
2. The government has passed three separate laws in the last five years, each promising to tackle the mortgage fraud issue once and for all. Why have these new laws failed to fix the problem?
3. When will the Minister comply with the Auditor General’s recommendations and secure the land titles registry from further incidents of mortgage fraud?

The Official Opposition has a clear plan for protecting Albertans from mortgage fraud, including stricter monitoring of land title transactions to detect fraud and tightening regulations for home inspections to ensure that appraisals are accurate.

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The spring sitting of the Alberta Legislature was originally scheduled to last until June, but the Tories pulled the plug in April – months early. While Tories are working the barbecue circuit, we’re still following the issues. If the Legislature were still in session this week, as it should have been, this is a set of questions we would have asked:

During the last 5 years, 30 Somali-Canadian men have been killed in Alberta. Despite repeated requests from the Somali community, the Stelmach administration has taken no action to remedy the issues surrounding these senseless deaths. 

To the Premier:

1) The Premier insists this problem can be handled by conventional policing, but the facts tell a different story. This approach has clearly failed. Why won’t you appoint a task force to deal specifically with this issue?

2) The Ministry of Justice claims that no formal request for a task force has come from the Somali community, but why should they have to ask? The Alberta Liberal Caucus would strike such a task force instead of adding red-tape. Why won’t you?

3) In the name of protecting Alberta’s economy, this government has taken to blaming the victims. Do you think this is good governance, or good PR?

Aside from striking a task force, an Alberta Liberal government would:

Provide a proper economic plan for boom towns such as Fort McMurray. This would allow ways to adequately equip social and community groups with proper resources to engage their youth in positive ways.

Ensure the police to population ratio based on StatsCan crime statistics is upheld.

– 30 –

For more information, contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Alberta Liberal environment critic Laurie Blakeman discusses the Official Opposition’s new environment policy. Clip courtesy CBC’s Provincial Affairs.

Click here to listen.

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Laurie Blakeman, Alberta Liberal environment critic, says that Alberta needs a provincially funded and operated air monitoring system as a first step toward cleaning up the province’s air quality – and therefore improving the health of Albertans. 

According to the most recently available statistics, Alberta has the highest asthma rate in the nation.

“Asthma affects thousands of Albertans and costs the health system between $135-$149 million every year,” Blakeman says. “Every sixteen minutes, an Albertan winds up in one of our emergency rooms because of an asthma attack. Many, many of these cases are vulnerable children. We need to clean up our air, and an accurate monitoring system is the place to start.”

The most recent air monitoring plan recommended to government would cost $11 million over four years and provide one air monitoring station in every population centre in Alberta with a population of over 20,000. Portable monitors would periodically assess air quality in smaller communities. The government has ignored this plan.

Blakeman also believes Alberta must adopt the National Air Quality Health Index, which provides more accurate and more comprehensive measures of the health impacts of toxins in the atmosphere. Currently, for example, sour gas levels are not even publically available for locations such as Mildred Lake. Alberta is the only province that hasn’t adopted the Index, which allows citizens to quickly check air quality (measured on a scale of 1-10) on TV before they go outside. This is especially important for asthmatics.

“It’s wrong that Albertans should be the only Canadians not to benefit from the federal air monitoring system,” Blakeman says.

Cleaning up Alberta’s air must include air monitoring, but it can’t stop there. “Monitoring means nothing unless the government enforces its own emissions standards,” Blakeman says. “Polluters that break the law should face the consequences.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Calgary – Harry Chase, Alberta Liberal critic for children and youth services, demands a public inquiry into the province’s foster care system. 

Chase’s demand comes in response to leaked information from inside the ministry that an aboriginal child has died in protective custody in the Stony Plain area. Details are incomplete because at this point the Stelmach administration hasn’t released any information.

“Minister Fritz has had more than enough chances to clean up the foster care system and ensure the safety of vulnerable children,” Chase says. “It’s time for a public inquiry.”

“For too long the Tories have hidden behind the shield of client confidentiality to cover up the mounting evidence of their callous incompetence,” Chase says. “Hiding the facts about the death of this child and all the children before him or her does nothing to keep kids safer. Just the opposite.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Is it time for the public to take back Grace Hospital?

Calgary – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition, says that the financial failure of the Health Resource Centre (HRC) shows the drawbacks of private health care delivery and may provide an opportunity to restore capacity to the public system.

“Grace Hospital, now occupied by HRC, used to play a key role in public health in Calgary,” Swann says, “Until the Tories sold it for a song to private interests. Taxpayers have invested millions in this private facility over the years, and now might be the time for us to get our investment back.”

Swann wants to know how long Alberta Health Services (AHS) has known about HRC’s financial troubles.

“How has patient care been affected?” Swann asks. “Did AHS assign HRC hundreds of surgeries in mid-February to help keep them afloat?”

According to Swann, this situation illustrates the lack of accountability and transparency inherent in private health care delivery.

“If it’s feasible, pulling Grace Hospital back into the public system would be good for Calgary, good for Alberta, and good for patients,” Swann says. “This whole affair shows that the best option for stable, reliable health care is a well-run public system.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

My caucus colleagues and I are delighted to congratulate Calgary-Varsity MLA Harry Chase for being awarded the University of Calgary Student Union President’s Citation, the highest award presented by the Student Union. 

Harry is being recognized for his never failing commitment to the students at the U of C. 

Alberta Liberal MLAs see Harry toiling endlessly behind the scenes to ensure every student in Alberta gets a top-notch education. As a former teacher, Harry understands the needs of students and has made it his life’s mission to guarantee that every child in this province is able to excel in their education. This honour is further evidence of his commitment.

Congratulations Harry! Well Done.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

On this Day of Mourning my caucus colleagues and I pause to commemorate and honour the Alberta workers who have been killed, injured, or developed diseases at the workplace.

Albertans work extremely hard to make better lives for their families and build a stronger foundation for Alberta’s future. In 2009, 110 Albertans died at work or as a result of an incident at their workplace. Albertans deserve a safe work place, and they deserve to return home to their loved ones after a day’s work.

My colleagues and I remain committed to protecting Alberta’s workers. In the coming months, we will continue to call on the government for safe working conditions, fair labour practices, and for the government to provide Alberta workers with the protection they deserve.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

This session has proven that the Official Opposition has an important role to play in defending democratic rights, exposing bad decision-making and corruption, and protecting the vulnerable.

The Stelmach administration’s attempt to muzzle the Public Accounts Committee, chaired by Finance critic Hugh MacDonald, exploded in their faces. They didn’t realize that Albertans still respect democracy and the need for checks and balances. Our efforts to publicize the scandal paid off, and the Tories were forced to back down. I’d like to thank the journalists, columnists and bloggers who kept this issue alive. You helped defend a vitally important democratic tradition.

The public accounts crisis wasn’t the only way the Official Opposition made its mark.

Last week the Tories made a big deal about their upcoming distracted driving legislation. You know who’s been pushing for this legislation all session long? Darshan Kang, Alberta Liberal MLA for Calgary-McCall.

Remember Motion 501, which passed unanimously in the Legislature, urging the government to establish an independent body to review MLA pay and benefits? That Alberta Liberal motion came from our own Bridget Pastoor, MLA for Lethbridge East.

Kent Hehr refused to allow vulnerable Albertans with developmental disabilities to be further victimized by cruel budget cuts. Ultimately, many of those cuts were reversed, thanks in great part to the pressure brought to bear by Kent.

Liberal stalwart Laurie Blakeman fought and won the battle to stop the practice of shady heat metering in apartments, saving thousands of Alberta renters hundreds of dollars.

Kevin Taft exposed the Stelmach administration’s continued disregard for taxpayer money by showing that huge bonuses haven’t gone away despite the Premier’s promises – they continue to be handed out to top executives at Alberta Health Services, while frontline care continues to wither.

Hugh MacDonald blew the whistle on the Olympic train, which ultimately turned into a private luxury for Tory elites and their families.

Harry Chase, the man with the biggest heart in the Legislature, continued to speak out for students and children – from young adults facing massive tuition increases to vulnerable children in foster care.

And as for me? I refuse to meekly accept the picture that some disgruntled people are trying to paint. Dave Taylor may try to take all the credit for our very well-received oil and gas policy, but the truth is I had to push him to complete it. I took the lead on the consultations with oil and gas industry leaders, and it was our caucus staff that put together the policy. Yes, Dave did good work on this policy, and despite everything I’m glad he had a hand in it. But he was far from the only person involved, and it would never have seen the light of day without my leadership and my initiative.
Every leader faces challenges. The Premier himself has experienced twice the number of defections I have, and it’s still two years until the next election – unless of course he calls one early to cut his losses.

You know what? I’ve faced bigger challenges. Do you really think that some harsh language is going to deter me from serving the people of Alberta to the best of my ability?

Not a chance.

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Alberta Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald says that high rates of death, illness and injury in the workplace are clear evidence that the Tories aren’t doing enough to protect workers.

Since 2006, over 500 Albertans have died due to workplace diseases and accidents, and tens of thousands have suffered disabling injuries.

“In 2002, this government promised to publish the names of employers that break worker safety laws,” MacDonald says. “The Official Opposition even proposed an amendment to the Occupational Health and Safety Act to force the Minister to publish those names. That amendment, had it been accepted, would have made workplaces safer.”

According to a 2002 press release, the government’s own Bill 37 would have “Publish[ed] the names of employers with the best and worst safety performance in the province.”

Eight years later, the Auditor General has reported, perhaps predictably, that the government’s enforcement of Occupational Health and Safety rules has been lax, further highlighting the need for strong enforcement of its own laws.

“Only now, eight years later, after a critical Auditor General’s report, are they finally saying that they are trying to move forward. Eight years is a long time to let a promise languish, especially when lives are at stake. Employees have the right to seek out safe employers and avoid unsafe ones.”

“The government needs to take a long, hard look at these numbers,” MacDonald says. “Many of these deaths, injuries and illnesses are preventable, but only if the government enforces its laws.”

On this International Day of Mourning, the Official Opposition recommends the following to make worksites safer:

• Publish the names of employers with the best and worst safety records in the province;
• Legislate mandatory joint work site health and safety committees, as is the norm in every province but Alberta;
• Commission a thorough study of the effect of workplace carcinogens on Albertans;
• Vigorously enforce all provincial employment and safety standards;
• Make paid farm workers eligible for Worker’s Compensation and protection under Occupational Health and Safety legislation.

“These measures would improve worker safety, protect jobs and reduce fatalities,” MacDonald says. “Alberta should be at the forefront of worker safety, but instead we’re at the back of the pack. Broken Tory promises have left workers unprotected, and that’s not acceptable.”

Attached: Government of Alberta Bill 37 release from 2002.pdf

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

or Hugh MacDonald

(780) 914-5270

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Kevin Taft, Alberta Liberal critic for Health and Wellness, wants to know why the government’s plan for building much-needed health care infrastructure is nowhere to be found.

Usually, the Health Facilities Capital Plan is released around the same time as the provincial budget. That didn’t happen this year, and when questioned about the issue, the Minister of Health and Wellness said that the plan would be released by April 1 this year. The government missed its own deadline, despite several false starts and promises.

The delay is perhaps the least troubling issue surrounding the capital plan. Mixed messages from Alberta Health Services (AHS) and the Premier are adding to the already considerable confusion in the provincial health care system, and raise questions about who is setting priorities for new health infrastructure construction – the Premier, Health minister Gene Zwozdesky, or AHS CEO Stephen Duckett?

“Stephen Duckett has told the media that a new cancer treatment facility to replace Calgary’s Tom Baker clinic isn’t a priority for this year’s capital plan,” Taft says. “But the Premier has said the exact opposite. Who’s running the show? We need to know that these decisions are being made based on community needs, not political influence.”

Now that the Legislature’s spring sitting is over, MLAs can’t even properly debate the merits of the plan.

“Had the plan been released while the House was sitting, we could have discussed it in the Assembly, for the record, for the people of Alberta,” Taft says.

Without a capital plan, Alberta’s cities and towns are left wondering when and if they’ll get the new facilities or upgrades they need. Projects such as the Sherwood Park Hospital, the Queen Elizabeth II Hospital in Grande Prairie and the new long-term care centre promised to Fort McMurray remain up in the air.

“Albertans can’t afford any more delays,” Taft says. “Thousands of Albertans across the province have already been feeling the lack of a capital plan: not enough beds, longer wait times in the ER, longer travel times for surgeries. This administration has left Albertans in the dark yet again.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

The Stelmach administration brought session to an early close again, and so these are the last Under the Radar questions for the spring session. 

But while PC MLAs go fishing, we’ll still be hard at work. Watch for our Question of the Week, starting next week. In the meantime, here’s the last round of Under the Radar for now:

Laurie Blakeman defends the free speech rights of Rocky View county residents – see http://bit.ly/cvNgS7

Kevin Taft reveals that 500 Alberta Health Services managers are eligible for still more generous bonuses and severance packages – see http://bit.ly/aCTiFF

Hugh MacDonald holds the Stelmach administration accountable for a massive $140 million budget overrun at Alberta Treasury Branches – see http://bit.ly/cfsZuX

Bridget Pastoor stands up for the right of PDD service providers to appeal Stelmach administration cutbacks – see http://bit.ly/9Z6Hlx

Puffball Question of the Week
PC MLA David Xiao transparently promotes the Stelmach administration’s public-private partnerships to build schools – see http://bit.ly/deq6ad

To ask MLAs about these questions, contact us at 1-866-633-4214.

– 30 –

For more information contact:

albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Calgary – Alberta Liberal Education critic Harry Chase says that the Stelmach administration’s attempt to spin their announcement on P3 schools as a great success has instead revealed the weaknesses of public-private partnerships and called into question the province’s approach to new school construction.

While the government trumpets the savings realized by building schools using the P3 model, Bird Construction, a member of the B2L Partnership contracted to build ten new schools in Calgary and Edmonton, reported stronger than expected earnings. Bird Construction’s earnings report states “[O]ur higher pre-tax earnings are a result of favourable margins realized on our contracts, many of which were secured prior to the downturn in the economy.”

“Albertans deserve to know if these ‘favourable margins’ were earned on contracts to P3 school projects,” says Alberta Liberal Education critic Harry Chase. “The government hasn’t come forward with any of the details – even though the Auditor General has demanded more transparency and the release of a value for money report.”

It turns out that Bird Construction owns a company that built at least 13 P3 schools in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia cancelled its P3 projects in 2001 because of cost overruns totaling $32 million. Nova Scotia’s Auditor General also blasted that province’s use of P3s to construct new schools. Bird’s Project Director of the Alberta Schools Project was the former vice president of the company connected with Nova Scotia’s failed P3 experiment.

“If Alberta doesn’t change direction now, we could be heading down the same path as Nova Scotia, with massive cost overruns that endanger schools our communities desperately need,” concludes Chase.

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta’s water allocation system is out of date. 

It was designed to provide for the irrigation districts first but also has to balance the water needs of our growing population and industry. Instead of dealing with the problem up front, the government is allowing irrigation districts to reallocate their water for commercial use. To the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development: how does this move towards commoditization of water do anything but jeopardize the province’s ability to protect water for agricultural use?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Hayden: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. While the licensing is handled under the Minister of Environment, I am pleased to report that with the new methods that are used now and the new approach that is used with irrigation, we’re able to cover far more acres with less water than we did in the past, which is going to open up opportunities, I think, in the future for other uses by Albertans.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. Has this minister considered what other countries’ approaches are to water conservation, particularly, and to irrigation, and might they work here?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, in fact, we have. Our agriculture industry is using the most modern technologies. The changeover is actually quite advanced, whereby we’re able to irrigate crops with far less evaporation and far more of the water actually going to the growth of those crops.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. Given that this shift could take away farmers’ rights to hold a plebiscite on water allocation, how can the minister be certain that farmers are really willing to permanently give up their water rights?

Mr. Hayden: Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe that farmers are wanting to give up any water rights with respect to the requirements that they have for their agricultural operations. It wouldn’t make sense. There’s no common sense in an approach that would reserve water rights beyond those that are required to grow the crops that these agricultural producers grow.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, this government dissolved one of Alberta’s most successful organizations, the Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. 

AHFMR is being replaced by something called Alberta Innovates. Last Friday the chairman of Alberta Innovates: Health Solutions sent out a memo openly admitting, “We do not know the exact nature of Alberta Innovates . . . new funding programs.”

To the minister of advanced education: why did this government shut down AHFMR when it didn’t have a detailed plan for what would take its place?

Mr. Horner: Well, actually, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member would peruse the rest of the letter, I think what he would find is that in this current year the competition that the fund did was actually $4 million more into health research than what happened last year. In fact, next year that amount and potentially even more, dependent upon the endowment, will also go out into the research programs of health research in the province of Alberta, more attuned to what the Premier of this province at the time, Premier Lougheed, wanted the Alberta heritage fund for medical research to do.

Dr. Taft: Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s a mess.

Given that Alberta’s medical researchers have been told that the September application process for funds is being cancelled and the new funding structure won’t be in place until the fall, what are medical researchers who depend on applying for funding this September supposed to do? What’s your guidance to them?

Mr. Horner: Well, actually, Mr. Speaker, I believe – and I was looking for the confirmation – that the competition that closed today was for moving forward in the fall. What is at issue here are a number of salaried employees of the universities, if you will, not just in Edmonton but also in Calgary, that are potentially not going to win the award. Whether or not they would win an award the next year and whether or not they would win an award under the program that the new Alberta Health Solutions board is going to design is the question.

The statement that the Alberta heritage fund for medical research is no longer there is a false one because it is. The statement that we’re going to continue to do what it used to do is a true statement.

Dr. Taft: Well, again to the same minister: given that this minister has been in charge of this reorganization for longer than a year, actually, why is it that according to the chairman of Alberta Innovates in this memo Alberta Innovates is only now embarking on a strategic planning process? How could we be so far behind?

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is forgetting a little bit of 18-month history here, and that is that we brought not only the Alberta heritage fund for medical research board but the University of Alberta’s representatives from the health and medical fields, we brought researchers from across the province, we brought researchers in the innovation community from across Alberta together 18 months ago, and this is the culmination of their recommendations. Alberta Innovates was not written by this ministry or this minister. It was written by all of the stakeholders within that research continuum.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, last fall this government dispatched three MLAs from the backbenches to canvass charitable organizations about possible changes to Alberta’s charitable gaming model, and they were supposed to deliver their final report by March 31. 

Obviously, this deadline has come and gone. My question is for the Solicitor General. When will this report be tabled in the Assembly? After today we adjourn for five months.

The Speaker: The hon. Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security.

Mr. Oberle: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to report that the committee, in fact, met its deadline, and I’m in receipt of a report, which I’m reviewing right now. The AGLC is reviewing it as well. I have an internal process to follow, and upon completion of that process if it’s determined that the report will be released, I’ll do so.

Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Solicitor General keeps setting and missing these deadlines, so let me just ask: why was this deadline missed?

Mr. Oberle: Mr. Speaker, I have done no such thing. The member himself just said that the committee is required to table a report, and they did so on the deadline. I haven’t missed any deadlines.

Mr. Hehr: Well, this Assembly just debated legislation that would see revenues dedicated to jurisdictions they originate from. Why were you considering redistributing gaming revenues raised in one jurisdiction to some other community?

Mr. Oberle: Mr. Speaker, all good stuff for debate, but we’ll wait until the report comes out and determine how to proceed.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Freedom of speech doesn’t seem to be a priority for this government. 

They took down only the antinuclear signs in Peace River, and now they are failing to protect the residents of Rocky View county’s right to free speech. In January of this year cease-and-desist orders were issued by the town council to individuals running a website which was critical of the council’s policies. To the Minister of Municipal Affairs: does the minister agree with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association’s criticism that the council infringed on the residents’ right to free speech?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I’m not familiar with those particular details. If the member opposite would want to give me more information on that, I would do the research and get back to her.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Well, thank you. Perhaps the minister at the same time could tell me why nothing was done by the ministry to protect the rights and the freedoms of those same citizens of Rocky View.

Mr. Goudreau: As I indicated, Mr. Speaker, I’ve got no details as to what may or may not have happened and the reasons why they might not have released some of that information. I’m going to wait for the member to send me that information.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, given that freedom of speech is only the most recent problem that the residents of Rocky View county have had with their council, could I also get the minister to agree to meet with these constituents to address their concerns?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, my role is to work with the individual municipalities. I think there might be other ministers in this room that might be more appropriate to respond to the issues that those particular individuals have. At this stage those are just allegations. Unless I get more information, I can’t say yes or no that I would meet with them.

Noise Abatement

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. A few weeks ago I raised the issue of loud vehicle noise in the cities and the efforts of the Edmonton Police Service, the industry, and Alberta Transportation to establish testing procedures and recommendations for new legislation which would establish a provincial standard for noise emissions. We need to give officers objective noise emission levels and approved equipment. So far no legislation. To the Minister of Transportation: why is the desire of government to hit the summer barbecue circuit early more important than the eardrums and a quality night’s sleep for many urban Albertans?

Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I absolutely don’t know where this hon. member ever got the idea that we were bringing legislation forward on vehicle noise. The province has never ever indicated we’d do that, and no other jurisdiction in Canada is doing that. Yes, we’ve done preliminary research tests. We’ve been doing static tests on noise of motorcycles. Contrary to what she believes, there’s no real way to prove the tests while they’re moving.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: since the minister’s ADM is well aware of this issue, if the minister hasn’t asked for a briefing, will he ask for a briefing, which would explain to him the need to establish a workable noise limit and approved noise-testing equipment and to understand that this was developed using automotive engineering test procedures?

Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I’m very aware of what she’s talking about. That’s why I’m telling her the real truth of the matter. The fact of the matter is that municipalities can give out and are giving out violations right now on noise with motorcycles. It’s being done today.

Ms Blakeman: Given that the police service is having trouble getting this through the courts because it is not verifiable, it’s not an objective way of dealing with this. Will the minister, since he wouldn’t bring it forward this time, guarantee us that this House will see that legislation next fall?

Mr. Ouellette: Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. I told her we have no intention of bringing it forward because it’s not testable. I want to reiterate that the Edmonton Police Service issued 383 tickets between May and October of last year.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. MacDonald: Thirteen per cent of new cancer cases identified each year in Alberta could be work related. 

However, only 31 cancer-related claims were accepted by the Workers’ Compensation Board in the last reported year. My first question is to the Premier. Given that there is over $300 million in the WCB’s occupational disease reserve fund, will the Premier ensure that all Alberta workers have the same protections that firefighters have for work-related cancers? I believe the government did the right thing when they enhanced protection for firefighters.

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, it’s a technical matter, and the minister will respond.

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, with pleasure. The Workers’ Compensation Board makes decisions based on the facts, facts presented to the Workers’ Compensation Board by the medical professionals. That is how cases are adjudicated. That is how entitlement is being adjudicated on files. When a worker gets injured, there’s an obligation for either the employer, the worker, or the medical staff to report the accident. Reports are filed. Decisions are made by the WCB.

Mr. MacDonald: Again to the Premier, and this is not a technical matter; it’s a matter of health and safety for Alberta workers. Why is the government reluctant to bring in legal protection so that Alberta workers such as welders have WCB protection if they are exposed to cancer-causing agents in their line of work?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the minister just answered the question. WCB makes the determination. They’re a quasi-judicial authority separate from government, and they make those decisions on behalf of Albertans.

Mr. MacDonald: I would remind the hon. Premier that it’s this government, his government, that writes the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Now, again to the Premier: given that there are as many as 2,500 Albertans who could possibly die of occupational cancer by the year 2015, how can the Premier justify waiting five years before cutting exposure rates to cancer-causing agents in the workplace by half?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It should be known to Albertans that aside from insuring Albertans following an unfortunate work accident, the Workers’ Compensation Board also provides our department of occupational health and safety with a significant amount of money for mitigating accidents. One of the areas where the funds are being spent is on making sure that our workers are informed properly and that laws relevant to the occupational health act are being enforced. We are focusing on preventing accidents by education, by putting the proper rules around workplace environments. But when accidents occur or when occupational diseases are developed, decisions by the WCB are made based on medical evidence.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. There’s growing evidence that shows that past a certain point in a salary more money does not mean better results. 

In fact, a healthy, trusting, positive work environment provides the best incentive. In light of the current bonus system at Alberta Health Services and the fact that their own staff survey shows an almost toxic work environment, it’s clear that Alberta Health Services is missing the point and putting their faith in money.

Again to the Premier: will the Premier immediately put an end to a flawed bonus system?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, in response to the same question a couple of weeks ago I said that the minister of health is reviewing the situation with Alberta Health Services. Alberta Health Services itself is looking at a new system for remunerating their senior officials that sit as vice-presidents and other management positions. Any other information the minister has with respect to the progress on the file.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that 30 per cent of the total bonuses for the 48 vice-presidents in Alberta Health Services will be determined by “adherence to values,” can the Premier explain how any system can possibly measure an individual’s adherence to values in an objective way?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I can’t speak to the piece of information that the hon. member just gave, but I can tell about what we did in government, and that is that we eliminated, with of course the support of our senior managers, $40 million worth of bonuses going forward, and we worked it out with those officials. As I said, the minister of health is working with the Alberta Health Services Board to deal with the issue.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, taxpayers surely have a right to know where their money is going. Will the Premier give his word that immediately on receiving this information, it will be made public to all Albertans?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we do have a very open and transparent system of communicating with Albertans in terms of the level of compensation for all senior officials, including those that are elected. There is a range of salaries that go into the annual reports from all of the organizations that report to the various ministries.

The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Hydroelectric Dam on the Peace River

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The B.C. government has just announced they’re going to go ahead with a massive hydroelectric dam on the Peace River, adding to the two huge dams that are already in place. The flow to the Peace River delta has already been compromised, and all this Premier is willing to do is to seek intervenor status and offer weak platitudes about mitigating negative impacts. To the Premier: given that so much is at stake for Alberta if B.C. goes ahead with the dam, what specifically is the Premier going to do to protect Alberta’s interests?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we will be protecting Albertans’ interests. As I told the media yesterday, I had a conversation with Premier Campbell on Saturday morning. He apprised me that they will be proceeding with the applications. Those applications, of course, will go to adjudication, and a quasi-judicial authority will make the decisions. We will of course be delivering our position. The Northwest Territories and First Nations have some issues. There are a considerable number of questions that have to be answered.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. That anticipates the next question which is, really: why has the Premier not been seeking government-to-government negotiations instead of going cap in hand merely as an intervenor in this application?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Premier has called and given us advance notice of the application is a good step on his part and has also given us an opportunity to dialogue on this particular matter even further. As I said before, we will protect the interests of Albertans. There are numerous concerns. The Department of Environment, Department of Justice, and SRD will be involved, and it may include other departments in terms of delivering evidence to the quasi-judicial authority.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that the run-of-river Dunvegan dam is downstream from B.C.’s two massive dams and a key renewable resource for Alberta, what effect will B.C.’s latest development and dam have on our ability to generate our sustainable energy resource?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, there is no development; it’s being proposed. That is one of the questions that will be asked by the province. Again, it’s the first part of a long process. This is discussion, of course, delivering the evidence to the committee that’s going to take a number of years to deal with it and make a decision. But in the meantime we’re going to ensure that the interests of Albertans are protected.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For over 25 years the Womanspace Resource Centre in Lethbridge has helped destitute women. 

Provincial agencies, service providers, including my office, have referred clients to Womanspace for assistance in free ID clinics, interim rent, and, certainly, interim damage deposits, teaching financial literacy and management. The closure has triggered a shortfall of services to Lethbridge citizens.

To the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports: given that Alberta has not much more than a . . .

The Speaker: The hon. minister. [interjection] The hon. minister has the floor.

Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, I know that our ministry has offices located in Lethbridge that are there specifically to help people out. We have offices there that will help people out with their AISH with their PDD and with the office of the public guardian. I know that we provide these services. I’m not quite sure what that question was, but I do want to assure people that if there is a gap because of the closing of an agency that has done wonderful work in Lethbridge, we are there to help and support the people of Alberta.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. One of the points that I didn’t get out was that Alberta doesn’t have much more than a desk and a chair for the status of women.

My next question would be to the Minister of Service Alberta. Will the minister explain how her ministry plans to deal with the fallout of the closure of Womanspace Resource Centre since photo ID is issued through her ministry?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the hon. member for bringing this to the House’s attention. While Service Alberta does not provide grants or funding to community organizations, one of the things that we are working very hard on with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs is the whole issue of identification cards for homeless and transient Albertans. We also have a wealth of resources to assist individuals in the area of renting, so we’re there to assist when we can.

The Speaker: Don’t look surprised, hon. member. Thirty-five seconds, no preambles. Proceed.

Ms Pastoor: Oh. To the Minister of Children and Youth Services: how is your ministry prepared to fill in the gaps left by the closure of Womanspace as a helping partner for your parent link family violence prevention and family and community support services in southern Alberta?

Mrs. Fritz: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, what a loss for your community, hon. member, and I know you’re a strong advocate for women. The Womanspace Resource Centre in Lethbridge has been known, as you said, for 25 years to empower woman through the provision of workshops and forums providing information referrals and resources for women. What I will do as the minister responsible for woman’s issues in our government is write to my federal counterpart on behalf of the agency to ask that they reinstate the funding that you’re inquiring about.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Xiao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In 2008 this government announced plans that it would build six new schools in the Edmonton region and that two of them would be built in my constituency of Edmonton-McClung. 

One is a K to 9 Catholic school, Sister Annata. I’m happy to report that this school is under construction and will be open for business this fall. Another one is the K to 9 public school in the Grange area. My question is for the hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Can the minister assure my constituents that this Grange school is still on track?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In fact, the 18 schools being built under the Alberta schools alternative procurement program are on track. They are being built two years ahead of schedule. We will turn over those schools by June 30. One of the schools that was started two years ago in the hon. member’s constituency is one of those schools. In September these schools will serve over 12,000 students.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Xiao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In 2008 the minister announced they would build 18 schools through the ASAP initiative, which is the Alberta schools alternative procurement program. I would like to ask the minister: is this process quicker than a traditional process, and has this lived up to this claim?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, as I said, yes, it is. In fact, it’s two years ahead of schedule. Students in the ASAP 1 will be in their classrooms September 30. We’re expecting the same with ASAP 2, and he has one of these schools. Yes, it is faster; yes, ASAP 1 saved $97 million. Stay tuned for the announcement of the next go-round.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Xiao: Yes. My final question is to the same minister. Can you tell me the specific date when the Grange school is going to be built?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, I need to say that we go through a very stringent evaluation of the school projects. That announcement is going to happen I believe tomorrow. I’m hoping that with the speed of the first go-round – it took two years shorter – the same thing will happen with this one. It is a good program. It is a good directive to keep our students very much educated.

Alberta Hansard, April 21, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, I’ve just obtained new information with regard to the bonus system at Alberta Health Services. 

It turns out that 500 Alberta Health Services managers are eligible for what they euphemistically call pay at risk.

To the Minister of Health and Wellness: how many millions of dollars are Alberta taxpayers at risk for if all 500 bonuses are paid?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, that’s a very torqued and distorted question. The fact is that under the new system we have standardized contracts, and in actual fact the people at that higher income level don’t even get the full range of pay that they’re eligible for unless they perform the specific benchmarks and meet the measurements that have been set for them.

Dr. Taft: Well, given that most people understand that as doing your job.

Given that pay at risk translates into automatic bonuses unless you mess up, and given how many mess-ups there have been in Alberta Health Services, can the minister tell Albertans if any managers at all have not received their bonus for the past fiscal year?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I do not manage those managers, but what we’ll find out from Alberta Health Services, who does manage them, is an answer to that question.

Dr. Taft: Well, given the minister manages all kinds of other decisions of Alberta Health Services, will the minister confirm that the new standardized severance package for Alberta Health Services managers who lose their jobs is 12 months’ pay plus a 15 per cent bonus?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I don’t know about the bonus part offhand. I’ll have to look into that. But I can tell you that the amount of severance has been brought down significantly from what it once used to be. It is in fact capped at the max of 12 months, and people find that to be very competitive with other multibillion-dollar organizations across this country. It’s what’s necessary in the industry to attract and retain the very best people to manage this multibillion-dollar situation in Alberta.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Taxpayers of Alberta guarantee Alberta Treasury Branch deposits of $23.8 billion. 

There’s no room for mistake or mismanagement.

To the minister of finance: why has the minister allowed ATB to mismanage the startup of its new banking system to the point where it is now $140 million over budget and a year behind schedule?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’ve already spoken, to the public record, that I’m not pleased at all with that result, a cost overrun of that magnitude. I’m requesting a full report from ATB as to what happened and what’s being done to prevent it from happening again. I would point out to the hon. member that the Auditor General has noted that ATB is already taking steps to correct some of the problems they’ve experienced.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister. Speaking of the Auditor General, the office of the Auditor General has 14 outstanding recommendations for the Alberta Treasury Branches, including one on risk management, one on senior management bonuses, one on internal audit programs, and one on internal control weaknesses. Why has the minister of finance failed to deal with these 14 outstanding recommendations?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, in fact, we’re dealing with all of them. We accept all of them. But I would remind the hon. member that we manage the relationship in terms of strategic direction for the Alberta Treasury Branches. I don’t think he or anybody else in this House wants us to get back into the micromanaging of internal decisions of Crown corporations. We’re not going there. We want operational independence for ATB.

Mr. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, the minister knows full well that the board of directors is appointed by this government. We have $23.8 billion in deposits that are guaranteed by the taxpayers. They have to be protected. Again, why has the minister . . .

The Speaker: The hon. minister has the floor. I heard two questions there. Deal with the first one. We’re moving on.

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’ve met several times already with the chairman of the board. We’ve discussed these issues. We’ve accepted all of the Auditor General’s recommendations. I’d remind the members opposite that the Auditor General – they’re not playing get-you politics the way you guys are pretending. The Auditor General makes recommendations to improve systems. There’s always room for improvement. We accepted the recommendations, and that’s what we’re doing.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Chase: Mr. Speaker, funding cutbacks are causing boards to eliminate segregated programs for special-needs students. 

This government’s flawed school closure process has targeted a school for complex learners in Calgary-Varsity. With concerns growing, the government can only gesture to a review of special education two years in the making. Parents, students, teachers, and staff need answers now. To the minister: what does the minister have to say to parents concerned that special-needs students are being pushed into traditional classroom settings prematurely?

Mr. Hancock: It would be quite inappropriate to do so, Mr. Speaker. We have a special-needs review process which has been under way for some time. It’s been under way for some time because it’s a very important area. We’ve had extensive consultation. We’re now working to do the collaborative processes between health, education, children’s services, and then we’ll work again with school boards and stakeholders and parents to design the implementation process. This is something that’s particularly important, that every student be included in the education process, and it needs to be done right.

Mr. Chase: Special-needs funding has also been frozen for two years. Given the developments in the Calgary public and Edmonton Catholic boards will the minister release any details about his plan for special-needs education, or will he continue to hide behind his ongoing review?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, we are actively engaged in the process of getting internal policy approval, and as soon as I have approval to move forward, we will be obviously including the same people and more who were included in the discussions leading up to the setting the directions task force report. That will happen, I hope, very quickly.

Let me be perfectly clear. Nothing is going to change overnight. This is a change in culture relative to moving from a diagnostic process to a learning-needs-based process. It’s going to involve a lot of work, and it has to be done right.

Mr. Chase: I hope that when it finally gets done, special ed children will be protected.

Why is this minister spreading even more uncertainty by publicly musing about getting rid of the evaluative practice of coding without indicating what the new system will be? Clarify.

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, I try to respond to questions when they’re put to me, whether we’re in this House or elsewhere. People have asked about coding. As late as at noon today on the inappropriately named Wildrose program on CBC I spoke directly to the question of coding. The fact of the matter is: we’re not getting rid of coding necessarily; we’re moving the funding model and the special-needs model to an all-inclusive model. It requires work. Students will still need to be diagnosed. There still will need to be health professionals involved, but they won’t necessarily drive the learning process.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Albertans are facing real challenges for long-term sustainability of water for human consumption, including drinking water and for agriculture and industry use, but the minister is going ahead with changing the policy on the irrigation districts to allow redesignation of water, something that will remove any need to consult with government or the public forevermore. 

To the Minister of Environment: given that this is a precedent-setting decision, does this signal that a decision has already been made on the future of the entire water allocation system?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, it certainly does not. In this particular instance there was a policy that was established about a year ago that allowed for very, very restricted reallocation of the licence within an irrigation district’s purview so that they can continue to provide the needs to municipalities and to small industries within their area where there is no access to water. This is simply the next step, an application under that policy.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Back to the same minister: what exactly are the circumstances, the criteria in which it is appropriate – the minister’s own words – to allow irrigation districts to redesignate water, and will he table that criteria in this House?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, I’ll be more than happy to table it. It’s a policy that was developed in consultation with stakeholders, as I said, about a year ago. I don’t remember the exact timing. This particular application is under that policy, and it will be considered.

There is opportunity for the public to have input, to make comment, and we’re going through that process as we speak.

Ms Blakeman: Well, according to his remarks in Hansard from April 13 on page 725 he talks about changing the policy. “We will be changing that policy.” Now he’s referring to a policy that has already been changed. Could the minister clarify his comments, please?

Mr. Renner: I’d be more than happy to. At the time that the member asked me the question, I couldn’t recall whether or not the policy had been actually finalized. I knew that discussions had taken place. What the member is referring to is an application under that policy. That policy is in place now, and as I indicated, I’ll be providing that member with a copy of the policy.

Wetland Policy

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The government’s wetlands compensation guide is weak: weak systems, no monitoring, no controls. The ministry has created a system with one organization responsible for restoring wetlands destroyed by development, and according to the Auditor General the Department of Environment still can’t manage to monitor restoration standards or how taxpayer dollars are spent on the program. My questions are to the Minister of Environment. Why does the minister continue to put Alberta’s wetlands restoration at risk by applying this weak, lacklustre approach?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, first of all, the member is inaccurate in saying that the province has allocated all of the wetland restoration to one organization. The fact of the matter is that there is only one organization because no others have come forward. If they come forward and can demonstrate their ability to reconstruct and to redevelop wetlands, then the opportunity is there for any others. Our wetlands policy is one that, as the member well knows, is in the process of being updated to reflect the current needs.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much. Well, given that the Auditor General has stated that there are no controls in place, no one in the ministry responsible for monitoring wetlands restoration, and processes in the ministry’s outdated guide are not even being applied, how can the minister determine if the current processes are effective?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, we do have a responsibility for ensuring that the dollars that flow through to organizations such as Ducks Unlimited are fulfilling the requirements. I think what the Auditor General was getting to is: is there a direct correlation value for the dollar? Frankly, that’s difficult because it is more expensive in some locations than others. You have to buy the land and do the restoration.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much. Back to the same minister: when will the minister release an updated wetlands policy for the whole province that includes a no net loss policy? Mr. Minister, children who were born at the time the current interim policy went into place have now graduated from high school.

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’ve answered that question numerous times in the House. The updated wetlands policy is under construction as we speak, and there’s a commitment on my part to bring forward that policy for further consultation as soon as we’ve got it complete.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, this government has undermined the authority of Public Accounts, disparaged the office of the Auditor General, and is now submitting its own 200-page report to the Electoral Boundaries Commission. 

Clearly, in the name of transparency and accountability it was inappropriate for the government to present a position when it has no reason to do so other than blatant political interference.

To the Premier: why did the government, which does not represent a constituency, submit a proposal to the Electoral Boundaries Commission?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the Electoral Boundaries Commission is an arm’s-length commission, and all MLAs have an opportunity to present to the commission the views and the wishes of their constituents. In this particular case what had happened is that two members presented to the electoral commission the collated, collected presentations from what MLAs heard from their constituents in terms of some of the splitting of particular community leagues, et cetera, and that came forward yesterday.

Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, who decided the Deputy Premier should present a 200-page submission to the Electoral Boundaries Commission? Did this come from the Premier, one of the political ministers, or the Tory party executive? Who?

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, given that this is about something that I did last night, first of all, I want to say that I will not apologize to anyone about doing my job. There was a line in one of the documents that was submitted with the compilation of all of the MLA submissions that did say “Government,” and I apologize for that. My letter to the commission clearly indicated that this was a compilation of what our members had heard from their constituents. I also made it very clear in my opening comments that it was exactly that.

Mr. Hehr: Well, I thank the hon. Deputy Premier for that apology and recognition of his error.

I’d ask the Premier: why does this government continually attempt to undermine and disparage the institutions set up exclusively to ensure accountability, transparency, and democracy in our province?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, there was no interference, and there was no attempt by anyone on this side of the House to interfere with the decisions of the commission. You know, sometimes these allegations come from some members of the opposition. I note that there were a number of opposition members that made presentations, and I know that it was done on Legislative Assembly letterhead. It’s funny how we have a letter . . .

Mr. Horner: On my letterhead.

Mr. Stelmach: . . . on his letterhead, yet the opposition can use their own letterheads and that’s okay. That’s fine for them, but it’s not fine for this member.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Public Accounts Committee is one of the most important ways taxpayers have to gain a public accounting of how their hard-earned money is being spent. 

Given the public outcry over the recent decision to introduce veto power over the chair of Public Accounts, we have heard that your government is reconsidering this change. To the Premier: can the Premier confirm that this change will be reversed at the earliest possible opportunity?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the Public Accounts Committee is a committee of the Legislature. It does not report to the Premier or to government. It reports to this Legislature. It is within the committee to make any recommendations or changes that they see fit with respect to the operation of the Public Accounts Committee.

Dr. Swann: Well, then, given that the Premier’s own House leader said that this action was taken to slap the wrist of the chair of Public Accounts, will the Premier reverse that decision?

Mr. Stelmach: Once again, Mr. Speaker, the committee itself sets its rules and guidelines, and any change that they may want to make to the operation of that committee is within the purview of the committee.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, then, I would like to ask the Premier, would he say yes or no? Was he involved in that decision?

Mr. Stelmach: If it’s in the purview of the committee, I won’t be involved because I’m not a member of the committee.

The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Water Allocation

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m hearing from across Alberta that this province needs a plan to help Albertans with water shortages now and into the future. I’m concerned that this government will continue with its fire, ready, aim philosophy, simply reacting to crisis instead of planning for it. If I were Premier, I would have implemented a proper water management framework, including accurate measurements, conservation, and storage in case of emergency, with human consumption the first priority. To the Premier: given that this is shaping up to be one of the worst droughts in years, how will this government’s reaction be different than it has been in the past?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is right: we are heading into one of the driest years on record, perhaps. Perhaps. To those in the agriculture industry, obviously, a concern. We haven’t lost a crop as yet in April ever in my memory, but we have to be careful as we proceed. There are some issues with respect to pasture for cattle. I would submit that every Albertan has a responsibility to conserve water. It’s not only good for the environment but in the end it’s also good for their pocketbook.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that Alberta is facing a drought now, how can the Premier continue to dither implementing a new water use strategy?

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, the government has been very open and sincere in our commitment to bring forward a water allocation policy that not only respects the historical water rights that individuals have but that provides for adequate opportunities for increased population and economic development. We remain committed to bring that plan forward this year.

Dr. Swann: Well, again, I’d like to put this question to the Premier because the province is looking for leadership, Mr. Speaker. The continuing drought will mean more people competing for less water. How can the Premier continue to defend an antiquated first in time, first in right principle that removes power from Albertans to control the use of their own water? To the Premier.

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, first in time, first in right is a longstanding tradition in law in this province. As I indicated, the issue that we need to deal with is: how do we allow for increased population, increased pressures on water supply and still respect the longstanding traditional rights of licence holders? That is the essence of the water allocation review which is upcoming.

Alberta Hansard, April 20, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Social Care Facilities Review Committee raised a number of concerns in their recently tabled annual report that I have previously referenced in this House. 

This government should take their concerns seriously and make the necessary changes to improve the children’s services system.

To the minister: when will the minister introduce province-wide standards for qualifications and minimum requirements for wage levels to ease some of the challenges service providers face in recruiting and retaining staff?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will take this question under advisement and look into that and see where it is at currently. I can tell you that the recommendations that were made by the Social Care Facilities Review Committee have all been followed through with, but I’ll look at your question in more detail and get back to you, hon. member.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Again to the minister: what specific steps is the minister taking to ensure that children always receive adequate support when moved to a new facility, something that is currently lacking?

Mrs. Fritz: Well, Mr. Speaker, I can tell you very clearly that that is in place and that it’s followed through. There are a number of ways. It’s either through our staff, through the good work that’s being done through our child and family services authorities, or, of course, on reserve through our delegated First Nation agencies, people that work with the family, work with that child wherever they take that child in whichever way and with what you’re involving here, hon. member. Anyhow, that is taken into consideration very clearly by staff.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Again to the Minister of Children and Youth Services: how is the minister working with other ministries to ensure that women and families making the transition from emergency shelters to affordable housing are fully supported?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I did just recently meet with the Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters, and I can let you know once again – we’ve discussed this in the Assembly before – that through the housing first program women and children that are leaving emergency shelters either go to second-stage housing through this ministry, or they go on to housing programs, which are through the minister of housing.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, dedicated aboriginal consultation is essential for developing oil and gas and implementing the land-use framework. 

Aboriginal groups hold that meaningful consultation is not taking place, and some have taken their fight all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada and won.

My question is to the Minister of Aboriginal Relations. Why does this government continue to put the legitimacy of the land-use framework at risk and provoke expensive legal battles by continuing an inadequate approach to consultation?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Webber: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the hon. member for the question as well. I would also like to say that it’s about time that the opposition asked a question on aboriginal relations. Being a member and sitting here, that’s quite frustrating when aboriginal relations issues are important. My department is working with all First Nations, all three treaties with regard to consultation, and we are working forward. We’re doing some wonderful things with respect to consultation, anyway.

Dr. Taft: Well, given that this consultation has been going on for years and given that the courts have ruled that the way the Alberta government approaches its duty to consult is contrary to treaties, to reconciliation, and to mutual respect, how and when will this be remedied?

Mr. Webber: It is something that is ongoing, Mr. Speaker. It can’t be fixed overnight. We’ve been working diligently with all our ministries with respect to consultation in the aboriginal communities. We are moving forward, and we are progressing.

Dr. Taft: Well, it seems whole lifetimes are passing, Mr. Speaker. When will this government finally begin a legitimate process of consultation with the aboriginal groups who are affected by the land-use framework and by oil and gas development?

Mr. Webber: Mr. Speaker, I’ve been consulting with all of the grand chiefs within Alberta, and we are working positively. We are making progress, and I look forward to continuing our relationship with all the grand chiefs and chiefs throughout Alberta. We will get a consultation process in place soon, I hope.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On March 18 we asked a question to the minister of seniors regarding disabled Albertans’ rights to appeal PDD funding decisions. 

An answer was not provided. Calgary area PDD service providers need clarification about their own liabilities because of the cuts that they’ve had to deal with. To the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports: will the minister confirm that under regulation 181/2006 it’s true that PDD-funded individuals have no right to appeal to the minister if their supports are cut due to their service provider’s budget being cut?

Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, I want to make it very clear that PDD clients do have the ability to appeal any decision of the community board that affects their levels of services, including the hours of service and the level of service itself. The PDD Community Governance Act makes this very clear. To be clear, if any client is notified about a reduction in services arising from a decision of the community board, they can appeal that decision.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you to the minister for that. But there is confusion between the PDD Community Governance Act and section 2(c) of the regulations. Will the minister provide clarification as to the legal liabilities of PDD service providers if they cut their individual supports because of the changes to their budgets?

Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, I’m not exactly clear on the regulations that the hon. member has cited, so I will check into that, and I will provide an answer to her for that question.

However, a service provider, once they’ve signed a contract with the community board, cannot appeal the contract itself, but they do have a very clear dispute resolution mechanism to turn to.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. I hope that this isn’t the government’s way to quietly cut PDD numbers and leave vulnerable Albertans with no right to appeal, which is, in my mind, a basic principle that anyone should have.

Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, I would agree with that. But I would make it clear again that our PDD clients have the ability to appeal any changes to their levels of service or the hours of service that they have been granted as long as they’re eligible for PDD.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, last month the Solicitor General wisely reversed the decision to eliminate late-night admissions at the Edmonton Remand Centre and rely on police lock-up facilities to house offenders after an outcry from police and corrections personnel.

To the Solicitor General. You indicated mid-March that this issue would be resolved almost immediately. I’d like to know what solution has been reached after a month’s time.

Mr. Oberle: Well, Mr. Speaker, no solution has been reached right at the moment, which is why we are still operating overnight admissions and discharges, and we will not change until we’ve reached an agreeable solution with the police forces involved.

Mr. Hehr: To the same minister, Mr. Speaker. Although nighttime remand admissions have continued downsizing, they still occur at these understaffed and overcrowded institutions. Are you still planning to eliminate five or six guards at the Calgary and Edmonton remand centres? Is that option still on the table?

Mr. Oberle: We haven’t made any changes until we’ve determined what we’re going to do with overnight admissions and discharges, but we’re not actually reducing guards on the floor. I’m not sure what the member is talking about.

Mr. Hehr: Given that you told me that you were going to have a reasonably quick decision made in regard to these late-night admissions, have you revised the timetable when something will be done on this issue, or are we going to continue to have overcrowding all through the summer months?

Mr. Oberle: Well, whether we have overnight admissions or discharges, Mr. Speaker, surely the member would recognize, has absolutely nothing to do with overcrowding in our facilities. We manage the levels of inmates very well in our facilities and move them around. We’re doing a very good job there. It has nothing whatsoever to do with overcrowding.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. The Auditor General’s recent report drew special attention to issues regarding water, including a lack of monitoring, serious recurring instances of noncompliance, and an extreme backlog of applications for water licences. 

The bottom line: the government’s systems are weak, and this increases the risk to drinking water, the ecosystems, and finally, use by agriculture and industry. To the Minister of Environment. The minister has repeatedly responded to concerns I’ve raised about cutting monitoring staff by saying that it’s not a problem. Does the minister still stand by this claim?

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think we’re trying to compare apples and oranges in this particular instance. What the Auditor General’s report refers to is the ability of our officials to have follow-up from the point of issuing a licence to then following up. In that regard we have accepted the recommendation of the Auditor General, and we will be putting it into play so that there are closer opportunities for checks and balances from the point of licences issued to the follow-up and compliance side.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, given that the Department of Environment cannot transfer a water licence until its noncompliance issues are rectified and given that 75 per cent of the backlog of unprocessed water applications are not current, relating directly to compliance issues, how is the minister going to rapidly deal with the backlog of over 3,500 water applications?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, the backlog that’s referred to is a valid number. What is not clear in first reading is the fact that a number of these applications are unnecessarily open, I would suggest to you, because they haven’t been closed. If that’s confusing, I don’t blame you for not understanding. But the fact of the matter is that applicants will apply, they’ll be requested for further information or clarification, we never hear back from them, and then we have a file that’s left open.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. And people wonder why we have an issue around water here.

Given that this administration has demonstrated a clear inability to monitor licence holders and, therefore, cannot assess levels of noncompliance, how can the minister even consider compounding these problems by introducing a water market?

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, the fact that we are in the process now of reviewing our water allocation policy fits very well into the issues that were raised by the Auditor General. You have to remember that the process, that has been in place for a hundred-plus years, is one in which there was a presumption of unlimited resources of water. That presumption no longer applies. That’s the reason why we are talking about reviewing the water allocation, and part of that review of water allocation will have to be a process whereby we can verify that the licence holders are withdrawing water that is appropriate to their licence.

Gravel Extraction Management

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. There are a number of proposals for new gravel mining projects currently on the table, including yet another proposal for mining in the Red Deer River aquifers and one at Wizard Lake. There are grim long-term environmental concerns, including contamination of groundwater, which affects drinking water, and loss of habitat for fish and wildlife and the negative effects on communities regarding recreation. To the Minister of Environment: when the province can’t currently track the effect of the gravel industry on water in Alberta, why is new gravel extraction being allowed?

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, to suggest that gravel extraction should be unilaterally stopped throughout the province is irresponsible. We build buildings, homes, offices, pave our streets, and build our roads with gravel. What we have to do is ensure that we mine gravel in a responsible way. That is why we have a strict set of guidelines that all gravel operations must abide by.

Ms Blakeman: Back to the same minister: when will this ministry finally step up and provide a strong legislative framework to ensure municipalities have the regulations and resources necessary to fully assess the impacts of a gravel mine on their environment?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, let’s not forget: the role and responsibility of a municipality is a very valid one, and that is to deal with land use and land zoning. Until a municipality makes a decision with respect to the zoning and the land use in a particular area, then it’s not appropriate for the provincial government and my ministry to interfere. At the end of the day, once a decision has been made to proceed, it’s up to us to determine and ensure that that operation operates at minimal impact on the environment.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thanks. Back to the same minister: why does this ministry continue to take a this-is-not-our-problem approach to gravel mining approvals when they have such far-reaching and dramatic impacts on Alberta’s environment and on water and water quality?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, I think I answered that question the first time around. It is the responsibility of municipalities to deal with land zoning issues. Once that issue has been dealt with, it is the very clear responsibility of Alberta Environment to ensure that the operation proceeds in such a way as to minimize the impact or, if necessary, protect the environment.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. Eight years ago a government press release announced major amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act that allowed for the publishing of names of employers with the best and worst safety performance in the province. 

Last week the Auditor General flagged a group of 63 employers who repeatedly broke workplace safety laws. To the minister of labour: why has the government failed to follow through on its commitment from eight years ago to publish the names of employers who repeatedly break workplace safety laws?

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Employment and Immigration.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, thank you for that. The minister of labour: I wasn’t sure exactly whom he was talking to.

Mr. Speaker, let me make this abundantly clear yet one more time to this House and for the benefit of anybody who is listening. I have made a very clear undertaking that I will be releasing not only that list of 63, that were randomly identified by the Auditor General, but I will also release a list that has perhaps between 500 and 600 employers, which we consider to be targeted employers, that we are keeping a close eye on. I will release a list of all employers and their statistics very shortly.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister. Given that eight years ago Bill 37 was introduced – there were amendments to the legislation – it’s clear the government made a commitment to publish the names of bad employers who were breaking the law. Why has this government failed its commitment from eight years ago?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, unlike that member, I will not be dwelling on the past, but I will tell you what I am doing and what I have been doing since I became minister of this particular department.

The moment I met with the Auditor General, which was some two months ago, I made it very clear to my department that we will be releasing the list. However, I want the list to be meaningful so that when you look up the name of your employer, you will be able to know how safe or unsafe your employer is. I simply will not throw a copy of the yellow pages onto your desk. I want the names of employers to have some meaningful information attached. It will be done.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government fails to enforce the law to protect workers. Again to the same minister: has the minister ordered any of the 63 employers who failed to comply with occupational health and safety orders to establish joint worker-management safety committees, and if not, will he do so now?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, one thing I can assure you of is that under this Premier’s and my watch we will be making sure that occupational health and safety is a priority. It is obvious that I have made occupational health and safety a priority since that was one of the first instructions I gave to my department. Any employer in this province who chooses not to follow the Occupational Health and Safety Act will be dealt with accordingly.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In the last couple of weeks we’ve seen the Tories lobby for undermining the Auditor General. 

We’ve seen them attempt to neuter Public Accounts, one of the most important legislative committees that exists. This committee is by definition to provide a public account of the spending and actions of the government of Alberta. Reporters, columnists, and bloggers across the province wrote over the weekend that Alberta is facing a, quote, doomsday because of this decision to neuter the opposition chair of Public Accounts.

To the Acting Premier: does the Premier support the decision to allow the vice-chair the ability to veto all correspondence by the chair of Public Accounts?

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Premier neither supports nor doesn’t support decisions that are made by a committee of this Legislature because it is a committee of this Legislature that reports to this Legislature. I’m sure they will have more discourse over that in the future.

Dr. Swann: Well, it’s very hard to believe that such a major draconian decision wasn’t in the apparent awareness of the Premier. Again to the Acting Premier: does the Premier honestly expect the opposition and the public to believe this?

Mr. Horner: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, the committee meets. It has a chair; it has a vice-chair; it has members of all parties. They are open to discuss a number of issues. The Premier isn’t briefed nor does he brief the chair before those meetings happen.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, does the Acting Premier agree that it was proper for government members to do this, to, in the words of the Government House Leader, quote, slap the wrists, end quote, of the chair of Public Accounts?

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, there was no attempt, in my view, and not being a member of that committee, it’s difficult for me to give my opinion as to whether or not I agree with the decision of that committee. I’m sure that that committee had very strenuous debate about the motion that was put before them. In fact, I’m sure that it was written in Hansard, as the hon. member rightly knows, and I’m sure that they will probably have further discussion about a number of issues that that committee is responsible for.

The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Education Funding

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This government constantly boasts about how much better off Alberta is in weathering the recession while refusing to honour teacher contracts, repair aging schools, or adequately support special-needs education. To the Minister of Education: if this government isn’t willing to carry out its educational obligations such as bargaining in good faith with our teachers, will you at least provide greater autonomy to locally elected schools boards so that they can provide for their needs?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, I don’t know where this hon. member has been, but we have not breached any contracts. We have not breached anything in faith with the school boards or the teachers in the province. In fact, we’ve totally honoured the contracts. What we haven’t done this year is budgeted for a 3 per cent increase to the school boards’ budgets, and I’ve done that in the context of talking with school boards about how we work on a longer term plan to deal with the pressures faced by school boards in meeting their negotiated obligations as well as looking at how we better utilize the resources within the system.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With the combined Calgary school board infrastructure debt now exceeding a billion dollars, why is the minister not taking advantage of the reduced labour and material costs by investing a portion of the multibillion-dollar sustainability fund to correct a decade of government neglect?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member will well know, you can only spend the sustainability fund once. You can’t spend it over and over again on every single priority he wants to bring forward. I would be the first to argue that school infrastructure is an important priority for us. We’ve moved forward on the alternative procurement program 1, where schools are going to be available even earlier than was anticipated and available for opening this fall in both Calgary and Edmonton, nine schools in each jurisdiction. That’s pretty good. ASAP 2 is progressing towards a very quick announcement, indicating we’ve made good use of resources, a good use of the public purse in putting schools where we need them.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Given that our most vulnerable students are those with special needs, why is this government fostering greater uncertainty by freezing their per-pupil funding grants and recklessly abandoning a coding system for special-needs children?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should go back and read the good report that was done by a task force chaired by the Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, which clearly sets out a change in direction that’s needed with respect to how we assure that every child in Alberta is included in the education system and that every child in Alberta has the opportunity to maximize their own personal potential. That takes some work to move. Some people would move it ahead of that process, but this is not an easy process. It’s going to take time. It’s going to take some work to implement. It doesn’t behoove anybody to jump ahead of the process, to talk about removing coding or making changes, those sorts of things. Funding is, of course, important, and funding is being provided.

Alberta Hansard, April 19, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Our arts organizations were told last summer that cuts might be 10 to 15 per cent, but they should hold on as things might change. 

Yet here we are in the new fiscal year. The budget cuts were 19 per cent, but groups are still holding on and haven’t been told and are trying to budget for their 2010-11 seasons without knowing their final numbers. Contrary to the minister’s written response, there is a fair notice policy for grant suspension; it’s just not being used. So my questions are to the Minister of Culture and Community Spirit. When will arts organizations be given the final grant numbers reflecting the 19 per cent cut?

Mr. Blackett: Well, Mr. Speaker, I had stated in estimates that we would be working through those through our arts department, the Alberta Foundation for the Arts. The organizations will be notified of the amount that they will be receiving in short order.

Ms Blakeman: Well, he’s the minister of culture. Does he not understand the timelines that most of these organizations are working upon? They have to release their seasons, do all of the media, print brochures, hire people, even choose which shows. How long is he going to make them wait?

Mr. Blackett: Mr. Speaker, our staff in our department has been in contact with many of these organizations on an ongoing basis. We have said that most of the money that will be found will be realized through savings or efficiencies. It will not go to grant reductions to those organizations. We’re trying to work through that to make sure that is the case. Right now my department is giving me no indication that any one of these organizations will not be funded to the extent that they were last year.

Ms Blakeman: I’ll be interested in how 20 per cent can be found out of administrative.

Given that the AFA has an actual fair notice policy to inform and work with struggling groups that may see their funding cut, why is the minister not following a similar policy to work with organizations that lose funding because of these government cutbacks?

You’re not going to find it in administration.

Mr. Blackett: Well, to answer the question, the comment that the hon. member made, last year we had a reduction of $8.9 million. We were able through efficiencies to realize the savings, and we were able to fund every one of those not-for-profits to the level that they received a year before, as promised in the budget last year. I see no reason that we won’t be able make that commitment to them this year. We’ll see in due course if my words speak for themselves.

Royal Alberta Museum

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Getting clarity out of this government can be elusive. We have a federal MP announcing in a mailing an $85 million contribution to the Royal Alberta Museum, and then we have the Minister of Infrastructure saying that the capital plan does include the Royal Alberta Museum and the minister of culture saying that $83 million over three years will pay for a building design and maybe collection purchases. Yikes. To the Minister of Culture and Community Spirit: how do Albertans figure out where our museum is, how many will be built, who’s paying, and when it will be built? How are we supposed to know?

Mr. Blackett: Mr. Speaker, as I’ve said before in this House, I believe that the government of Alberta committed to the Museum of Nature on the Glenora site in the neighbourhood of $240 million.

We are in principle looking at a two-museum site. The first, the Museum of Nature, is on the capital plan; it has been deferred out a number of years. The federal government has not made an announcement. They have not contacted our office and indicated that they’re making any announcement, so I’m not sure what the question is.

Ms Blakeman: Okay. Well, how much of the $83 million in funding for the Royal Alberta Museum is from the federal government? You have it in print here. Is the province’s entire budget really federal money?

Mr. Blackett: Well, Mr. Speaker, the reference “you have it in print” is a reference to a publication that is not something produced by the government of Alberta. If it’s something that the federal government has produced, ask them the question since they are the ones who produced it.

Ms Blakeman: Is the minister saying that the $83 million that appears in his budget is 100 per cent money from Alberta taxpayers through provincial government coffers?

Mr. Blackett: As we said in estimates, I believe that $30 million was promised by the federal government in 2005, and the $50 million remaining, if I remember correctly, was going to come out of the Department of Culture and Community Spirit of the government of Alberta.

Alberta Hansard, April 15, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A month has passed since I asked a series of budgetary debate questions, including concerns over the cut of $27 million from child intervention services. 

In 2008-2009 less than 260 families of the approximately 13,000 Alberta children in custody received family enhancement services. Last year over 90 per cent of children taken into custody were not reunited with their birth families. To the minister: when will I receive written answers to the budget debate questions?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have addressed that question in the Assembly, and I can tell you that I have not changed my approach with that. I will not be providing any further answers to Committee of Supply. I consider those answers to have been complete at the time, and that’s just the way it is.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m glad that the minister admitted on the record that she will not fulfill her ministerial duties to provide answers to budgetary questions.

Why is so little focus and funding support committed to birth families compared to the financial costs and emotional trauma associated with custody? It’s grab first, support second.

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Fritz: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s absolutely incorrect. This member knows that. I’ve addressed that in the Assembly as well. We had a Child, Youth and Family Enhancement Act come into place in 2004, and this member knows that as well. That act is where the caseworker goes to a home along with the support worker, and those workers assess the home with the family. Many children that previously may have been taken into care immediately stay with the family while they provide support to the family. It’s a complete new way and approach of handling the child and family and youth care, and it’s a good way.

Mr. Chase: That gives very little comfort to the 13,000 children in custody and their families.

How can the minister justify cutting $27 million from child intervention services when there is $15 billion remaining in the sustainability fund? How is this cruelly unnecessary cut either in the best interests of Alberta’s children or their broken families?

Mrs. Fritz: You know, Mr. Speaker, honestly, the way that you dismiss the good work that’s being done out in the field is amazing. The child, family, and youth enhancement workers are working very hard along with the lead agencies. They have a lead agency model where they go together and where they assess families, they provide the services as they’re needed, and they assist children. Immediately they protect children and they care for children, and they’re very thoughtful in how they do this. I was on Friday at two case reviews with both the lead agency and the caseworkers, and there were approximately 20 people involved. You know, hon. member, that this is working.

Alberta Hansard, April 15, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. The uncertainty continues to swirl around Alberta Health Services’ decision to consolidate cataract surgeries in fewer clinics. 

There are serious concerns that the emphasis was more on cutting costs than on protecting public safety.

My question to the Minister of Health and Wellness: is it true that the clinics that won the cataract bids are reusing the equipment they use in cataract surgeries, or are they meeting the same standards as cataract surgery in public hospitals, which is to use disposable equipment?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, there are very specific standards regarding that particular question, and I discussed it with some ophthalmologists, in fact, on the weekend. In some cases they use stainless steel, and those particular blades are chucked out at the end of the operation. In other cases they might be using diamond blades, and in those cases they can be sterilized and reused. That’s my understanding from the ophthalmologists. They are very closely scrutinized in that regard by the college.

Dr. Taft: Okay. Well, when the minister is looking into it, he should ask about the use of cannulas and other equipment in addition to the blades.

What does the minister say in response to reports that Alberta Health Services is planning to close the cataract surgery program in Wetaskiwin? Is this true?

Mr. Zwozdesky: I haven’t heard any such news whatsoever. In fact, I’m surprised to have it raised, but I can assure him that it’ll be looked into immediately.

Dr. Taft: To the same minister. Given that there are growing reports that Alberta Health Services is planning to save money by charging patients for the lenses that are implanted during cataract surgery, will the minister reassure Albertans that he will put a stop to any such plan?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, again, speaking with ophthalmologists over the last couple of weeks, I’ve asked some of these same questions. There is a standard lens that is provided and covered, paid for by the public payer. That’s us, essentially. If, however, the patient wants or requires an upgraded lens, then they simply are asked to pay the difference, but that is a patient’s choice. Otherwise, they have a standardized lens that works perfectly well in most cases. But, again, some of it is patient choice.

Alberta Hansard, April 15, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Pastoor: Mr. Speaker, we have heard from a number of constituents that their rent support has run out and that the income support has turned them away, telling them to move to cheaper accommodations, but affordable housing is all too rare, and rents have not come down. 

To the Minister of Employment and Immigration: Albertans are not receiving the housing support they need from this government, so how much of the income support budget is going towards emergency housing?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, I cannot give the member the actual percentage, and that’s something that I would gladly get back to her on if she is looking at percentages from the budget. I can tell you one thing. We do provide assistance for individuals who find themselves in a difficult position, and part of the assistance is a housing allowance that provides for rent. What percentage of the overall budget is the housing allowance? That’s a very technical question, and I’ll be glad to come back with the actual numbers.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. I look forward to that answer.

Given that since this minister has taken over control of the homelessness and eviction prevention fund, no one has any idea of how big the cuts have been to the program, will the minister make this information public?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, how much more public can my budget be? I was in estimates. I’m not sure if that member attended estimates or read the Hansard, but I have gone through estimates line by line, and members of the opposition could have asked me any questions that they want. I can table a copy of this ministry’s budget in the Legislature at the next opportunity, and she can look through it. All the numbers are for public consumption.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. Same minister. Given that other provinces like Ontario and B.C. make this information and much more information about income support public, why is this government keeping Albertans in the dark? It isn’t always clear in the budget.

It comes across just as lines.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member comes from Lethbridge, and I understand they had some electricity problems in southern Alberta, hence the darkness. We have a budget that we have tabled in the House. I have gone through this ministry’s estimates line by line, open to anybody’s questions. I can table the budget of this ministry that itemizes every single expenditure. We also have the blue book that shows every contract expense the ministry has. I’m not sure how much more transparent I can be other than asking the member to come to my office, sit down with me, and I’ll discuss it with her.

Alberta Hansard, April 15, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. April 28 marks the International Day of Mourning for workers killed or injured as a result of workplace accidents or diseases. 

Yesterday the Auditor General revealed that 110 orders for noncompliance with occupational health and safety legislation were suspended during a period when three Albertans a week were dying from workplace-related injuries or accidents. To the Minister of Employment and Immigration: why did the government suspend 110 occupational health and safety orders at a time when three Albertans a week were dying on the job?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the first things I have done as a new minister is that I invited the Auditor General to meet with me some two months ago and give me an overview of what his perception of the department is and what issues he perceives there to be. He has given me an oral report, exactly identical to the one that we have here in writing, giving me a two months’ head start on addressing some of these issues. As a matter of fact, I am proud to report to you that for the last two months I have been addressing any and all issues in this report, and I’m taking them very seriously.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister. If you’re going to address these issues, the first thing I would suggest you do is release the number and the list of all employers who have been allowed to cheat the occupational health and safety . . .

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. Well, I am glad that this member brought this question forward because one of the reviews that I’m doing right now is whether I am able to release not only the records of employers who are underperformers but all employers in Alberta so that Albertans can take a look and see how their place of employment is faring and whether they choose to work or not work for that particular employer. There are some complications relevant to getting accurate statistics, and there are some issues relevant to freedom of information legislation, but I am working through it right now. You will get an answer on it very shortly.

Mr. MacDonald: I appreciate that, hon. minister. Again to the same minister: why did the government allow those 63 employers to cheat our occupational health and safety laws for so long, when the death rate in this province at that time was 166 workers?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, I cannot give this member an accurate answer about what happened, but let me tell you about what will happen. As you may know, I spent a good part of my pre-elected life representing injured workers, so I take occupational health and safety very seriously. One thing that I will be doing is making sure that those who willingly choose to ignore the law will be dealt with appropriately.

[Continued]

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Last year the office of the Auditor General deferred an audit on workplace health and safety because this government limited the resources of the office. That happened during a year when 166 Albertans lost their lives as a result of injuries or disease. My first question is to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. How many lives would have been saved or how many injuries would have been prevented if the Auditor was allowed to do his real work last year instead of having to defer it for a year?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, again I have to thank this member for this question. Read the newspapers for the next few days, and you will be seeing that this department will be releasing ads advertising positions, hiring front-line workers to inspect places of employment.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. That should have been done two years ago.

Again to the same minister. Of the 166 . . .

An Hon. Member: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Mr. MacDonald: Yeah, yeah, yeah, you say. These are lives at stake here, hon. minister, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Of the 166 workplace fatalities recorded in 2008, how many were the responsibility of the 63 employers noted in the Auditor General’s report and allowed to cheat occupational health and safety laws?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, nobody is allowed to cheat. Let’s make that apparent. Those who are cheating or are perceived to be cheating will be dealt with accordingly.

I cannot release the number of casualties in those particular places of employment because, like I indicated earlier, at this point in time I cannot legally release the list, but I will be releasing the list the moment I find out that it is appropriate for me to do so. When I release it, I will make sure that it is an accurate list, so you will know, hon. member, who are the employers who follow the rules and who don’t follow the rules and why.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Speaking of following the rules, again to the same minister. Will the minister demand that the employers, the 63 employers who cheated on occupational health and safety laws and received grants, incredibly, from this government for their actions will have to repay the rebates that they were given from their WCB premiums? How is that fair?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, another thank you to the member. Thank you for bringing up the premiums. What the member is I imagine referring to is the COR program. One of the things I have done, having met with the Auditor General two months ago, is that I’m having a thorough review of the COR program because the purpose of this program is to reward good performers and make them more competitive and punish poor performers to make sure that they are not competitive in the market, bidding for contracts against employers who actually follow the rules.

Alberta Hansard, April 15, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. What the Premier and minister of health do not realize is that by failing to take action and put an end to the extravagant bonuses handed out to the Alberta Health Services executives, they agree with giving these people handfuls of taxpayers’ dollars as a reward for bringing the health care system virtually to standstill. 

To the minister of health: will you or will you not put an end to the system that erodes public confidence?

Mr. Zwozdesky: I don’t know if I’ve heard such a silly question in this Chamber in all the years I’ve been here. There are no policies in place to erode the system. What we have is an excellent system of health that we’re still trying to improve. We’ve done that by providing additional dollars, by streamlining some of the processes, and by continuing to provide Albertans with the very best health care possible in these difficult circumstances.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, given that contracts don’t guarantee bonuses, why are bonuses being given out to Alberta Health Services senior executives for poor performance? Why?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, there’s no poor performance associated with any of this. What there is are very specific, targeted performance measures, very specific benchmarks. Everybody is going to be very accountable. That’s where we’re at today. I’m not going to comment on stuff from the past, which is where the hon. leader appears to be living at the moment.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, why is it that this minister is going to wait for yet another review when he already knows what everybody in Alberta knows and wants him to do? Will he or will he not do the right thing? Put an immediate end to executive bonuses and guarantee that not a single bonus payment in ’09-10 will be made in Alberta Health Services.

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I think I clarified quite clearly that what we’re doing is honouring the commitments that were made, contractual commitments from a previous era. That is being done as we speak. I think it’s important for people to know that there are a lot of streamlining costs that point to very outstanding performance.

For example, instead of 12 CEOs, now we have one. Instead of 66 senior vice-presidents, we have seven. That has saved millions of dollars, that are going back into providing outstanding care for Albertans across the province.

Health Services Executive Pensions

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, the story goes on. The executives at Alberta Health Services not only have rich six-figure salaries; they also have two pensions. Count them: two, the local authorities pension plan and the supplemental executive retirement plan. The second, the supplemental executive retirement plan, does not require any employee contributions. To the minister: why are these executives so special that they are entitled to two pensions, one of which is totally paid for by taxpayers?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I indicated that all of this is under review, as are all the roles, responsibilities, and the very mandates of some of the positions he’s talking about. What has to be kept in mind here is that while these individuals have been transferred from previous authorities into the new Alberta Health Services, they have inherited additional work. They are being compensated for that additional work because there’s an increased workload, there are increased responsibilities that come with it, and we want the very best people occupying those positions.

Dr. Swann: Well, we know from documents that the Towers Perrin group has been working on this review for 10 months, Mr. Speaker. How many of the executives at Alberta Health Services are entitled to these gold-plated retirement plans paid for by taxpayers?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, to my knowledge the SERPs, as they’re commonly referred to, are under review, and I’m not sure if they haven’t even already been eliminated. But I will look into that.

Dr. Swann: Please do, Mr. Minister.

Given that the old executives who were simply transferred to Alberta Health Services are still entitled to these gold-plated retirement packages, what is the minister going to do to change the policy and this abuse of taxpayer funding?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s not my policy, but I am ultimately responsible, and I’ve said that I will look into it. These are policies that were brought into place by Alberta Health Services. It’s the board that reports to me. It’s the board that is responsible for overseeing the overall direction that it’s going. But I have to account for it, and I will look into it.

Alberta Hansard, April 15, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dear Premier Stelmach,

During yesterday’s meeting of the Public Accounts Committee, PC MLA Verlyn Olsen moved that “all future correspondence on behalf of the public accounts committee be signed by both the chair and the deputy chair.”

Another of your colleagues, PC MLA Dave Rodney, is the deputy chair. The chair, of course, is Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald.

Naturally you understand that this is totally unacceptable and hands the government veto power over the actions of a committee whose mandate is to oversee government spending and ensure that public dollars are being used responsibly and in the public interest. Public Accounts is the only committee that isn’t already chaired by a Tory MLA. Now it may as well be.

Mr. Premier, surely Albertans don’t need or want every committee of the Legislature to be essentially ruled by the very government these committees are supposed to oversee. Albertans know all about the problems with foxes guarding the henhouse; for that matter, as a farmer yourself, you above all should see the problem here.

Mr. Premier, you are better than this. In the early days of your administration, you promised Albertans that your leadership style would be far more accountable and transparent than the last.

Now you have an opportunity to make good on that promise. Reverse this decision. Restore at least a little accountability to your administration. Restore the faith of the people of Alberta.

David Swann

Leader of the Official Opposition

Download the original letter.

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Speaker, these are dark days for accountability and transparency. 

It’s incredibly sad that a Premier who once claimed to believe in those ideals has flip-flopped so completely, serving his own personal political agenda at the expense of truth, clarity, openness and fairness to the people of Alberta. The actions of his administration have served to draw a dark curtain over government, hiding the actions of an administration that has lost the trust of Albertans.

Yesterday the Auditor General delivered his latest report – a report the Premier’s administration tried to bury with a good-news story about distracted driving legislation.

The Tories have been trying to silence the Auditor General for months; they’ve ignored hundreds of recommendations, publicly chastised the AG for speaking out, restricted the office’s budget causing the deferment or cancellation of a number of important audits – including occupational health and safety and water quality – and distributed in this House a paper by top Tory Ron Hicks that calls on the government to severely curb the powers of the Auditor General.

Yesterday the Deputy Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, a Tory, was granted veto power over the Chair’s actions – neutering the entire purpose of that committee, whose mandate is to oversee government spending and ensure that public dollars are being used responsibly and in the public interest. Of course the Chair is a Liberal who happens to be very good at digging up dirt on the Tories, the Honourable Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. No wonder the Premier’s lapdogs are trying to muzzle him.

Yesterday in Question Period the Premier claimed not to know what went on in Public Accounts, a claim I find, frankly, ridiculous. I believe that Tory members of the Public Accounts Committee were directed by the Premier to give the Deputy Chair his new veto power in a deliberate attempt to silence a prominent source of aggravation to the ruling party. Naturally our call for an emergency debate was dismissed, as usual.

Mr. Speaker, these third-world, banana republic tactics are a farce. They shame Alberta. Even former Tory MP John Williams once called this administration’s restrictions on the Public Accounts Committee “shocking” – and that was before this latest move.

I’d like to close by thanking the Alberta bloggers who are following this story. They are proving themselves to be a valuable addition to the fourth estate, showing as always that individual citizens of good conscience are the best defenders of truth, accountability and democracy.

[direct link to this article]

Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A constituent on AISH brings home $1,188 and spends over 60 per cent of it on rent. 

She applied for a rent subsidy but was turned away because she was, quote, low priority. To the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs: how is it that this woman is low priority for this government?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m not aware of the specific situation, but I will have my department follow up with this particular member with a response in a timely fashion.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you, and I will share that information, although I’m sure she doesn’t stand alone.

Given that over 10,000 people are on a wait-list for rent support, which means that they spend more than 50 per cent of their income on rent, how can the minister defend the huge cuts made to rent supplements over the past two years when rents are always increasing?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This member is actually not correct that rents are always increasing. They have increased over the past couple of years, but we’ve actually seen a decline to the rents this year. That’s why we have budgeted somewhat less, about $13 million for rent supplements, than we have. This member should also know that we are actually helping 80,000 people every month with their rent, and every month 800 new people were able to transition into this system.

Ms Pastoor: Well, 80,000 plus 10,000: that’s 90,000 out there that need it.

Given that keeping people in their homes costs less than having that person become homeless, why is the minister unwilling to properly fund rent supplements, a move that saves taxpayers money in the long run?

Mr. Denis: Mr. Speaker, I again would challenge that member’s last comment. In fact, we do properly fund these items. We fund to the extent that we actually help three times the amount of people that we did only three years ago.

But I would like to welcome this member. I guess she’s my new critic.

Thank you.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This government does not protect the people of Alberta from chemical emissions. 

Instead, they rely on self-regulation by industry and on companies to tell them what it means for Albertans when incidents occur. The government has no idea what and how much toxic and carcinogenic chemicals were released into the air. Government officials are reduced to begging the responsible company for information. To the Minister of Environment. It has been a month. Can the minister tell us the amount of chemicals released into the air that Albertans breathe from the Suncor incident on March 15?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, I don’t have that information at hand, but I’m sure that given an appropriate amount of time I could have that information brought forward from my department, and I’ll be happy to provide it to the hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: To the same minister: what is the reason that we lack the expertise in the Department of Environment to be able to tell Albertans the potential effects of a thousand kilograms of a catalyst that was released? We had to go and ask Suncor what it was.

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, that’s ludicrous. We have all kinds of technical expertise within our department. What we don’t have – and it would be ridiculous for us to have – is our top technical people at every licensed facility in the province 24 hours a day, 365 days a year just in case there is an incident that needs to be recorded. The member is absolutely right: we depend upon industry to advise us of these incidents. At the same time, we don’t only depend on it; we require it, and we will hold them accountable if they do not.

Ms Blakeman: You don’t know what happened there. Back to the same minister: why does the government choose to rely on a weak self-reporting policy rather than monitoring and expertise done by ministry staff? Is it money? Is it lack of political will? Why? This jeopardizes the health of Albertans.

Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I answered the third question in the second question. It’s the same reason that we don’t have auditors that are employed by the government of Alberta ensuring that at the end of the day people record the numbers correctly in their books so that we can ensure the taxes they pay at the end of the year. We have audits. We have a process where we do unannounced audits, and we have a process where we do regular audits. That’s how we hold them accountable.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On March 18 the President of the Treasury Board stated that he would report back to the House on the retroactive payments made to Conservative MLAs for sitting on internal cabinet policy committees. 

He has not yet responded to me with a report. To the President of the Treasury Board: why did the government pay $42,000 in retroactive payments to Conservative members for sitting on the internal cabinet policy committees, and who authorized that decision?

Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, for the hon. member to suggest that I did not report back to him on that issue is completely untrue. The next day it was read in here. The exact fact was that those people are authorized under the memorandum that came in October ’08 and stays in place until it is replaced by a concurrent or follow-up OC, which may change membership on the different committees. They are all operating under OCs, that are publicly published and announced. For him to suggest I did not report back is false.

Mr. MacDonald: He did not report to the questions that I asked him, and he knows that.

Now, since the government is unable to provide a ministerial order showing the appointment of all Conservative MLAs to the five internal cabinet policy committees, will the President of the Treasury Board explain what was done to authorize these members to be paid? Was there a secret ceremony, a private swearing-in, or what?

Mr. Snelgrove: We put the little candles out around the room, and we sing Kumbaya and chant, and it would make sense to him.

Mr. Speaker, there wasn’t a ministerial order. In was an order in council. None of the pay involved was retroactive, because the work on committees as well as cabinet members continues whether there is an election or not.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The taxpayers are not impressed with your response to date, hon. minister.

Again, will the President of the Treasury Board clarify whether funding for these cabinet policy committees, reported as a line item in various department budgets, is paid for support staff, members’ payments, or both?

Mr. Snelgrove: As everyone who paid attention while we went through budget deliberations would understand, the department that has the chairman of the standing policy committee funds the total cost of that policy committee through one ministry to make sure that it is streamlined in the most effective way. It does include membership on the committee, support staff, materials, or travel that might be necessary.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, executives at Alberta Health Services are paid large salaries and then bonuses, and now today we learn they are paid premiums on top of the bonuses. 

Plus, they get gold-plated retirement packages without contributing to them. It’s become a private feeding frenzy on the public purse in an organization that is struggling badly to do its job. The Minister of Health and Wellness has reversed policies by Alberta Health Services on pharmacy, bed closures, surgeries, ambulance consolidations, so why won’t he reverse the pay policies of Alberta Health Services and bring it into line with the rest of the province?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I assume the hon. member is talking about contracts. That’s a lot different than some sort of a plan or a policy change or some other initiative. Contracts are contracts. We have to adhere to them.

Dr. Taft: I’m hoping the contracts are in line with some kind of policy, and our policy needs to be changed.

Does the minister buy the line from Alberta Health Services that it’s a good idea to pay premiums of up to $79,000 a year to staff who are already getting huge salaries, bonuses, and retirement plans? Is that a good idea?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I think I indicated yesterday that the policy is under review by Alberta Health Services. They are the ones who are responsible for recently created contracts and/or recently created policies regarding those employment contracts. They’re also reviewing contracts of the past, those that they inherited from one of the three provincial boards or from the nine health authorities.

Dr. Taft: To the same minister: given that the salary range for provincial deputy ministers, who run entire departments, goes up to $253,000 plus benefits and a car, if this is good enough for a deputy minister, why isn’t it good enough for an executive at Alberta Health Services?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I think that if the hon. member took the time to take a look at health systems across Canada, perhaps elsewhere, he would realize that these salaries are in line with those top-level executives who are outside the government stream at an arm’s-length level. But I can assure this member that no bonuses will be paid unless specific performance targets are met in accordance with the recently revised standardized contracts that Alberta Health Services has now put in place.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Justice minister was playing the role of the ostrich, burying her head in the sand but insisting that cuts to legal aid funding would not affect service delivery. 

Well, today the legal community is asking her to come up for air as these changes will deprive impoverished citizens of legal representation, and this will result in wrongful convictions, inappropriate sentencing, and unfair custody and access rights decisions. Accordingly, my question is for the Justice minister. Are these critics right in saying that because of these cuts many low-income Albertans will not receive adequate legal representation?

Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, in fact, the hon. member is not right. We have a system in Alberta where we are ensuring that we are able to provide access to justice and appropriate legal advice to everyone that needs it in this province. Now, one thing I know as a lawyer is that lawyers don’t like to see a lot of change, but just because change is something that people aren’t sure about doesn’t mean that it’s not a good thing, and we’re proceeding.

Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Justice minister has determined how the Legal Aid Society should operate and oversee aspects of this service delivery. Doesn’t this undermine the confidence and the impartiality of legal aid and bring our system of justice into disrepute? Don’t forget that you’re also responsible for public prosecutions.

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the Legal Aid board is an independent board. The Legal Aid board oversees how it decides to spend its money. The Legal Aid board also has a role in public policy discussions about what legal aid should look like. We participate in that discussion. The Legal Aid board makes the decision as to how they will proceed, and it’s a fully transparent system.

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, given that Legal Aid Alberta has been forced to reduce eligibility requirements to, quote, remain sustainable and legal aid is an essential service provided to Alberta’s most vulnerable people, why are we casting them aside for the sake of sustaining a business model?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, legal aid that is provided in this province is much more extensive than in many other provinces in this country. We fulfill our obligations both as a matter of public policy and as a constitutional issue, and we will continue to do that.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This government clearly needs to deal with the rich sense of entitlement that has been created among senior executives in Alberta Health Services.

The fact that bonuses larger than the average Albertan earns in a year were handed out at a time when the health care system was in turmoil is something the Premier should be very concerned about.

To the Premier: how bad would the performance of the health care system need to be in order for no executive bonuses to be handed out?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we just entered into a long-term funding agreement with Alberta Health Services. The minister is now in the process of entering into negotiations for performance-based measures like improvement in access, quality of care, and many others. The minister is on top of the file, and he’ll take the questions with respect to the bonus issue.

Dr. Swann: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, given that the ’09-10 bonuses have yet to be determined for Alberta Health Services and the performance of the health care system in the last year has been nothing if not appalling, will the Premier commit here and now that no executive bonuses to Alberta Health executives will be paid out in ’09-10? Yes or no, Mr. Premier?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, this issue comes under my purview, and I want to tell the House that Alberta Health Services has responsibility for this particular part of this file. It deals with employee packages, some of which are inherited from previous local health authorities in the province and perhaps some of them that were created under the new Alberta Health Services. Nonetheless, the entire system is under some review by the Alberta Health Services Board.

Dr. Swann: Well, again to the Premier, Mr. Speaker. Your skin is on the line, Mr. Premier. Are you or are you not going to stop this executive largesse to Alberta Health Services executives?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I indicated yesterday very clearly what the process is going forward with this matter. We are having this discussion between myself and the Alberta Health Services Board on looking into how that review can result in a system that everybody feels very proud of. We have an excellent group of people who are working very hard to deliver health services, and they were delivering them during the worst economic downturn in Alberta’s history since 1930. They are working very hard right now, I can assure you.

The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Provincial Public Image

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta’s reputation in this country and abroad is suffering. While the Premier touts local newspaper articles on the Alberta train as a success in advertising Alberta to the world, the Premier continues to take actions that damage Alberta’s reputation for environmental and democratic stewardship. To the Premier. The rest of the world is taking notice.

If a few positive articles in B.C. and Alberta newspapers on the Alberta train count as $70 million worth of success, the cost of 70 Super Bowl ads by the way, then what is the value of all the negative publicity around the world from this government’s mishandling of tailings ponds, cancer rates in Fort Chip, and policies like . . .

The Speaker: The hon. the Premier.

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, a lot of work has been done with respect to the environmental file in all of the oil sands development. There is more to be done, and we are very adamant in working with the ERCB that we deal with tailings ponds. Although there is no evidence of any seepage – and I must say that water has been monitored in the Athabasca River since 1971 – these are issues that we are dealing with, and over time we are going to move to dry tailings ponds, which will remove a lot of the site of the tailings ponds presently.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, in reference to another move that damages Alberta’s reputation as a modern democracy, did the Premier or anyone else from his office instruct the PC majority members on the Public Accounts Committee today to restrict and limit the authority of the chair of Public Accounts?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’m not aware of what happened at Public Accounts this morning. If there was a matter that the chair or the opposition is unhappy with, there’s a way of bringing it forward. There is a process. Usually those matters are dealt with by the Speaker of the Assembly.

Dr. Swann: Again to the Premier: does the Premier recognize that all of this bad publicity, backtracking, and backroom shenanigans such as we saw today in Public Accounts have effectively cost Alberta taxpayers $25 million? That is the price of negating the government’s bloated $25 million greenwashing campaign.

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the government of Alberta will have a parallel process in terms of working with other jurisdictions around the world to get the facts out with respect to all oil and gas development in the province of Alberta. The fact that we do have the most stringent environmental rules and regulations, the fact that we’re the first jurisdiction in Canada to actually be able to measure carbon, the fact that we have a carbon levy, the fact that we’ve set money aside in a carbon levy fund to deal with issues especially tied to research, we are leading the nation if not, indeed, North America in this area.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition, says that an Alberta Liberal administration would give the Auditor General greater authority, with binding powers, to help clean up government. 

On a day when Premier Stelmach moved to neuter the Public Accounts Committee by giving the Tory Deputy Chair veto power over the committee’s activities, Swann is offering a very different philosophy on government transparency and accountability.

“This administration has ignored hundreds of recommendations from the Auditor General over the years – 306 at the moment, with 54 more than three years old. They’ll almost certainly ignore most of this year’s recommendations. Any government led by me would not dismiss the Auditor General; in fact, I would move to seriously strengthen the powers of that office.”

Swann says that the scandals brought to light by the Auditor General every year demonstrate the importance of independent oversight of government activities. This year the AG uncovered serious problems with information security at Alberta Treasury Branches (ATB), very reminiscent of the same kinds of issues at Alberta Health Services – issues that remain unresolved. Of the seven audits conducted by the AG this year, four showed a lack of compliance and monitoring in government departments responsible for the ATB, health and safety standards, the Solicitor General, and water quality.

“Democracy depends on checks and balances to make sure that the ruling party cannot hide corruption and incompetence,” Swann says. “It’s incredibly sad that a Premier who started out calling for more accountability and transparency has flip-flopped so completely. He’s become overly sensitive to criticism, to the point that now he’s serving only his own personal political agenda instead of the people of Alberta.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Edmonton – Official Opposition Health critic Kevin Taft says that huge bonuses are just the beginning for some well-paid AHS executives, at least five of whom are also being paid tens of thousands of dollars in premiums every year.

It’s the frosting on the already rich cake of huge salaries and bonuses cooked up by the Stelmach Conservatives.

“Double-dipping is bad enough,” says Taft. “Triple-dipping is an abuse of the public trust.”

Yesterday the Alberta Liberals exposed the huge bonuses being doled out to AHS executives. Now Taft is revealing that at least five AHS executives were paid premiums between $25,480 and $79,200, in addition to those huge bonuses and their already generous salaries.

As if huge salaries, bonuses and premiums aren’t enough, some executives also qualify for special pensions called Supplemental Executive Retirement Plans (SERPs) that are fully funded by the government. Unlike normal pensions, which require employees to contribute to their own retirement, these AHS executives get generous pensions without contributing a dime of their own money.

“The Stelmach administration needs to make the full details of these SERPs public,” says Taft. “Consider the case of former Calgary Health Region CEO Jack Davis, who is receiving a gold-plated $22,000 per month pension fully funded by taxpayers. Most Albertans have to sacrifice large portions of their paycheques to build a retirement fund. The retirement funds of these AHS executives are 100 percent taken care of by Joe and Jane Taxpayer.”

Yesterday, the Premier and the Minister of Health claimed that AHS executive contracts are being reviewed. But a letter from AHS CEO Stephen Duckett from just ten months ago says that AHS has just completed a pay review, conducted by consulting firm Towers Perrin. The documents seem to indicate that at least some of the current payments, including the bonuses, premiums and special pension provisions were based on that review.

“Were the Premier and the Health Minister talking about the same review as Dr. Duckett, or is the pay system getting overhauled yet again only a few months after the last review?” Taft asks. “This is the kind of confusion that is bringing the management of AHS to its knees and spreading so much chaos throughout the health system.”

– 30 –

Attached: AHS premium letters, Calgary Health Region SERP summary

For more information contact:
albertaliberalcaucus
1-866-633-4214

[direct link to this article]

Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [The members sang Happy Birthday] Thank you very much. Actions do speak louder than words, so thank you for that.

The minister of seniors’ actions have shown a lack of support for people with developmental disabilities, and the lack of support is directly translating to decreased care. To the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports: will the minister immediately reinstate the funding that is needed so that the Calgary area PDD service providers will not have to cut services?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, the budget for the PDD program this year has not changed. It remains the same as last year, at $597 million. I understand that there may be some cost pressures that we have to be cognizant of. I would say to you that maybe there’s a way that we can do things a little bit differently so that we can make the $597 million stretch. I’d like to say that $500 million of that budget goes directly to our service providers for 9,200 people.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. To the same minister. Part of the reason for the cut is to direct funds toward unfunded pension liabilities. How can the minister justify cutting front-line services and supports for this reason?

Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, there have been no cuts in PDD. The PDD budget remains the very same as last year. Like I said, I understand that there may be some funding pressures, but there have been no cuts. I’ve asked our PDD boards, I’ve asked my department and my divisions to look very carefully at their own budgets so that they can find the efficiencies that will help us make that budget stretch as far as we can so that the savings can go directly to the front-line services of our PDD clients.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. Are some of those funds going toward unfunded pension liabilities, not necessarily from the PDD but out of your department?

Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, what I can tell you is that of the $600 million that we have in the PDD budget, $500 million goes directly to our service providers. The other $97 million goes to direct services, to the PDD boards, and to my PDD divisions. I would say to you that we have one of the very best programs in Canada, most generously funded. If you compare us to B.C. and Ontario, our PDD clients receive more in funding than clients in those other areas.

Alberta Hansard, April 13, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today the government announced that $105 million is being invested in seniors’ accommodation across the province. 

Fifty million dollars of this funding was made possible by Albertans who bought capital bonds. This is such good news that I thought I, too, would ask a question of the Minister of Infrastructure. Why are the capital bond funds being directed to seniors’ accommodations?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, preparing for an aging population is a priority for this government. Investing capital bonds in seniors’ accommodations supports that priority. In fact, it was very clear in the discussions in this Chamber, the importance of supporting seniors’ housing. Seniors have told us very clearly that they want to stay together as they age and in a more homelike setting than the traditional long-term care.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister, and I think he partially answered some of my question. My next question is: what will these facilities look like, and will they actually meet the great need that exists for seniors’ housing today?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, each facility is going to be unique. Most of the projects are new facilities. Some of them are renovations. The investment addresses the priority needs of the communities. The details of each of the projects will be announced in the very short future.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Finally, to the same minister: what assurances can the minister give to this House that this is not just another great-sounding announcement but that these facilities will actually be built?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, today’s announcement will allow us to move forward with 1,000 new and upgraded spaces. Providing seniors with accommodations that best suit their health and personal care needs is a priority, as I said, of this government. These projects will be completed or well under way by 2012. That’s the assurance, that those projects are starting and those projects are going to be done by 2012.

Alberta Hansard, April 14, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Chase: Mr. Speaker, Alberta has the lowest postsecondary enrolment rate in Canada, at only 14 per cent. The consequences of this government’s cutbacks to postsecondary education can be seen in the budgets recently passed by universities and colleges, who are forced to increase fees on students, cut programs, and run operating deficits. 

To the minister: is the minister satisfied with the strategy of simply downloading the province’s deficit to our universities and colleges, who then pass it on to our students?

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, we haven’t downloaded anything. We’re working in collaboration with our institutions and with our student bodies. In fact, as I said in the House in answer to questions of this hon. member before, we have been working very closely with the student associations throughout the province to talk about the tuition cap and how we protect it going forward. We had to fix some problems that were within the system dating back to 2004. So working collaboratively with the student bodies we fixed the problem and protected the cap, one of the few provinces in Canada that still maintains a CPI cap. This year tuition levels will be 1.5 per cent as compared to Manitoba, up to 5 per cent, as compared to Ontario, 3 per cent to 8 per cent, as compared to even Saskatchewan, which could be as high as 5 per cent. We think we’re doing very well for our students.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m not sure that the minister’s sentiments are shared by students going into pharmacy, engineering, and business.

Does the minister think it is acceptable for universities to charge students mandatory fees ranging from $300 to $450 because this government isn’t willing to provide sufficient operating funding to postsecondary institutions?

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I was searching for the letters that I received from, as an example, the Pharmacy Students’ Association, which actually requested that we approve the request from the university for the increase as a market modifier because they realized the value of their investment and the taxpayer investment.

They requested that we do that. I also have a letter from the engineering students at the U of A Faculty of Engineering suggesting that they believe that it was the right thing to do to fix the error so that we can move forward into the future. So to suggest that we’re not collaborating and talking to the students is blatantly false.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. I don’t think you’ll get the same letters if you take that route for medicine, law, and education.

Is the minister going to stand idly by while institutions like NAIT, due to lack of government funding, are forced to eliminate over a dozen programs, some of which had full registration and are unique in western Canada?

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, any programs that are going to be eliminated have to get the approval of the ministry. In fact, as we understand it right now, the particular institution the hon. member is talking about is reviewing it, as I would suggest every institution in this province should be reviewing every program they’re delivering to ensure that it’s meeting the needs of the student, the taxpayer, and the economy, not the institution’s, because we serve those three clients, not the institution.

Education Funding

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government abandoned its commitment to fund a five-year agreement with teachers. Now, with the 2010-11 academic year approaching and no extra money for teachers’ salaries on the table, school boards, students, and families are about to feel the crunch. To the minister: with the Calgary board of education considering eliminating 150 positions to cover its $21 million shortfall, what plans does the minister have to prevent layoffs?

Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, we have not abandoned our commitment. In fact, we’re fulfilling our commitment. We fulfilled our commitment to the 5.99 per cent increase after we went through the arbitration process. That’s been done. What we haven’t done is put in a 3 per cent increase for salaries this year, the September 1 adjustment. What I’ve said to the school boards is that we need to work that out over a longer period of time and they should work with me, the school boards and the ATA, with respect to how we go into a longer term agreement.

In the meantime I’ve asked them to consider not laying off staff at the classroom level, the teachers and the support for the classrooms, and to manage it over a longer period of time.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You can’t extend a five-year contracted agreement and pay people gradually.

How can the minister continue to advocate for student-punishing Band-Aid solutions such as boards running temporary deficits or drawing on small reserves when the real problem is an ongoing funding shortfall from this province?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, there’s $340 million of operating reserves in this province among school boards. Not every school board has them, but across the system we have a very healthy financial statement. What I’ve said to school boards is that we need to draw on those surpluses or perhaps run a short-term deficit in order to help us work on a longer term agreement to deal with not just salaries but also other areas to make sure that the education system is strong for teachers, for the profession, for the school boards, and for the province.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Clawing back committed surpluses seems to be the new raison d’être of this government.

Given that school boards in Medicine Hat are considering eliminating full-day kindergarten programs to cover their shortfall, will the minister admit that by not honouring the teachers’ wage agreement, this government is pushing Alberta even further away from meeting the recommendations of the Learning Commission and doing nothing to reduce our one-third dropout high school rate?

Mr. Hancock: No, Mr. Speaker, I won’t admit that at all. Again, for the benefit of this member and for the benefit of anybody on school boards that hasn’t heard me say it before, I’ll say it again: we need a longer term approach. We’re working on that longer term approach. That longer term approach will deal not just with salaries for teachers but also professional development and curriculum and other things that are in the best interest of students, in the interest of teachers as a profession, in the interest of school boards, and in the interest of the province. We’ll be working on that over a longer term, and in the short term we’re asking them to draw on their very healthy reserves.

Alberta Hansard, April 13, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last month the unemployment rate for young men in the province of Alberta aged between 16 and 24 was 15 and a half per cent, twice the rate for the general population. 

My first question is to the minister of advanced education. Given that labour market analysis is indicating that we’re heading for a shortage of skilled workers in this province, hopefully as the economy improves, why did the government allow the number of apprenticeship spots to actually go down here in Alberta last year? We’ve got unemployed people. Why aren’t we training them?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Horner: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that if the hon. member were to look at the statistics in a lot more detail, what he would find is that during the down period, which in some areas of the economy we’re still experiencing, companies aren’t hiring a lot of new apprentices. So first-year apprentice numbers and second-year apprentice numbers are down. Secondly, we don’t choose when that student is going to show up at the doorstep. In fact, if they have their second-year ticket or their third-year ticket, they may indeed not go to school this year. If they were very fortunate and maintained their employment, they may decide to stay working.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s an interesting response.

Again to the same minister: given that so many apprentices have built up such a large number of hours towards the completion of their apprenticeship during this last period of high employment, why are you cutting your budget now, when these individuals should be trained so that they can get permanent work whenever the economy turns around? Bad policy.

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, knowing the relationship that this hon. member has with many of our tradespeople, I’m sure that he’s not advocating that we would force tradesmen to come to school at a certain period of time outside of their selected periods of time when they want to work, and we’re not going to do that. Indeed, the apprenticeship program has always been based on the number of apprentices that want to get in that particular year at that particular time of the year. If there are no spaces at that particular time of the year, they move to another part of the year. We’re working with the apprenticeship board and all of our institutions to ensure that those spaces are there.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, this government is forcing many of these apprentices into longer periods of unemployment through bad public policy.

My next question is to the minister of labour. Why is the department cutting . . .

The Speaker: Whoa. Whoa.

Mr. MacDonald: Yes?

The Speaker: Were you unaware of the comments I made earlier about preambles?

Mr. MacDonald: I didn’t consider that to be a preamble, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: But I did. I did, sir. So you’ve asked me the question, and it has been responded to.

Alberta Hansard, April 13, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, when this government had a choice to make between scaling back services for the rich or taking away services from the poor, even the least sophisticated observer was able to predict the outcome. 

In order to save approximately $5 million, Legal Aid Alberta is predicting that more than 6,000 people will be turned away this year. Will the minister confirm this? Are 6,000 or more economically disadvantaged Albertans going to be denied legal assistance by your pilot project?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Absolutely not. Legal Aid and the government of Alberta almost two years ago decided that it was time to consider whether or not the traditional model for delivering legal aid in this province was really serving the interests of people that needed legal services but couldn’t afford them. We decided that we wanted to launch pilot projects not to completely transform the system immediately but to see whether or not it might be possible to put a system in place where we could provide different levels of legal advice and legal support to people depending on what they needed when they came in contact with the legal system.

Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, given that the hon. member’s limits for an individual to receive legal assistance have now been dropped by $6,000, how are these people now supposed to get this legal service if they’re not eligible to get the service?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that’s exactly the point. What we’ve done this year in conjunction with the Legal Aid board is that we’ve developed a system where we’re going to support public defender positions, legal aid clinics, enhanced support to law information centres, and two pilot projects around the province which will allow people who need to access a lawyer to come to a clinic to get advice and then to decide how they want to pursue their rights. Now, if they do decide that they want to pursue their rights, then they will fall into the traditional legal aid system, will be able to get a certificate and have legal advice provided.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Hehr: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given what I said before, that roughly 6,000 Albertans will no longer be eligible to even qualify under legal aid, where are these people now supposed to go to get legal services?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, it’s not the case that they won’t be able to qualify. It’s the case that they will not be able immediately to obtain a certificate because Legal Aid and the government of Alberta have decided in consultation with stakeholders that in some cases people are better served by receiving legal advice and general directional information through courts. The law information centres in Alberta, which were established two years ago, have served over 150,000 people in the past 12 months alone, people that needed legal information, legal direction, and access to a lawyer.

Alberta Hansard, April 13, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. My first question is to the Premier. Given the information he’s just given that there will be standardized contracts and given that he did the right thing and cancelled bonuses for other public executives, will these standardized contracts contain bonuses, or will he take a firm stand and ensure no bonuses are paid on any of these standardized contracts as they are negotiated?

Which is it?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the Alberta Health Services Board has a mandate to negotiate senior executive level contracts, and they will look at the most appropriate model used to bring about efficiencies and improve access to health care. That’s why we have appointed the board. They have the responsibility. If it’s going to be top down all the time to every organization like that, we won’t get the kind of achievements that we require in getting efficiencies in the system.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. My question, then, is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. It’s a matter of public record that this minister will sign off on the contracts of senior executives in Alberta Health Services. Will this minister do the right thing and refuse to sign any contract that has a bonus?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, the bonus system, as I indicated, is part of being competitive to attract the very best people into the most senior positions. However, in view of the difficult economic times we’re in, it should be noted that bonuses paid out at the executive vice-president level or at the senior vice-president level are limited to 20 per cent only of their total yearly contracts.

Dr. Taft: Again to the Premier: given that the public experience of Alberta’s health care system is a huge deficit, long waiting lists, overcrowded facilities, and a staff and physician satisfaction survey that is absolutely devastating, why won’t he do the same thing he did for his deputy ministers and other public servants and eliminate bonuses in the health services system? Why not? What are they doing?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the decision rests with the Alberta Health Services Board. They will look at the best way to manage their senior executives. This is an issue that we dealt with within government. It brought about a savings of over $40 million. This came as a request from me and our government to our senior officials, who, by the way, did not contest. They just simply said: look, even though there’s a contractual obligation, we’re willing to give up our bonuses in order to achieve the savings in government that are necessary.

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. On October 26, 2009, the former Minister of Health and Wellness addressed the Public Accounts Committee, and he said: “Under the new model that the board chair [of Alberta Health Services] outlined earlier, the board is responsible for hiring, but the final sign-off comes through my office. So I guess it’s joint, but the final signature is [the minister’s.]” My question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Will he exercise his authority as minister and refuse to sign any contracts that have performance bonuses in Alberta Health Services?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, the bonus arrangement that may be in place between the CEO and the president of Alberta Health Services is between him and the board. If there are performance bonuses, and I suspect there are, with executive vice-presidents or senior vice-presidents, that’s a matter of those vice-presidents and the CEO. What I can tell you is that there are very specific performance measures that are in place right now that deal with increasing access, shortening wait times, and providing Albertans with the outstanding health care excellence that they are accustomed to receiving.

Dr. Taft: Well, how are those performance measures working so far, Mr. Minister?

Why is the salary of the Deputy Minister of Health and Wellness frozen, and why is that bonus frozen but this minister still allowing the senior executives of Alberta Health Services to have a bonus?

Why the double standard?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, it’s true that bonuses are frozen for senior members of the government. Alberta Health Services is, of course, an arm’s-length organization. They operate very much with their own scenarios, and they’re doing a pretty good job of handling some very difficult and challenging circumstances. However, the important thing is that there is greater certainty today, that there is more stability, that there is greater predictability, and the five-year funding plan coming forward will ensure it.

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, this is the minister who boasted about being hands on and getting in there, and we know he’s meddled and interfered and stepped into all kinds of decisions. Will he do the right thing and end this distorting system of bonuses that get paid to one very select, already incredibly wealthy section of the public service? Bring it to an end. Do the right thing.

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I’ve indicated before and I want to stress this again: you have to engage the best people you can possibly find when you’re administering about a $10 billion operational budget comprised of taxpayer dollars, when you’re managing over 400 health care related facilities and you have a workforce totalling approximately 90,000 people. Those people are working very hard, and so too are these top-level managers.

Alberta Hansard, April 13, 2010

[direct link to this article]

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Last year Alberta Health Services handed out executive bonuses when they had a projected deficit of $1.3 billion. 

The letters outlining the bonuses said, “Many of the typical individual and portfolio performance measures used to establish this payment were difficult to measure . . . and [not consistent] during this year of transition.” To the Premier: how can the Premier defend a bonus of $129,000 of taxpayers’ money for one person when your documents show you cannot measure the performance of that person?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the Alberta Health Services Board has taken decisive steps to overhaul the process of executive contract negotiations. The most important step is the establishment of a standardized contract for senior executives, which will cover all of the senior executives in Alberta Health Services.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the Premier support Alberta Health Services handing out bonuses larger than most Albertans make in a year as a reward for creating a $1.3 billion deficit while public-sector employees are facing wage freezes?

Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could address that on behalf of the Premier. We have to keep in mind here that stuff that occurred two or three years ago is a matter of history. What’s more important is how we’re going forward. When we have individuals who are handling a $10 billion budget, approximately, we have individuals who are looking after 400 different health facilities in the province, we have individuals who are helping to manage or work with approximately 90,000 employees across the province, it requires us to be very competitive in who we hire and how we hire.

Dr. Swann: Again to the Premier, Mr. Speaker: will the Premier order an immediate halt to the bonus system for Alberta Health Services’ executives and restore some semblance of public confidence?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, with respect to executive bonuses we took a very big decision last year. We cancelled all senior level management bonuses within the government, which is $40 million. Alberta Health Services is following up on the leadership that this government has shown and is going to renegotiate all of the contracts and look at a consistent approach to all senior executive positions within Alberta Health Services.

Small Business Assistance

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Recent numbers show that insolvencies are up 9 per cent in Alberta and that there has been an almost 80 per cent increase in bankruptcy proposals over the past year. Now we find that Alberta is becoming a very minor player in venture capital markets, attracting only 6 per cent of venture capital dollars. We now have a situation where less and less money is going into building the economy. More and more people are suffering through the current crises, and all we get from government is increasingly hollow claims that Alberta will be the strongest economy and the first to recover. To the Premier: what will the Premier do to increase the availability of venture capital in Alberta?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we have taken bold steps to increase the amount of venture capital invested in the province. It first starts with the money that’s invested in research. Then it leads to further commercialization of those ideas. In fact, we’ve set aside a hundred million dollars to attract much of the investment to Alberta. There were recent announcements, and there will continue to be more in terms of money coming to the province. We’re on the right track. The other thing, Mr. Speaker, is that we are debt free operationally. We don’t have any debt in the bank to pay. We’re keeping our taxes low. We’re not increasing them. That is what attracts business to this province.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What is the Premier doing to deal with the fact that we have the highest per capita number of bankruptcies in the country?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we also had the hottest economy a number of years ago, when oil was $145, $147 a barrel. Those are some of the issues that the government, of course, is dealing with, but now the economy has settled down. There are very good green shoots in the economy coming forward, and we’re going to see a good recovery not only in the number of businesses moving to Alberta but continued flow of people to Alberta because they do see this as a land of opportunity.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, when will the Premier admit that his do-nothing approach is only causing more and more pain for Alberta families and small businesses?

Mr. Stelmach: Well, Mr. Speaker, in terms of doing nothing, here we are a jurisdiction that said: no new taxes and no tax increases, no fee increases; we eliminated health care premiums for all Albertans. Those are all savings in the pockets of Albertans to be reinvested in the economy. I declare that compared to all jurisdictions in Canada, we have taken that leadership role, and we will continue. We will be the first to be in the black by 2012-13.

Alberta Hansard, April 13, 2010

[direct link to this article]