2005 Spring Session Report: Seniors and Community Supports

image

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]

Helping Alberta’s Seniors Lead Full and Active Lives

image

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]

Find Your Policy

image

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

 

[direct link to this article]

Logging in the Castle threatening grizzlies

Edmonton – Laurie Blakeman, Official Opposition Critic for Sustainable Resource Development (SRD), says logging in the Castle Crown Special Management Area further threatens Alberta’s tiny population of grizzly bears – a species already listed as “Threatened” under Alberta’s Wildlife Act.

“You’d think there would be no logging allowed in a so-called ‘special place,” Blakeman says. “But there’s no legislation to make that mean anything. It’s a designation without any protective teeth.”

Blakeman says the danger to bears is very real – and growing.

“There’s a significant possibility of logging equipment crushing bear dens and the mother bears and cubs inside them,” Blakeman says. “Furthermore, logging operations are about to expand rapidly, and while there’s an agreement to avoid bear dens, SRD doesn’t know where the bear dens are located. Loggers, therefore, don’t know where the bear dens are either, putting even more hibernating bears at risk.”

There are less than 700 grizzlies left in Alberta, and only a few hundred of those are in a position to reproduce. The Alberta Liberals have repeatedly called for grizzlies to be listed as an endangered species, but the government has consistently refused to do so despite the species’ small numbers. From 2000 to 2010, the government counted 240 grizzly deaths caused by humans.

Blakeman says an Alberta Liberal government would protect the Castle and its grizzly population with legislation.

“Alberta Liberals believe the area should be a provincial park, with all the legislative protection that entails,” Blakeman says. “80 percent of the region’s residents oppose logging in the Castle. When will the premier listen and do the right thing? Once the grizzlies are gone, they’re gone forever.”

-30-

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, Director, Southern Alberta Liberal Caucus Office
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

The Warlords of Alberta, Part Three: County of Camrose

image

In Alberta, important public servants such as city councillors, school boards and university officials are routinely invited to donate taxpayer money or participate in partisan political fundraisers for the governing Progressive Conservative Party. These public servants feel immense pressure to comply for fear of losing provincial government support for their communities. In effect, powerful government MLAs are acting as warlords, intimidating local officials to toe the party line.

For the next several weeks, the Official Opposition will release documents suggesting which organizations felt pressured into using taxpayer dollars to fund partisan Progressive Conservative activity.

County of Camrose
According to the February 27, 2007 minutes of a regular meeting of the council of Camrose County, council voted to send the Reeve or a designate, plus spouse, to the Battle River-Wainwright MLA dinner at a cost of $100 per person.

At the same meeting, councillors also passed a motion to send councillors within the Lacombe-Ponoka constituency to that constituency’s MLA dinner in Lacombe. Both of these events were fundraisers for the PC party, reimbursed at taxpayer expense.

-30-

Attached: Minutes of the County of Camrose council meetings for February 27, 2007 - NOTE: Technical difficulties have prevented the upload of this document. Reporters may inquire below for a copy of the minutes.

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

[direct link to this article]

Bed bugs biting Alberta seniors

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman and Edmonton-Centre MLA Laurie Blakeman say the state of some publicly funded seniors’ accommodations is unhealthy and an affront to the human dignity of Alberta’s seniors.

The Westlawn Courts seniors’ residence in Sherman’s constituency of Edmonton Meadowlark is infested with bed bugs, parasitic insects that feed on human blood.

“The residents and management of Westlawn Courts and my office have been working together on maintenance issues at this seniors’ residence for over two years. Basic maintenance Issues have arisen as a result of lack of government funding, and the ministry responsible is aware of this.” Sherman says. “The recent bed bugs infestation is a symptom of the government’s neglect of our seniors’ facilities. This is a public health issue and it’s got to be brought under control.”

Gerard LeBlanc, President of the Westlawn Tenants’ Association, says that over 30 suites are infested, meaning that more than100 tenants are affected because adjacent units must be fumigated as well.

“Tenants are being asked to move out of their suites during and after fumigation, which can take five or six hours,” LeBlanc says. “They’re stuck waiting in the lobbies and common areas. And if the fumigation doesn’t work the first time, they may need to go through the process twice. This can be pretty tough on residents who have mobility issues.”

Blakeman says she’s aware of bed bug infestations at a number of seniors’ residences. She has raised the issue with the government via correspondence and during Question Period, but the problem persists.

“There’s no official income support policy in place for low-income Albertans who have bedbug infestations,” Blakeman says. “Yes, there’s some money available for reimbursement, but it’s not easy to access and you have to know who to ask. Unfortunately it can cost hundreds of dollars out of pocket for these folks to find alternate accommodations during fumigation, to pay for extra cleaning supplies and laundry, to move and store furniture…it adds up, especially when you’re barely making ends meet.”

A new Sherman Liberal government would invest in quality public, non-profit seniors’ accommodations based on local needs.

“Our seniors built this province and they deserve quality, affordable accommodations. It’s their right as citizens to enjoy a measure of dignity and respect in their golden years. What’s happening at Westlawn Courts is happening in seniors’ homes across the province and society must not allow this to continue. Albertans deserve better.”

-30-

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, Director, Southern Alberta Liberal Caucus Office
(403) 860-4330

Gerard LeBlanc, President, Westlawn Tenants’ Association
(780) 483-8783

 

[direct link to this article]

Statement: Sherman on pipelines

Yesterday interim federal Liberal leader Bob Rae suggested that he does not approve the construction of the Northern Gateway oil pipeline. Alberta Liberals respect Mr. Rae, but he is on the wrong side of this issue.

Projects such as this help ensure that Alberta’s most important export, our oil and gas, reaches the world market. Oil and gas is the foundation of Alberta’s prosperity. It puts food on the table for Alberta families; it pays for our schools, hospitals and roads.

Alberta Liberal Caucus support for expanding our markets to the west coast is already a matter of public record, but in light of yesterday’s announcement from Mr. Rae, we feel it necessary to reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that our oil and gas sector remains strong. Safely transporting our product is important to Alberta and good for Canada, and such projects should move forward as long as they do so with sufficient protection for the environment.

Alberta Liberals favour increased monitoring of emissions and pollution, stricter fines for companies that pollute, and incenting more upgrading within Alberta.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
(780) 904-5430

[direct link to this article]

The Warlords of Alberta, Part Two: Big Lakes

image

In Alberta, important public servants such as city councillors, school boards and university officials are routinely invited to donate taxpayer money or participate in partisan political fundraisers for the governing Progressive Conservative Party. These public servants feel immense pressure to comply for fear of losing provincial government support for their communities. In effect, powerful government MLAs are acting as warlords, intimidating local officials to toe the party line.

For the next several weeks, the Official Opposition will release documents suggesting which organizations felt pressured into using taxpayer dollars to fund partisan Progressive Conservative activity.

Municipal District of Big Lakes
According to the April 11, 2007 minutes of the Municipal District of Big Lakes council meeting, council voted unanimously to send acting CAO Renaud and any interested councillors to the Lesser Slave Lake PC association dinner in High Prairie with Ed Stelmach held later that month.

Two years later, council voted to contribute $200 to the Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock PC association toward the purchase of a gift to celebrate the 30th anniversary of service by MLA (and Speaker) Ken Kowalski – a $200 illegally taxpayer-funded gift for an MLA who will receive a $1.27 million transition allowance when he retires this year.

-30-

Attached: Minutes of the Municipal District of Big Lakes council meeting for April 11, 2007 and April 22, 2009.

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, Director, Southern Alberta Liberal Caucus Office
(403) 860-4330

 

[direct link to this article]

Sherman calls on government to listen to Albertans and make the Castle Crown a provincial park

Edmonton - While PC Ministers spread out across the province to supposedly consult with the public on decisions that they have already made, Alberta Liberal Leader Raj Sherman asks why the government isn’t listening to Albertans when it comes to clear cut forestry in southwestern Alberta.

Clearcutting is going ahead in the Castle Crown area despite its designation as a “Special Place.”  The area was once part of Waterton National Park. Protesters continue to try to stop the clearcutting in the Castle area in spite of being served an Enforcement Order yesterday. 

On behalf of the Official Opposition, Sherman is calling for the area to be protected by immediately designating it as a provincial park. Furthermore, he is calling for proper protection from development in areas that are designated parks.

“We have been very clear that this area should be made into a park and preserved with strong legislation,” Sherman says. “That will protect not only the habitat, but also the watershed, plant and animal varieties and recreational trails in it.”

A 2011 Praxis Group survey found that 77% of residents living near the area in southwest Alberta opposed any new logging in the Castle Special Management Area, and 74% supported making the area a provincial park. 

“We have received literally hundreds of calls and emails calling for the protection of the Castle area and the over 220 rare and at risk species that it contains,” Sherman says. “I grew up in a logging town; I worked in a sawmill like my father and grandfather before me. I understand the importance of responsible forestry. But I also know that Castle Crown is a unique and precious area, one that Albertans want protected. It’s not the place for us to be clearcutting. Let’s listen to the people and protect Castle Crown by making it Alberta’s newest provincial park and an even more attractive destination for tourism.”

-30-

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, Director, Southern Alberta Liberal Caucus Office
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

The Warlords of Alberta, Part One: Athabasca

In Alberta, important public servants such as city councillors, school boards and university officials are routinely invited to donate taxpayer money or participate in partisan political fundraisers for the governing Progressive Conservative Party. These public servants feel immense pressure to comply for fear of losing provincial government support for their communities. In effect, powerful government MLAs are acting as warlords, intimidating local officials to toe the party line.

For the next several weeks, the Official Opposition will release documents suggesting which organizations felt pressured into using taxpayer dollars to fund partisan Progressive Conservative activity.

Athabasca County/Town of Athabasca
According to the November 8, 2005 minutes of the regular county council meeting, five councillors were authorized to attend the Athabasca-Redwater PC association dinner in Thorhild. Council also approved a motion to provide an item for the dinner’s silent auction.

Nearly a year later, the town council of Athabasca considered an invitation from former PC minister Mike Cardinal to attend his fundraising supper. A motion to pay for tickets for any councillors wishing to attend the supper, as well as to provide an item for the silent auction, was defeated by council. Town council did the right thing, but the fact that they received an invitation from the minister shows that the PC party was openly soliciting illegal donations. 

-30-

Attached: Minutes of Town of Athabasca Council Meeting NOTE: technical difficulties prevent us from uploading the County of Athabasca minutes at this time. Reporters can request the minutes by phoning Earl J. Woods.


For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, Director, Southern Alberta Liberal Caucus Office
(403)

 

[direct link to this article]

Code Red crisis and weak ministerial response prompts Official Opposition to activate health hotline

Call 1-888-886-2834 to improve ambulance and emergency service in Alberta

Calgary – Official Opposition Health Critic David Swann has been following the Code Red crisis – the dangerous shortage of ambulances, paramedics, and backlogged emergency rooms– very carefully. The stories from paramedics and other front-line staff coupled with today’s response from the Minister of Health have prompted the Official Opposition to activate a hotline so that Alberta’s health care professionals and their patients can share their stories and help convince the government that urgent action is required to fix the system

Swann points out that Minister Horne’s announcement of more staff only brings staffing levels up to where they were previously before burned out workers left the system. The other announcements regarding station openings were already part of the EMS Five Year Plan. Swann insists that Albertans deserve this matter to be taken seriously and not have their concerns brushed off by a PR exercise.

“I’m inspired by the courage of the EMS workers who’ve risked their jobs to inform the public about this crisis,” Swann says. “However, the fact remains that the government is not taking any new measures and nothing is being done to reduce the bottlenecks in emergency departments.”

Emergency department wait time performance for admitted patients in adult hospitals in both major cities is down to 20-42%, and where they were once prominently posted on AHS’ website front page, they have now been hidden three levels deep.

Swann says a lot more needs to be done to shorten ambulance response time, and once the ambulances get to hospitals, to transfer the patients and get back on the streets to serve their home communities. He’s asking health care professionals or anyone who’s waited dangerously long for an ambulance or for hours with paramedics in emergency to phone 1-888-886-2834 and leave a message telling their story. The Official Opposition can then take those stories to the Legislature and present them to the government so that the premier and health minister understand the real impacts the Code Red crisis is having on Albertans.

Those who would rather leave written comments can visit www.fixhealthcare.ca for more information and email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Swann has also written an open letter to Health Minister Fred Horne and Alberta Health Services CEO Chris Eagle that describes the potential impacts of the crisis.

“When someone is having a stroke or heart attack or they’ve been in a car accident, time is of the essence. A few minutes’ delay in response can mean the difference between life and death,” Swann says.

-30-

Attached: Swann Letter to Horne


Open letter from David Swann, AHS Weekly ER wait times

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, Director, SALCO
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

PDD dollars used to pad PC party pocketbook?

Edmonton – Official Opposition Seniors and Community Supports Critic Harry Chase is releasing documents today that show the PDD (Persons with Developmental Disabilities) board in Red Deer allocated some of their operational funding to reimburse board members for attending a partisan Progressive Conservative fundraiser.

According to minutes of the PDD Central Alberta Community Board meeting held in Red Deer on August 23, 2005, board members were to purchase tickets to an upcoming premier’s fundraising dinner and submit honoraria claims for reimbursement. In other words, taxpayer money – money that should be used to support people with developmental disabilities – was intended to support the partisan work of the Progressive Conservative party.

“This shows that the people in charge of the Progressive Conservative party simply have no shame,” Chase says. “To create an atmosphere in which PDD boards feel they need to divert taxpayer money to support the governing party, when funding for those boards is already lacking, is utterly outrageous. They’re stealing money from the most vulnerable Albertans of all. It’s sickening.”

Chase doesn’t blame the board members, noting that they are under enormous pressure to play by the unspoken rules of a bullying government.

“It’s quite possible that these folks planned to attend this fundraiser because they were afraid not to,” Chase says. “Last year we talked about a culture of fear and intimidation in health care. We were thinking too small. The Tory culture of fear and intimidation has infiltrated every aspect of governance in this province, and now we find out that it’s even affecting our most vulnerable citizens. It has to stop.”

– 30 –

Attached: PDD Central Community Board meeting minutes for August 23, 2005

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, SALCO Director
(403) 860-4330

 

[direct link to this article]

Keystone failure has lessons for Alberta

Edmonton – Official Opposition Environment Critic Laurie Blakeman says the delay of the Keystone XL pipeline project gives Alberta an opportunity to get better environmental practices in place before the next round of approvals.

“Citizens all over the world, including the United States, are concerned about climate change and protecting their air, land and water,” Blakeman says. “As Keystone goes back to the drawing board, Alberta should take the opportunity to make our province and our energy sector cleaner and even more attractive to global markets. Clearly, the best way to protect our energy industry and help move projects such as Keystone forward is to take real action to make Alberta a world leader in environmental protection.”

To that end, an Alberta Liberal government would:

• Clean up Alberta’s toxic tailings ponds through research partnerships, strict guidelines and enforcement, and shared best practices – whatever gets the job done, and done fast
• Implement a no-net-loss policy to protect wetlands
• Set up a system to independently monitor greenhouse gas emissions
• Enact tougher penalties and stricter enforcement for violators
“Actions speak louder than words,” Blakeman says. “Advertising hasn’t done the job. The government must take real steps to protect our environment and our energy sector. Both are critical to Alberta’s future.”

– 30 –

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, SALCO Director
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

Sherman would put new federal health dollars to good use

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says the PC government’s refusal to say whether or not billions of dollars in federal health transfers will be used on health care shows an appalling lack of common sense.

Changes to the program that transfers federal money back to the provinces for health care could provide up to $900 million a year in extra funding for Alberta.

Sherman says that if he were Premier, he’d use the money to, first and foremost, unclog Alberta’s emergency rooms and hospitals.

“We need to invest in caring for our seniors,” Sherman says. “We should use that money to provide home care and public long-term care for the hundreds of seniors still waiting for spaces – seniors who are instead stuck in much more expensive acute care beds in hospitals, which prevents the admission of patients in the ER, which in turn prevents our ambulances from going out on 911 calls. These new federal dollars could ensure that every Alberta senior spends his or her golden years in comfort and dignity, and we’d slash wait times in the ER to boot.”

Sherman would also invest in training a new generation of front-line health care workers: nurses, doctors, paramedics, technicians, support staff and allied health professionals.

“We have the best facilities and the best health care professionals in the world,” Sherman says. “But the PCs lacked the foresight to train enough doctors and nurses to keep up with rising demand. These federal dollars could pay for plenty of spaces for medical students in our post-secondary institutions.”

– 30 –

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, SALCO Director
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

Whack-a-mole cabinet tour shows Redford beholden to same old, same old Tory style

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says the PC pre-election cabinet tour of Alberta shows that all that’s changed in the old PC party is the cut of the leader’s suit.

The government refuses to release the full tour itinerary. Instead, they will release stops the day before cabinet members arrive, leaving citizens little opportunity to participate in a supposedly open process.

“Premier Redford was elected on a platform of doing things differently, but this tour is the same old same old dog-and-pony show we’ve seen before,” Sherman says. “It’s a whack-a-mole tour; the public doesn’t know when or where cabinet members will pop out of hiding until the day before, giving constituents very little time to arrange participation in these meetings. How is the government supposed to get honest, open feedback from Albertans under these circumstances?”

According to Sherman, the answer is simple: the Redford government isn’t really interested in hearing from anyone but their existing supporters.

“I’d laugh if this transparent pre-election tour weren’t being paid for with taxpayer dollars,” Sherman says. “When I travel across the province, I give people a heads-up. I’m prepared to respond to tough questions, to have an open and honest discussion. That’s the basic courtesy elected officials owe their constituents.”

“They may have a new leader, but the PC party is up to the same old tricks,” Sherman concludes. “Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, SALCO Director
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

Statement: Sherman Supports Frontline Healthcare Workers

Yesterday 95 percent of frontline hospital support staff rejected the government’s latest contract offer. The Official Opposition stands behind these crucial frontline workers, who play an essential role in protecting the health of Albertans. Not only do they need a living wage, they need help; in other words, we need additional frontline staff.

When I spoke to the AUPE convention last fall, I said that frontline support staff – people like clerks, maintenance workers, cooks, security and custodians – make it possible for me to do my job as a physician. I stand behind those words. For too long, the PC government has taken these workers for granted and treated them with an appalling lack of respect.

A new Sherman Liberal government would sit down with frontline workers to hammer out a deal that recognizes their invaluable contributions. While the PCs continue to invest in managers managing managers and big shiny hospitals and clinics that sit empty, Liberals believe in investing in frontline staff who actually do the jobs that Albertans need done. They are the foundation of our public health system.

Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition
Communications Department
(780) 904-5430

[direct link to this article]

Thanks to Civil Servants

(If you’re a provincial civil servant, be aware this is a long piece, but you ARE going to want to read it. It’s likely the first positive thing you’ll have heard about your job in a very long time.)

Controversial as what I have to say may be in these redneck times, the very fact of its controversiality is why we Albertans need to have a very serious think about the place of government and its employees in our society.

It’s long past time for us to re-appreciate our provincial civil servants as intelligent, highly-trained, deeply dedicated and powerful creative forces in so many aspects of the potential overall improvement of our lives.

It’s amazing that an otherwise highly-educated province has fallen so deeply into its blind worship of Reganomics, the bonehead philosophy that drove California’s Proposition 13 which so starved the state and its municipalities of funds (without reducing public demand for services) that California’s state and local debt now totals nearly $2 trillion, or roughly 4 times the Canadian per capita debt load!

Since the 1980s, Alberta’s Conservatives have religiously chanted the Reganomics mantra – government and bureaucrats bad, private sector good – and their policies have reflected the belief that cutting taxes and downsizing government leaves more money flowing through the economy to generate more overall wealth.

In theory, at least, it’s not a bad philosophy…if it weren’t for the fact that 99% of us have learned that most of the money flows not into barber shops and restaurants and retail stores, but instead straight into the hands of the rich. And it more or less stays there.

The bottom line is that we’ve still got a government of swaggerers and gunslingers (the epitomes being Ron Liepert and, before him, Steve West) who curl their lips at government in general and openly disdain civil servants as a featherbedding underclass that’s constantly in need of a good downsizing. Their egos are tied directly to the size of their…budget cuts.

These are the guys who actually believe that it you decimate the ranks of workplace safety inspectors, or environmental enforcement officers, bad-guy employers and polluters will eagerly report their transgressions so they can be duly punished by the few remaining staff in government service.

These pol-honchos care far, far, less for the service that government is supposed to perform on behalf of the people who pay the taxes, than they do for the accolades they’ll get from fellow Reganomics-believers-voters-donors for having cut government budgets.

Pity the poor civil servant
You have to feel awfully sorry for the poor souls that have so far dodged the cutters and slashers in successive Conservative governments.

As more and more of their dedicated colleagues have been thrown under the bus by their employers, their work loads have increased by factors that would be unconscionable in efficient private sector companies. In some areas, these workloads have resulted in the loss of life – just ask someone in the child welfare department.

The scope of the civil service has also incredibly narrowed, from delivering (or supporting the delivery of) important services that protect, assist or enable Albertans to improve their lives, to sheepishly performing niggardly roles that mostly consist of telling people NO and keeping them away from government instead of bringing the government to them.

Civil servants these days have been forced into saying NO to this, NO to that. More and more, they’ve been forced by their bosses to aspire to, and deliver, less and less.

And they know it. Every time they go to work, they know how different it should feel in their gut to open that office door. They yearn to once again feel good about their work; they thirst for employers who understand how important it is for them to do what they’re trained to do, to provide whatever service they’ve chosen as a profession that makes them feel needed, valued and appreciated by the people they serve.

Instead, every day they re-enter a siege mentality, hunker down, shut up and just get through the day…chalking up one more day toward retirement. Everywhere around them they see the way things are done, or not done, and they know better. They also know it’s no use speaking out, because they’ll just doom themselves for the next downsizing.

How it could be?
OK, now for the positive pitch…and ironically it starts with a guy named Peter Lougheed, our first Progressive Conservative Premier who was elected more than 40 years ago.

There was a guy who GOT government – enlightened government, supported by a competent, respected and empowered civil service.

Under him, everyone had their roles on straight. Elected officials made policy and pointed the way. The civil service (below the Deputy Minister level, largely non-political in those days) advised the government in the process of making policy, then carried out the programs that flowed from the policy decisions. In those days, undue Ministerial interference in the delivery of programs actually caused minor scandals.

It was a good time to be a civil servant. You were respected for your skills and your goals. You were given the resources to do your job. You were encouraged to come up with new ideas and innovative approaches. And you were appreciated by your political employers for a job well done.

And the enlightened approach that Peter Lougheed brought to his relationship with government employees translated in his government’s similarly enlightened approach to its programs and services.

All kinds of smart, exciting, valuable, wonderful and just plain fun things happened in Lougheed’s days. He started the Heritage Fund. He bought an airline to retain control over transportation policy in a fast-growing, geographically isolated province. He bought an oil rig so he could sue Pierre Trudeau over royalties. He opened government’s eyes to protecting and enjoying the environment. His programs built or improved all kinds of local community facilities. He recognized Alberta’s multicultural wealth. And he invested heavily in encouraging the growth of our visual and performing arts.

All of that was done with the eager support of a truly empowered, appreciated civil service.

It can be that way again!

Alberta Liberals want an end to decades of Reganomics-based attitudes toward the place of government in society.

To us, an enlightened government is a social mechanism to make life better, safer, more fulfilling, more promising and hopeful, for all of us.

To us, the cost of government is an investment, not a waste.

(Here we need to take a side-step and assure fellow Albertans that we are also highly aware of the need for government to respect the taxpayer’s dollar, and to run as cost-efficiently as possible.)

But in the overall scheme of things, our approach to government would represent an enormous attitude shift about just where government fits in the lives we live.

We would say YES – not always, but certainly more often. YES to our citizens. YES to the value of our civil servants. 

We would challenge both Albertans and our civil servants to become more proactive, more creative…to take more chances in promoting new ideas and new ways of doing things…and to feel safe while doing it.

We would protect whistleblowers big-time, but we would need to protect them much less often because our brand of government would be far more welcoming to (and therefore far less threatening as a result of) the internal venting of concern about how we’re doing things.

Save for our Deputy Ministers, we would sweep politics out of the higher ranks of the civil service with tough, new civil service ethics rules that severely limit managers’ ability to apply their personal politics to the workplace.

And we would completely remove the ever-present political strong-arm from the awarding of government contracts across the entire spectrum of government spending - from construction to IT.

It’s dead wrong – actually, it’s almost literally criminal – that we’ve come to the point where people in every nook and cranny of Alberta feel compelled to donate money or volunteer time to the Progressive Conservative Party if they want even a hope of getting provincial work.

Given how pervasive this nudge-nudge, wink-wink political rot is these days, doing away with it is a big job.

So, how would we do it? Easy!

Under the Raj Sherman Alberta Liberals, all major provincial contracts would be awarded in full public view, by a committee chaired by an Opposition MLA and attended by the media. Pros and cons of various bidders, and civil service recommendations, would be part of the discussion leading up to the contract award.

Similar, open processes not involving MLAs would be set up for the awarding of smaller contracts focused more on local or regional projects.

Imagine! Awarding contracts solely on the basis of merit.

Poof!...political pressure, gone.

Imagine that!

Imagine what this change alone will do for the position of the civil servant in the process of government. Suddenly, employees’ training and judgment will count for something. They’ll be more in control of delivering cost-effectiveness – not votes and donations – in the spending of public funds.

Imagine citizens having the individual freedom to say NO to an invitation to attend the local government MLA’s annual golf tournament!

So take heart, faithful provincial civil servants. There are people out here who get what you do, who know how important it is and who empathize with how frustrated you must be subjected to the ideological whims of people who still haven’t awakened to the fact that Reganomics landed the United States $15,200,000,000,000 in debt and didn’t do a thing to reduce the public’s need for government service.

[direct link to this article]

Official Opposition welcomes new key staff

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman announces a number of additions to his Alberta Liberal caucus staff.

“I’m very excited about my new team,” Sherman says. “Together they bring a formidable combination of talent, energy and experience to the Official Opposition. They join a new and growing Sherman Liberal team eager to take on the PCs and serve the people of this province.”

Jonathan Huckabay is the new Chief of Staff. He’s an Edmonton native, University of Alberta alumnus, political science instructor and veteran political staffer who previously served with Sherman in the government caucus and during his time as an independent member.

Jeff Melland, currently a Communications Officer with the BC government caucus, takes over as Director of Communications on February 1. Jeff is making the move to Edmonton with his wife, KJ, and their three-year-old son, Ian. Jeff brings extensive political experience to the Alberta Liberal caucus team.

Ryan Pineo, a former Legislative Assistant with the BC government caucus, now serves as Sherman’s Executive Assistant.

Finally, longtime communications jack-of-all-trades Earl J. Woods has been promoted to Senior Communications Advisor. Woods is a former CBC television host, freelance writer and speechwriter to Lieutenants-Governor Lois Hole and Normie Kwong, as well as former Official Opposition Leaders Kevin Taft and David Swann.

Sherman also thanks past staff members for their contributions.

“I’m very grateful to outgoing Chief of Staff Rick Miller and outgoing Director of Communications Brian Leadbetter for their service to the caucus and to Albertans. They’re both fine men and it was a pleasure to serve alongside them on behalf of the people of Alberta.”

– 30 –

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, SALCO Director
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

Cold snap reveals mismanagement of Alberta power grid

Calgary – Official Opposition Energy Critic Kent Hehr says this week’s bone-freezing temperatures will chill Albertans even further when they see their power bills spike a couple of months from now – and those higher bills come courtesy of the PCs and their mismanagement of the power grid.

This week, Alberta experienced record-low temperatures that, combined with unplanned outages at three power plants, caused the kilowatt/hour price to spike to its maximum level, over 99 cents. While Albertans won’t see a price jump right away – it takes time for such spikes to appear on a monthly bill – we will pay for the lack of supply eventually, Hehr says.

“Here’s the problem. Way back in 1999, the PCs promised that deregulation would open up the power grid to the free market and everyone’s power bills would drop. Well, it hasn’t turned out that way. Albertans now pay among the highest power prices in the nation, because the government hasn’t managed the grid properly or properly incentivized utility companies to build more baseline generation. The result: more money out of your pocket to make big power companies rich.”

The Official Opposition is committed to the principle that electricity is an essential service that must be affordable for every Albertan.

“We need more baseline generation built close to cities to ensure that power is as cheap and plentiful as possible, while avoiding costly new transmission lines to move electricity between Edmonton and Calgary,” Hehr says. “At the same time, we should ensure that as much new generation as possible comes from clean alternatives such as gas-fired plants, wind and hydro while also examining long-term solutions to replace coal-burning generation.”

– 30 –

For further information, contact:

Earl J. Woods, Senior Communications Advisor
(780) 904-5430

Denis Lapointe, SALCO Director
(403) 860-4330

[direct link to this article]

MacDonald asks Elections Alberta to investigate additional alleged illegal contributions to PCs

Edmonton – Official Opposition Finance Critic Hugh MacDonald has provided Elections Alberta head Brian Fjeldheim with documentation showing that municipal officials across Alberta have used taxpayer dollars to attend partisan Progressive Conservative fundraising events or otherwise contribute to partisan PC activities.

From Athabasca to Whitecourt, municipal officials clearly feel that they must attend PC fundraising events and donate to the PC cause,” MacDonald says. “These contributions are against the law, and Albertans don’t want their money being used this way.”

In one 2009 case, Smoky Lake County voted to provide a $300 sponsorship benefitting the Athabasca-Redwater PC association. Also in 2009, Wetaskiwin council received an invitation to attend the Wetaskiwin-Camrose PC association golf classic and social. In 2007, the County of Camrose voted to send the Reeve (or designate) and his wife to the Battle River-Wainwright PC association’s annual MLA dinner at a cost of $100 per person. The list goes on.

MacDonald says the government is responsible for creating an atmosphere that intimidates public servants into toeing the party line.

“It’s easy for the government to sit on their high horse and tell people not to make illegal contributions, but the fact remains that their party accepted these contributions in the first place – and they are, in fact, soliciting donations by sending town councils invitations to these fundraising events. The government is responsible for setting the tone, and they’ve set a tone that encourages this misuse of taxpayer dollars.”

MacDonald says the ruling Tories have encouraged an atmosphere in which local officials cooperate with the PC party in order to keep infrastructure money and other government benefits flowing to their communities.

“This process has to stop; it’s not fair to the taxpayers or to these municipal officials,” MacDonald says.

– 30 –

Attached: Letter to Brian Fjeldheim


For more information contact:

Hugh MacDonald, Finance Critic
(780) 914-5270

[direct link to this article]

Hehr stands up for Northern Gateway Pipeline

Alberta Liberals defend energy sector and expanded capacity to export markets

Edmonton - As hearings into the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to the B.C. coast get under way, Official Opposition Deputy Leader Kent Hehr is expressing his support for the project and those like it. 

“The more customers we have for Alberta’s oil the better,” says Hehr. “The ability for industry to ship to new markets such as the booming Asia Pacific economies, with high demand, and potentially higher prices creates jobs and value for Albertans in general as the owner of the resource.”

“Alberta has been the safest and most reliable supplier of energy to our best friend and customer in the USA for a long time.  We have a lot of current oil and oilsands production though, and the potential to add even more production capacity in the future,” Hehr says.  “That means we can also become a safe and reliable supplier of energy to other markets if we build this pipeline and projects like it.”

The Alberta Liberals strongly support the duty to consult with all affected stakeholders, including people living along the route, environmentalists and Aboriginal groups.  A proper process to deal with all potential issues is the best for Albertans and for Canadians in general.


– 30 –

For more information contact:

Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 862-5661

[direct link to this article]

Name the constituencies and tell us how much, demands Alberta Liberal caucus

Edmonton – Official Opposition Finance Critic Hugh MacDonald is demanding the government reveals the names of the 10 Progressive Conservative constituency associations that Elections Alberta is now investigating over claims they received illegal donations.

“What is this government party hiding? Which PC constituencies accepted these potentially illegal donations and what is the value of these donations?” MacDonald asks.

Elections Alberta is responsible for ensuring all political parties follow the Elections Act. It is illegal for any organization that receives provincial or federal funds to make political contributions. Currently, officers at Elections Alberta need permission from the Ministry of Justice to prosecute anyone for breaching the Act. 

Lorne Gibson, Alberta’s former Chief Electoral Officer, made key recommendations that would have given Elections Alberta stronger investigative powers, MacDonald says.

“The Chief Electoral Officer made excellent recommendations to strengthen our laws and he was shown the door for his efforts,” MacDonald says.

The Alberta Liberals have documented 19 cases where the PC Party has solicited or received political donations from municipalities in recent years. The Alberta Liberals will make all 19 cases available for investigation.

“The reason the government ignored Mr. Gibson’s sound recommendations was so it could continue with the age old political practice of accepting donations from taxpayer funded organizations,” MacDonald says.

“This is a deceptive practice that must stop before the next provincial election.”

Recommendations by Gibson included the following:

• Providing the Chief Electoral Officer with investigative powers under the Election Act
• Extending the time limit on prosecutions so they may commence up to one year following the date on which the CEO believes the offense has occurred
• Requiring parties and candidates to retain records related to campaigns and annual activities for five years

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Hugh MacDonald, MLA
Edmonton-Gold Bar
(780) 914-5270

[direct link to this article]

New health transfer scheme provides Redford with excuse to privatize health care

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says the federal government’s decree limiting health transfer payments to GDP growth leaves Alberta at the mercy of a PC government that’s long wanted to privatize health care.

Yesterday federal finance minister Jim Flaherty announced a new formula for federal health transfers to the provinces. Beginning in 2016, the growth of such transfers will be limited to GDP growth. In practical terms, that means a reduction in the rate of increase from the current figure of six percent to something around four percent.

Sherman points out that he raised this very issue in Question Period earlier this month, and that the Premier’s response clearly indicated she wasn’t willing to play hardball on behalf of Albertans.

“Most other premiers have responded to this unilateral declaration from Ottawa with justifiable outrage,” Sherman says. “When I raised this issue in the legislature, the premier offered some feel-good rhetoric about being partners in confederation, which is all well and good except when your partner is playing fast and loose with your money. Now our premier is silent, which suggests to me that she and her old boys’ club cabinet are perfectly happy to see health transfers trimmed, because it suits their backroom agenda to privatize public health care.”

Sherman says that rather than make the necessary changes to management that would fix the health care system, the Redford administration will use the health transfer cuts as an excuse to privatize.

“Mark my words: at some point in the future the premier will stand up and say that Alberta can no longer afford public health care, that Albertans will have to make do with less and pay out of pocket for more and more health care services. We can avoid that scenario, but only if we change the government.”

A Sherman Liberal government would fix health care by expanding the role of primary care networks, training enough health care professionals to cover Alberta’s population growth and ensure everyone has a family doctor, opening up enough public home care and long-term care spaces to clear the backlog in hospitals and emergency rooms, and focusing on prevention to keep Albertans healthy and out of hospitals.

“There really is no alternative anymore,” Sherman says. “If Albertans want private US-style health care, they should vote for the Redford PCs. But if Albertans want their public health care system fixed, they must elect a new Sherman Liberal government. Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Earl J. Woods
(780) 904-5430

[direct link to this article]

No long-term care spaces for Calgary or Okotoks

Calgary – Harry Chase, Official Opposition Critic for Seniors and Community Supports, says that while he welcomes the additional supportive living spaces announced today, he’s concerned that there are no additional long-term care spaces, which provide essential medical services supportive living spaces cannot.

“Across this province there are hundreds of vulnerable Albertans, many of them senior citizens, who are waiting in pain and anxiety for public long-term care beds,” Chase says. “While supportive living spaces are fine for those who need minimal care, they do nothing for the most vulnerable Albertans, those with serious and ongoing medical needs who don’t have the money to pay for expensive private care.”

Chase says that supportive living represents the lowest level of care, but at a very high cost. To truly provide the care Albertans need, the province must invest in publicly funded, publicly delivered continuing care, including long-term care and non-profit community-based home care.

“By ignoring the desperate need for public long-term care, the government is condemning hundreds of vulnerable seniors to very unpleasant circumstances,” Chase says. “Many are stuck in crowded hospitals, occupying acute care beds and contributing against their will to the emergency room wait-time crisis. Others live in fear that their retirement savings will run out before they die, leaving them in desperate poverty in their final years of life. What kind of thank-you is this to the men and women who sacrificed so much to build this province?” 

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Earl J. Woods
(780) 904-5430

[direct link to this article]

30 new long-term care spaces not enough

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says today’s announcement of a mere 30 long-term care spaces spread out over six communities shortchanges Alberta’s seniors, and that the direction Premier Redford is taking with regard to long-term care is the same direction as the Stelmach administration – the wrong direction.

Earlier this afternoon the Alberta government announced just over 500 new “affordable living” spaces, but only 30 of those are actual long-term care spaces, which the province needs most desperately. The remainder are so-called “supportive living” spaces, which do not provide any health services.

“This government has abandoned its duty to senior citizens,” Sherman says. “30 new spaces won’t make a dent in a lineup that’s already hundreds of seniors deep. Today we have hundreds of seniors awaiting placement in our hospitals, and well over a thousand seniors awaiting placement in the community. Until we get our seniors out of hospitals and into long term care, we will continue to have long waits in our emergency rooms.”

Sherman adds that the Redford government is nickel and diming seniors at their most vulnerable.

“They’re investing tens of millions of dollars in capital funding to for-profit providers, and there will have to be operational grants down the road as well,” Sherman says. “Private providers have to make a profit, and they’ll take that profit from two sources: taxpayers and vulnerable seniors in care. And let’s not forget that Redford is removing the cap on accommodation fees for residents of long-term care facilities, making life even tougher for our seniors.”

Sherman says things will be different for our seniors when Albertans elect a government that makes the right decisions.

“A Sherman Liberal government would invest in publicly-funded, publicly delivered, non-profit community-based home care, seniors lodges and long-term care.” Sherman says. “The men and women that built this province deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, like human beings, not commodities. They need affordable, quality care, the kind that’s best delivered through the public system.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Earl J. Woods
(780) 904-5430

[direct link to this article]

Redford and Liepert betray Alberta by backing down on health transfers

Edmonton – Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says that Alison Redford and Ron Liepert are betraying Alberta by giving up on trying to collect $900 million per year in health transfer payments from Ottawa – nearly $2 billion over the next two years.

Sherman says it’s clear the only reason this is happening is because Premier Redford wants to make life easier for her longtime friend, Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

“This is a betrayal of every Albertan who’s had to wait days in the ER or months for a hip or knee replacement,” Sherman says. “It’s a betrayal of every Albertan whose cancer wasn’t diagnosed in time because we don’t have enough MRI machines, of every senior waiting for long-term care. It’s a betrayal of the taxpayers who are seeing health expenses skyrocket under the PCs. That money belongs to Albertans, and Redford and Liepert don’t have the right to just give it away – certainly not to appease their political allies.”

Sherman says that the provincial Tories have scored political points for years by picking fights with the federal government, and that normally he would support a more cooperative tone – but not at the expense of Albertans.

“This is absolutely the wrong time and the wrong issue to start playing nice with the feds,” Sherman says. “That $900 million per year could create hundreds of public long-term care spaces, enough to clear the backlog in acute care, which would in turn dramatically shorten wait times in emergency rooms. It could create more Primary Care Networks, pay for the education of the thousands of new doctors, nurses and other health care professionals Alberta needs to meet our growing population. It could pay for home care to keep seniors together in their homes. And the premier and her finance minister are willing to give up on that for the sake of making Stephen Harper’s life easier?”

Sherman says the Alberta Liberals would never settle for a bad deal for Alberta, no matter which party is in power in Ottawa – especially when, according to the provincial government’s own documents, Albertans contribute more to and receive less from the federal government than citizens of other provinces.

“Why won’t the premier fight for Albertans and shake down Ottawa for the money it owes us?” Sherman asks. “Of all the promises this rookie premier has broken, this is the worst of all because it attacks the very health of every citizen. Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 862-5661

 

[direct link to this article]

Courthouse Security (December 7)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The wheels of justice have slowed in some Edmonton courtrooms because this government has failed to provide the necessary security.

Provincial sheriffs are responsible for security details. My first question is to the Solicitor General. How can this happen when over $33 million is budgeted for court security and prison transfer?

Mr. Denis: Mr. Speaker, I would first refute this member’s claim that this ministry has in any way failed to provide court security. There are four levels of court security. The final level of court security is only available in high-profile cases. Do you want a sheriff in every courtroom, for even a small-claims case? What about the taxpayers’ interests?

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. Again to the same minister: can the minister provide a breakdown of this $33 million budget? What is spent on court security, because court security is lax, and what is spent on prison transfer?

Mr. Denis: Once again, I refute this member’s claim that court security is lax. There are four levels of security. That includes the perimeter security, the inside security, and the roaming security. On top of that, every courtroom has a panic button, where one of the roaming sheriffs can actually come in if there is an actual need. We do not need – there you go, Mr. Speaker. You have one yourself. I’ll take my seat.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I think I have pushed the hon. member’s panic button on this issue.

Now, given that last year the sheriff and security operations branch had a surplus – listen carefully – of $1.5 million in their budget and that this year that budget was increased by an additional $1.5 million, why are Alberta justices in Edmonton so concerned about their security and the security of the courtroom that they administer over? They’re not wimps.

The Speaker: The hon. minister, please.

Mr. Denis: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I agree with this member that the justices are not wimps, but I again disagree that security is, in fact, lax. I’ve outlined exactly where security is in the courtroom.

If anybody in this House has hit their panic button, it’s the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar because he’s not running again.

Merry Christmas.

Alberta Hansard, December 7, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Protection of Personal Health Information/Recovery of Tight Gas and Tight Oil (December 7)

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. For the second time this week we’ve heard of a health professional, driven by passion and revenge, grossly violating the privacy of innocent people’s health records.

In the most recent case a pharmacist unlawfully obtained the prescription medication information of eight people and posted it on Facebook.

To the minister of health: has the government considered that personal health information illegally posted on the web will be widely available in cyberspace forever? Are these violations creating permanent victims?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, the case to which the hon. member refers is a very serious matter and is taken very seriously by this government. In fact, the individual in question was prosecuted and fined. I would leave it to others to determine. I think any time personal health information is inappropriately or illegally accessed by anyone, a health professional or anyone else, we have serious cause for concern in this House.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Well, given that the victims in this case were a group of church ladies, who are probably not IT specialists, who have had their medical information posted on the Internet, will the government be providing any support to help these people fully erase their records from all web access?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, to my knowledge this government or my department has not been approached with such a request. Again, I agree with the hon. member about the serious nature of the crime and the impact that the electronic rebroadcasting, if you will, of this information has on individuals. But to this date we have not been contacted with such a request.

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, given that cases like these threaten public confidence in electronic health records and maybe even discourage people from disclosing crucial information to health care providers because they’re worried that it’s going to get spread all over, what steps is the minister taking to better protect Albertans’ most personal of personal information?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, we’ve taken a number of steps over the years to do everything we can to strengthen the protection of personal health information. Unfortunately, it is beyond our ability to legislate or to regulate the behaviour of individuals who would intentionally engage in such behaviour and cause serious damage to others. We will continue to monitor the security of personal health information. It is a subject of constant discussion between my department and Alberta Health Services, and I’m quite confident that wherever we can find an opportunity to strengthen that protection, we will take full advantage.

Recovery of Tight Gas and Tight Oil
Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Energy. In recent years the price of natural gas collapsed and along with it royalties to the government because of technologies that release vast amounts of tight gas. Now, due to the same technologies there are suggestions the oil market could be flooded with so-called tight oil, driving oil prices into the same low, long-term plateau that hit natural gas and of course, along with them, royalties. To the minister: is this government paying attention to the emergence of tight oil supplies? If so, what’s it finding?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’m happy to respond that we’re closely monitoring that. In fact, I’d be happy to show the hon. member a map in my office – it actually just came in last night – that shows all the land sales in the province over the last three years. It’s very clear that it’s focusing on tight gas and tight oil. While the abundance of natural gas in North America and the world has driven the price down, so far the exploration of so-called tight oil has been a very positive influence on the Alberta market.

Dr. Taft: Well, that’s good to hear. Let’s just hope it continues because the concern is that it won’t.

Does this government have forecasts for the expected impact of tight oil on the Alberta or Canadian or North American supplies and prices?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, our forecasts, of course, are based not only on internal estimates, but we also use a variety of well-recognized commercial sources, banks, and investment companies as well. All of those forecasts continue to show robust growth for demand even with growing supply and gradually rising prices.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Taft: Thanks. Again to the same minister: what is the government doing to assess the potential impact on Alberta’s royalty revenue from oil supplies and prices if there is a prolonged flow of tight oil onto the market?

Dr. Morton: Well, Mr. Speaker, of course, we pay close attention to royalties, both present and projected, but we do not anticipate, nor do any of the other financial institutions that do these projections, a collapse of oil prices. We actually think that one of the areas of growth for royalties will be in tight oil.

Alberta Hansard, December 7, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Mental Health Services/Services for the Disadvantaged (December 7)

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Despite three years and millions of dollars for front-line emergency room changes the ER wait times are not reaching even minimal goals, in part because of the failure of this government to understand the need for systemic change in their long-term strategy, as an example.

To the minister: why did he reduce by over 150 beds at Villa Caritas last year? What was the rationale?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, we did not reduce the number of beds. The introduction of Villa Caritas was, in fact, a new option in continuing care to respond to the needs of seniors with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia. In many cases the residents at Villa Caritas are there on a temporary basis in order to have their condition stabilized and put them in a position where they can return to the community either in a supportive living option or, in some cases, independently with the support of family.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, much of the demand in emergency rooms is preventable, yet this government has reduced its spending on prevention to less than 4 per cent of the budget. Why has the minister reduced our investment in prevention?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, this government, in fact, has not reduced any investment in prevention. If the hon. member is referring to the wellness portion of the budget, I would certainly agree with him that I would like to see the resources that can be allocated to wellness increased. In fact, we’re finding that through primary care networks and other community-based health care providers citizens are expressing an increasing interest in taking responsibility for their own health. They want to be supported in that, and they want to make sure that the health of future generations of Albertans is better than those of us today.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, I believe this minister understands the connection between mental health services and the emergency room wait times. How does he explain the lack of funding committed to the new mental health plan? How is that going to build confidence?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, I believe it’s been mentioned before in the House. The development of the mental health and addictions strategy – and it is an integrated strategy – was completed only recently, with the involvement of literally dozens of stakeholders in the health care system. We, in fact, are devoting resources to mental health, and I can tell you that in the city of Edmonton we have 21 psychiatrists who are doing clinic time in our primary care networks. Do we need to do more in mental health? Absolutely, we do. As we move forward, our government will present an implementation plan . . .

Services for the Disadvantaged

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Albertans with disabilities face barriers every day in areas that many of us take for granted: housing, transportation, employment, public services. Alberta lacks a comprehensive disability rights law such as the one that exists in Ontario and nationally in the United States.

To the Minister of Seniors: is he prepared to champion an Albertans with disabilities act, and will he commit to working with the disabled-serving organizations and their clients to develop such legislation for Alberta?

Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you for the question. Mr. Speaker, you know, in taking on this new ministry, one of the issues that I go to bed every night thinking about is how I can make the world better for people with disabilities in this province. It’s an interesting file. I commit to you and to all of the Assembly and all of those with disabilities in this province that I’ll do everything I can to make this a better province, to make sure that our programs are better than any other province in this country.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Swann: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Then will the minister follow through on the Premier’s commitment to raise the monthly income and index it to inflation, just like everyone in this House receives?

Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you again for the question. I think we dealt with this earlier in the session. I heard the Premier very loudly and very clearly, and I had some pretty strong marching orders on how we’re going to deal with payments to our vulnerable Albertans. Stay tuned, member; the next budget is coming.

Dr. Swann: That doesn’t sound like a commitment to me, Mr. Speaker.

To the Minister of Municipal Affairs: given that the demand for special-needs housing in Alberta far exceeds what’s currently being delivered through the housing capital initiatives program, can the minister explain how he plans to increase the province’s stock of accessible low-cost housing beyond conventional means?

Mr. Griffiths: Mr. Speaker, the previous minister had committed to building over 10,000 affordable housing units in this province in a period of five years. We met the target and exceeded it, producing 11,600 homes, affordable housing, in this province in that short period of time. We’re continuing with that objective. We just signed an agreement with the federal government for a three-year plan to continue doing it. Our commitment hasn’t changed.

Alberta Hansard, December 7, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Funding for Private Schools (December 7)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier and the Minister of Education have both spoken in favour of eliminating provincial achievement tests.

Earlier this week the minister admitted that these tests do not recognize the number of ESL and special-needs students in a school and that organizations like the Fraser Institute use this information to scare parents into choosing other options for their children than our inclusive public education system.

To the Premier: given your caucus’s comments and that private schools traditionally score at the top of the achievement test rankings as a result of excluding ESL and special-needs students, why not along with eliminating . . .

The Speaker: The hon. the Premier, please.

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, it’s been very clear over this year that there is incredible frustration with standardized tests. It’s been reflected in my comments. It’s been reflected in the comments of the Minister of Education. We are currently in the process, as the Minister of Education goes around the province consulting on the new Education Act, of ensuring that we’re reflecting the fact that Albertans think that these don’t actually allow us to measure the outcomes that we need to.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Again to the Premier: given that the Webber Academy has $33 million in cash and land assets and that they are clearly not interested in providing an inclusive education system, why is this government giving them another $4 million of taxpayers’ money this year when you’ve bankrupted the public school systems by depleting board surpluses?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, whatever private schools may choose to do in terms of the decisions that they make with respect to their assets is one thing. What we know as a provincial government is that we’re committed to a public education system. One of the things that we have talked about consistently as a party over the past 12 months, going through the leadership campaign that we did, is ensuring that we did not have a second-class public education system in this province, and we will not.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you very much. My final question to the Premier: given that despite provincial funding some private schools charge parents extra tuition to accept special-needs children, how can the minister defend subsidizing this exclusive and elitist two-tier educational system?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, one of the great things about this province is that we offer Albertans choice. We ensure that Albertans can have choice with respect to how their children are educated. Our responsibility as a government, our responsibility as public trustees of government expenses and of revenue that’s collected from Albertans is to ensure that we deliver a public education system that allows every child in Alberta to thrive, and we’re going to do that.

Alberta Hansard, December 7, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Impaired Driving Legislation/Services for Seniors/Alberta Health Services Budget (December 7)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As an ER doctor I know Albertans should not drink and drive, and as legislators we know that we shouldn’t speed ill-conceived laws through the Legislature while sleep deprived.

More accidents happen on our roads because major highways like highway 63 aren’t twinned, cars don’t have snow tires, and there aren’t enough officers on the street to enforce the laws that we already have. Front-line health staff always listen to their patients, examine them properly, and make good decisions. Why have the Premier and government rushed, used closure to ram Bill 26 down the throats of Albertans without consulting them first?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, Bill 26 is a fantastic piece of legislation that reflects what we need to do in this province. What we need to do is ensure that we’re having honest conversations about changing the culture around drinking and driving. Albertans from across the province have been in support of this legislation, and I’m really proud that this government introduced it and passed it this session.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree with changing the culture, that Albertans should not drink and drive. Absolutely, Madam Premier.

Given that even her own government members criticize Bill 26 for giving law enforcement officers too much power, how can the Premier, a human rights lawyer, defend laws that assume guilt and dole out punishments before due process is afforded to Albertans?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, what we know is that under legislation we have the opportunity to set standards, and under those standards, which are completely consistent with the laws of this land, we are able to say to people that if you take actions, there will be consequences. What we know, whether we’re talking about this legislation or the earlier legislation this government passed with respect to civil forfeiture, is that the courts agree with us that those are the appropriate tests.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that police officers are skilled, very skilled in the art of policing, why are you asking police officers to be judge and jury at the side of the road?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, this legislation is helpful to police in the same way that our civil forfeiture legislation was because it empowered the police to be able to deal with people that are breaking the rules and to have consequences as a result of that attached to those actions. I have full confidence in the ability of our police services across this province to do exactly what we will ask them to do under this legislation and to have those actions upheld by the court.

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

Services for Seniors

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my tour of Alberta over the past year many seniors have told me that they feel like their government is failing them. The cutting of public home care and long-term care is causing emergency rooms to overflow and is forcing senior couples, who have been married 50 years, who can’t afford private facilities, to face involuntary separation or abandonment in hospitals. The solution for the government is more privatization and to build more private buildings and, of course, nickel and dime our seniors to pay for it all. Will the Premier and the government listen to their own workforce, which is telling them to invest more in public home care and public long-term care and stop looking to private companies and corporations to solve Albertans’ problems?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the solution to ensuring that seniors in Alberta can live a quality of life with dignity and respect is ensuring that we have enough appropriate spaces that are part of a publicly funded health care system to ensure that they can make life choices. That will mean – and we’ve been very clear about this – that there will be a variety of options open to Alberta seniors. Alberta’s seniors are going to be well cared for, they’re going to have access to public health care, and they’re going to be able to make choices and continue to make choices that will enhance the quality of their lives, their marriages, and their families.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s exactly what the previous Premier said before we failed the seniors.

Given that some of my constituents and Albertans using the special-needs assistance program for seniors and the Alberta seniors’ benefit program are worried about cuts and delays in funding, what is the Premier doing to ensure that when seniors are in need of help from their government, these programs are fully funded and quickly delivered?

Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, the first thing I’ll say is that we’re going to do exactly what we should do as the government and make sure that we call people that make unreasonable and unfounded statements to account. I think that’s exactly what the hon. Leader of the Opposition has just done. There is no suggestion that there are going to be cuts to those programs, and the idea that he would concern or get seniors upset about the fact that this could happen is entirely inappropriate and unfair.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, the only thing unfounded is this government’s action.

My final question is to the Minister of Seniors. Given that I have a letter here from one of your constituents, who is a senior, who’s asking why he has to wait 12 to 16 weeks to get a paltry $200 out of the Alberta seniors’ benefit program, will you please look into this and look after the concern of your constituent before Christmas comes?

Mr. VanderBurg: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m glad that the member brought up this issue, but the one thing that I will refuse to do is bring up personal issues of the people that I represent. The people I represent, whether they be seniors or vulnerable Albertans, deserve some privacy, and I can assure this member that this issue is already taken care of.

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

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That was quick. I just talked to him yesterday.

Alberta Health Services Budget

Dr. Sherman: The former president and CEO of AHS and HQCA and even front-line health care workers all agree that despite all of the massive spending in health care, an increase of $2 billion, we are still dangerously underperforming, missing even the low targets that we have set for ourselves. My questions are to the Premier. When AHS was formed, there was a $1.3 billion deficit that Dr. Duckett inherited, and the previous Premier and health minister could not explain it. Can you please tell us where it came from?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, Alberta Health Services was the consolidation of a number of operations across the province. Those were operations that had reflected a number of different business models that had taken place in different health regions across the province, and the consolidation of that brought together both assets and liabilities. I don’t think it’s a complicated answer.

That’s it.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, given that the budgets of all the health regions except the Calgary health region were balanced – we didn’t hire any extra nurses or open any extra beds, and we dumped in hundreds of millions of dollars – and there was a $1.3 billion deficit and given that the current Finance minister was then the health minister and it would be inappropriate for him to investigate himself, will the Premier please call an independent forensic financial audit of AHS and the former Capital health region to find out where that $1.3 billion deficit came from?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, there’s nothing to investigate. We live in a sophisticated world. We’re talking about budgets, but we’re also talking about assets and liabilities. We’re talking about major capital infrastructure. We’re talking about pensions that were on the books. We’re talking about a sophisticated business structure that merged. That’s why we ended up with what we did. We continued to provide public health care to Albertans. We continued to operate a budget that provided services. There’s no doubt that there was an issue there. It’s been a completely public and transparent issue. It was dealt with in accordance with normal business practices and appropriate business practices. There is no issue.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, we do have sophisticated staff. The only thing that’s not sophisticated is the government.

Given that last week the hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo asked the Premier to help the Wambolt family, who are faced with a $240,000 bill for life-saving brain surgery that is not done anywhere in Canada and given that this young man is in danger of losing his home because of the enormous health bill, will the Premier please help this family before Christmas?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Horne: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As with the response earlier by the hon. Minister of Seniors, I too am not prepared to get into an in-depth discussion in this House with respect to the very serious concerns of one individual. What I can tell you is that the individual named by the hon. Leader of the Official Opposition: we have been in touch with him. He is aware of the appeal processes that are available for out-of-country health care services, and he has been encouraged to avail himself of that full process.

Alberta Hansard, December 7, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Farm Worker Exemptions from Labour Legislation (December 6)

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s now exactly one year since two farm workers were electrocuted on the job east of Edmonton. No occupational health service, no fatality review has been done, nor were they done on the two other electrocutions in the past four years on farms.

The Fatality Review Board refused an appeal for a fatality review stating that, quote, it was not in the public interest. End quote.

To the agriculture minister: given that the Premier supported extending occupational health and safety standards to paid farm workers during her leadership campaign, when will the minister bring equal treatment of paid farm workers and save lives?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Berger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last March, I believe it was, the former minister struck a task force, a committee made up of 15 prominent Alberta farm and industry workers, who are currently going through a consultation process and will be bringing back recommendations to me by the end of the year.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, we don’t need committees; we need action. This has been decades of scandalous mistreatment of paid farm workers.

To the Justice minister: how can you allow even one electrical death in four years without an investigation?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, Justice prosecutes. We don’t investigate.

Dr. Swann: Then to the Minister of Human Services: given that child labour in Alberta is completely unregulated in agriculture and that children are killed and injured each year working in the same industry, will the minister commit to legislation in Alberta related to child farm labour standards in 2012?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have a tradition in this province of family farms and of families working on farms, and that’s one of the issues that makes it very difficult with respect to legislation. Legislation with respect to hiring outside workers would be an interesting piece, but with respect to the farm I think all of us who have any rural background know and understand that everybody on the farm pitches in to help.

Now, what’s really important is that we have a culture of safety in this province. Whether you’re on the farm or off the farm, whether you’re at the work site or anywhere else, people want to come home to their families safely. Regardless of where the work is being done, there needs to be a culture of safety, and there needs to be education to ensure that there is a culture of safety.

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Twinning of Highway 63 (December 6)

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the snow falls and the air gets cold, that doesn’t mean that work on expanding our highways stops.

Planning for next construction season continues and budgets are made. You know what else doesn’t stop? Unnecessary deaths due to roads being dangerously over capacity.

To the Minister of Transportation: will the minister tell this House the target year when the twinning of Highway 63 south of Fort Mac will be completed and why progress on this 350 kilometres long project has been slow?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m very glad to be able to answer the hon. member’s question. This government is continually looking at upgrading roads in Alberta, whether it’s four-laning highways, whether it’s ensuring that this province, which is a commodity-based province, has the accessibility of moving its product to market. Highway 63 is exactly that highway, and we are continually working on that highway to ensure its safety.

Mr. Kang: That is very slow progress, Mr. Speaker. To the minister again. Given that according to the government’s documents only 36 kilometres of highway 63 south of Fort McMurray are scheduled to be twinned by 2014 and that, as we know, this dangerous highway constrains our economy and is a contributing factor in far too many accidents, does the minister find this pace of development acceptable?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure if the hon. member has ever been in Fort McMurray. I want to say to him that there are overpasses; there are roads that are being built; there are interchanges that are being built; there are bridges that are being built. We have a budget that we are adhering to, and if the hon. member suggests that we should take some of the funding away from the ring road in Calgary, then what will happen is that we will very much try to increase that road.

Mr. Kang: That’s a ridiculous suggestion, Mr. Speaker.

To the minister again. Given that the government is planning to twin just over 10 per cent of highway 63 south of Fort McMurray by the end of 2014 – that is 10 per cent in five years, Mr. Speaker – will the government accelerate construction so that the project can be completed before the middle of the century?

Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, first of all, we are very much working on the north-south corridor. We’re working on the Canamex highway. We’re working, as I said before, on the corridors from Fort McMurray to Edmonton. There are over, I believe, 30,000 miles of road in this province, and we are working very hard to ensure that this province is treated equitably and that this province . . .

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Fort Chipewyan Health Study (December 6)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. After almost a half-century of oil sands development impacts the Department of Health and Wellness finally announced on September 29 of this year a community health investigation into Fort McKay.

This assessment comes years after the disturbing AHS reports on cancer rates in Fort Chipewyan, a report that only resulted yet again in inaction on this government’s part. To the minister of health: what are the specific timelines for the promised Fort McKay community health assessment?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, I don’t have the specific timelines on hand with me in the Chamber. I’d be happy to get back to the hon. member on that. I can report to the House that the process is proceeding as intended, that the atmosphere is collaborative, and that I have every hope that we will achieve the objectives that were set in that agreement.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Again to the health minister. Given the recent tragic suicides and drug-related shootings that have affected Alberta’s First Nation communities, will the health assessment cover mental health and addictions?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, I believe the intention of the exercise is to cover as broad a subset of the health sector as possible. The factors that the hon. member raises are important factors in the analysis of any health issue. I have every confidence, as I said, that this review will address a comprehensive . . .

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Again to the minister, Mr. Speaker: given that residents in Fort Chip have been suffering from higher than average cancer rates, which were first revealed by Dr. John O’Connor, when will the minister order a community health assessment for the Fort Chip community?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, the data that the hon. member refers to has been reported widely in the media. My concern, as with the situation in Fort McKay, is that we’re able to work collaboratively with the community and arrive at a plan, an approach that will work for all people involved. I have every expectation that we will be able to do what we have done in Fort McKay eventually with the citizens of Fort Chipewyan.

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

incremental Ethane Extraction Program (December 6)

Mr. Hehr: The Premier promised full public disclosure about changes to the incremental ethane extraction program, eventually approved by cabinet, but documents obtained clearly show that government staffers were writing press releases with industry prior to the approval.

The information provided is a document showing that a closed-door meeting of the Alberta Competitiveness Council was held on March 8. Given that we do not know which, if any, of the industry players were in attendance, we still don’t know if any companies were given an unfair advantage. Will the Minister of Energy release the attendance record of the meeting?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’d be happy to release the attendance at that meeting. In fact, I would refer the hon. member to slide 5 of the slide deck there, that lists members and also makes it very clear that it’s anticipated the government is going to change the policy. All this talk a few weeks ago about secret deals and inside deals – there was no inside deal. There’s no secret. All industry players were fully advised of what the policy was that was coming.

Mr. Hehr: Well, I’ll ask a follow-up to the hon. minister. Are the names of the companies who were in attendance at this meeting listed on slide 5?

Dr. Morton: Slide 5 makes it very clear what the forthcoming policy is. Whether the names of the companies are on slide 5 or not, I’m not sure. I have a list of everybody who was at the meeting. I’m happy to make it available to the hon. member.

Mr. Hehr: Well, I thank him for that. I wrote him a letter on November 14 on this. The Premier promised full disclosure, and I’d appreciate that information as soon as we can get it, all the industry players who were at this said meeting on March 8, to really clear the air and set us straight on this matter.

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Dr. Morton: He’s most welcome.

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Financial Contributions to Members (December 6)

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, my questions will be to the Minister of Justice. The previous two Premiers received payments and benefits that raise serious concerns about the risk of conflict of interest; the case of True Blue, for example, a company solely set up to pay the former Premier.

To the minister: is there any government policy or legislation that prohibits or restricts interest groups or corporations or individuals from paying money or other benefits to a Premier of this province that are in addition to the Premier’s salary and party benefits?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, again, we’ve been answering these questions for a week, a week and a half now. I can explain, if the hon. member needs me to explain again, that we have things such as the Conflicts of Interest Act. We have a Chief Electoral Officer, who’s an independent officer of the Assembly. We have an Ethics Commissioner, who’s an independent officer of the Assembly. We have a Lobbyists Act. We have all kinds of provisions for disclosure. Our government is fully compliant. This Premier is fully compliant. I don’t think anything more needs to be said.

Dr. Taft: Well, Mr. Speaker, given that there are holes in the legislation as big as this Assembly, let me ask this: as long as these payments are generically disclosed with no detail other than being, quote, over $5,000 per year, is there any limit on the value or nature or source of these potential payments?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, again, we’ve got the legislation there. It provides for full disclosure. No more needs to be said.

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, I don’t think this minister knows his own legislation. Is there any government policy or law that prevents a shell company being established, collecting unknown sums of money from unknown sources and paying these to a Premier of Alberta in such a manner that their specific source and value are never known to the public? It certainly seems to be what’s happening.

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, with respect, I’m trying to be polite here. This member first of all didn’t know that a report had been filed and a discussion paper filed with the standing committee on leadership finances. He also doesn’t seem to know what the legislation says. I’ve explained to him generally what the legislation is, but I’m not going to sit here and read it to him. I also want to make a little point about private business. It is not the responsibility of this minister to look into private business.

Mr. MacDonald: Point of order.

Mr. Olson: This member has offended my department by suggesting that lawyers are somehow unethically appointed. There is only one way a lawyer gets appointed by this government, and that is if they are professionally competent and have professional expertise. This member should be ashamed of himself for . . .

Speaker’s Ruling

Legal Opinions

The Speaker: There was an interjection there for a point of order. If it has anything to do with providing a legal opinion, that will not be dealt with by the chair because Beauchesne 408 clearly says that members in asking oral questions will not ask a question that requires an answer involving a legal opinion.

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust (December 6)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. The president of the PC Party reported last week that the party pays its leader an income above and beyond expenses.

My first question is to the Premier. What is the leader’s benefit plan trust, and how much will it top up the Premier’s current total compensation package from Alberta taxpayers?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I’ve already answered this question. I have repeatedly said in this House – last week, this week, and press availability yesterday – that I am receiving no such payments.

Mr. MacDonald: Again to the Premier, Mr. Speaker: when will the Premier promise to taxpayers to release all the details on this leader’s benefit plan trust that is being negotiated for her from the party and all of the details as well on the leader’s benefit plan trust that was paid to the former Premier for the last four years?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, whatever situation may have existed before, I have no information on it. I’m not going to be providing any information because I have no information with respect to that. As I’ve said over and over publicly, inside this House and outside this House, I do believe that there are expenses related to being leader of the party that are appropriate for the party to pay through party donations and not through taxpayers’ dollars, and if that happens, then I will fully disclose that. It has not yet happened.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, we’re not talking about the expenses that are valid. What we’re talking about, and this is my question again to the Premier: why does the Premier feel it is necessary to hide the details of the leader’s benefit plan trust from the taxpayers, who are already paying the Premier over . . .

The Speaker: Okay. There could have been interjections, but the Premier chose to respond to those first two questions. But when you start talking about “hiding,” I think we’re going overboard here.

Premier, if you want to supplement an answer or add an answer, go ahead. If not, we’ll move on.

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I will say exactly what I said last week, yesterday in the House, and outside the House. There is no information for me to be disclosing because there is no information that I have.

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission/Federal Transer Payments for Health (December 6)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just last week the hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning, a member of a proud visible minority group, read a member’s statement about the importance of Human Rights Day.

Premiers Lougheed and Klein understood this and strengthened human rights in Alberta. But in the mandate letter to the Minister of Justice this Premier ordered him to assess the appropriateness of amending or repealing section 3 of the Alberta Human Rights Act.

To the Premier: what are you trying to achieve? Do you want to dissolve the Alberta Human Rights Commission? Yes or no?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the most interesting part of the hon. Leader of the Opposition’s question is highlighted by the fact that the letter I wrote with respect to the Human Rights Commission went to the Minister of Justice. One of the things that I’m very pleased that we’ve been able to do in this very short time is to move the Human Rights Commission, which is a very important part of institutions in Alberta, from where it was sitting, in the department of culture and community spirit, into the Department of Justice. We believe that this is a commission that matters to Albertans, that will protect human rights, and it should appropriately be in the Department of Justice.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that access to affordable legal representation is already a major problem for low income Albertans, many of whom are single mothers, seniors, the mentally and medically ill, the indigenous peoples, visible minorities, and new Canadians, by moving the Human Rights Commission under the Justice department, are you planning to put this under the Criminal Code of Canada and send them to the court systems?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the Human Rights Commission has legislation that both constitutes the Human Rights Commission and that we observe with respect to protecting human rights in Alberta. The fact that we’re managing the processes around the Human Rights Commission through the Department of Justice has absolutely nothing to do with changes with respect to the Criminal Code. It’s a question that doesn’t make sense.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, what’s not making sense is this government, clearly.

To the Premier. You asked the Minister of Justice to assess the appropriateness of amending or repealing section 3 of the Alberta Human Rights Act. That was the question. Is that your plan, to repeal it?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the letter was quite clear. This is an issue that matters to Albertans. It’s important for us to consult with Albertans on this to make sure that we know how Albertans feel about this. It’s very important for us to know that the intention must be to review or to consider what to do with it next.

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

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It appears they have taken the Wildrose policy on this.

Federal Transfer Payments for Health

Dr. Sherman: Every year Ottawa shortchanges Albertans by over $900 million in health transfers even though we pay more per person to federal coffers than any province. Thousands of hardworking Alberta seniors want to stay in their homes, but they can’t. If they need long-term care, there’s nothing there for them but a long waiting line. Instead of talking about increasing premiums and taxes, nickelling and diming our seniors, our working families, and our students, why won’t the Premier fight for Albertans and shake down Ottawa for money that it owes us?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we’ve been talking about as government and that the Minister of Seniors has been very involved in in the last two months is ensuring that we’re putting in place a sustainable long-term care plan that’s going to allow for seniors to continue to have a high quality of life. That’s what Albertans want. We know that as a province in this country we do make transfer payments to Canada. We’re proud of that because we believe that we have to be proud citizens and proud partners in Confederation. We’ll be able to deal with our issues, we’ll do it well, and we’ll ensure that people have strong publicly funded health care and good long-term care.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that our seniors are for sale or rent in this province – they are paying more than ever, they’re having to get divorced, and you’re removing the cap on seniors’ living – and given that the Premier’s friendship with the Prime Minister is well known, why can’t you just pick up the phone and demand the billions of dollars Albertans are owed from your friends in Ottawa?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, these characterizations of what’s happening in Alberta seniors’ communities are entirely inappropriate. What we know is that Alberta seniors want to have choices with respect to accommodation, and they want to make sure that they’re continuing to be able to be provided with public health care support. We’re going to make sure that that happens within our own borders.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, thank you. I understand that this is question period and not answer period. All we’re asking for is a collection call, a collection call to Ottawa, Madam Premier, not a collection call to our seniors and working families. Why won’t you unleash your horde of lawyers and sue the federal government for the money they owe us? Premier Lougheed would do it. Why can’t you?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I’m not going to speculate on what anyone else may or may not do. What I do know is that as a partner in Confederation, we have to have a relationship with other provinces in this country and with the federal government. I’ll tell you that the approach that this hon. member is suggesting does nothing to support Confederation or Alberta’s place in it.

Alberta Hansard, December 6, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PDD Appeal Panel (December 5)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week we heard that a decision of the Persons with Developmental Disabilities Appeal Panel was quashed by Alberta’s Court of Queen’s Bench in part because the panel relied on evidence of an insider, an “expert witness,” who is also a PDD program employee.

To the Minister of Seniors. Supposedly, panel members are recruited through “an open, competency-based process.” How does the minister explain such apparent lack of competence on the part of those charged with making decisions impacting the crucial supports and services vulnerable Albertans receive?

Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, I take very seriously the work that I do and that the department undertakes on behalf of vulnerable Albertans. I take exception that anybody would question the mainly volunteer base of our appeal panels. We recruit experts from all across the province to ensure that we have the right people with the right training to make the right decisions.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When children move to age 18, they run into a wall in PDD. It’s a regular occurrence. What requirements are currently in place to ensure that panel members possess the considerable expertise necessary to determine eligibility for PDD supports and services?

Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, once again, I do recognize that there is an issue, you know, when you’re a youth under 18 versus someone who’s over 18 served in our department. It’s our intent and that of the members of the appeal panel to make sure they know the case that they’re dealing with in front of them. Our staff prepare and do lots of homework before they hear these appeals, sir.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Will the minister save other families $70,000 in legal fees and undertake today to tighten the recruitment process for panel members to ensure that the most qualified people are in place?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, I have to tell the member opposite that we do everything possible to recruit the right people to do the right job with the right training. These people are very valued members of our department and serve the needs of Albertans in an honourable way.

Thank you, sir.

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Highway Maintenance (December 5)

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Albertans count on being able to travel our highways to get to work, visit family, go shopping, and get to medical appointments, yet too often in winter we see our provincial highways behaving more like skating rinks than modern roads.

To the Minister of Transportation: does the minister honestly believe that what we saw on the highways this weekend is the best we can do with our current resources?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. An opinion.

Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. There’s a little bit of irony because last week the hon. member asked me a question on how come we were wanting to have more sand and more salt in reserve for our highways, and today he is worried about the ice. Let me make it very clear that the safety of our highways is number one. It is critical to ensure that individuals that are travelling on those highways are confident in our highways, and we’re trying to do the best that we can.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Where was the salt and sand when people were slipping and sliding all over the place on the highways?
To the minister again: given that almost all highway mainte-nance in Alberta is contracted out, can the minister give the House assurance that contractors don’t have incentive to keep plows and sanders off the road until the last possible moment to increase their profits?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, first of all, we do have a highway mainte-nance network, that’s divided throughout the province into different maintenance crews. Mr. Speaker, I want to say to you that they are on duty 24 hours a day if necessary, if the situation arises. We do everything that we possibly can to ensure that the highways are sanded, that the roads are bladed, and that the safety of Albertans is our paramount concern.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I travelled on the highway on Saturday, and I only saw one sand truck on the highway coming to Red Deer and one going back.

To the minister again: given that Albertans continue to be disappointed in the response to the snow on the highways, can you really say, sir, that your department is meeting Albertans’ expectations?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m not exactly sure what distance the hon. member travelled to see the one sand truck, but I will tell you that if there is ice on our roads and if there is a safety concern on our roads, we will be there, and we will be sanding, and we will be clearing the roads.

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Misuse of Electronic Health Records (December 5)

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, last week’s report by the Privacy Commissioner into violations of privacy of personal electronic health records is deeply troubling to anyone who has read it.

It’s clear there is a significant risk of widespread abuses and intrusions into people’s personal medical information.

To the minister of health: hospital staff obtained lab results and diagnostic imaging reports unlawfully by using co-workers’ accounts to log on to patient health records. How widespread are such violations?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, I have no information that has been presented to me to suggest that this is a widespread problem. That said, I will express my wholehearted agreement with the hon. member that the incident that was reported on by the Privacy Commissioner is a disturbing one.
I take some heart in the fact that this issue was detected quickly, that our audit and assurance procedures are such that we can identify when someone inappropriately uses health information. I’m sure the investigation that’s under way now will come forward with additional recommendations to help secure that information from similar misuse.

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, the reason to be concerned that it’s widespread is that the report states, “It is common practice, at least at this . . . emergency department, for staff to simply use who-ever’s Netcare account is currently logged in and available,” and that in this one case 12 different accounts were used. Has this minister launched action to safeguard the most personal of personal information?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, the report also stated the fact that the emergency department was so busy meant that the security for access to the computer had not always had an opportunity to kick in prior to someone else walking by and perhaps having an opportunity to use that same computer. I believe the recommend-ation suggested ways in which this could be addressed, and I know Alberta Health Services is focused on doing that right now.

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, given that emergency departments across this province are at least as busy as this one, we need to suspect that this practice is widespread. Given that 21 breaches were investigated at just this one emergency department, how does this minister know, if he’s not going to look, that this case is not just the tip of an iceberg of privacy violations at emergency and other departments all around the province?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, speaking of logic, the premise of the hon. member’s question would have us believe that the desire to inappropriately access health information on the part of health care workers is widespread. I don’t believe that’s true. I believe the appropriate recommendations have been made by the Information and Privacy Commissioner. I will look for assurance from Alberta Health Services that they are taking corrective measures.

Thank you.

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Pathology Testing Services (December 5)

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Laboratory pathologists in Alberta are overloaded and afraid to speak. Calgary Lab Services have two pending investigations from the Health Quality Council, the Rockyview general hospital and the Baker cancer centre, both about poor-quality diagnoses.

This means preventable suffering and death for some Albertans and wasted public dollars. Pathologists have been raising concerns for years, but unfortunately the management of AHS has ignored and intimidated them. Small wonder pathologists are in short supply, overworked, and bound to make mistakes.

The Speaker: The hon. minister, please.

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, well, I thank the hon. member for the question. Just to clarify, the review that is under way in Calgary is with respect to the processing of laboratory specimens at Calgary Lab Services.

With respect to the question around the culture of the system in which the pathologists perform, the hon. member has raised an important issue. Pathologists, like all physicians, need to feel the proper level of support both materially and within the workplace generally. I have every confidence that the Health Quality Council will look into this dimension as part of the review.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Swann: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Well, given that Calgary Lab Services has recorded a $16 million deficit this year, what is the nature of the contractual relationship between Alberta Health Services and Calgary Lab Services?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, Calgary Lab Services is a wholly owned subsidiary of Alberta Health Services.

The Speaker: The hon. member, please.

Dr. Swann: Thank you. It’s my understanding that three members of the Alberta Health Services executive are also on the board of Calgary Lab Services and, therefore, make decisions regarding budgets and contracts. Is this not a conflict of interest?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m not in a position to stand here and say what is or is not a conflict of interest. What I am in a position to say is that the terms of reference for the section 14 review that the member refers to are sufficiently broad. That issue, if it is an issue, would be addressed as well.

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust, part 3 (December 5)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, Albertans have seen how this government rewards its friends. In public disclosures under the Conflicts of Interest Act we see that members of the Conservative caucus, the former Premier in fact, create corporations so that they can take unlimited fundraising contributions that are not reported to the public.

Those same corporations then cut a cheque to the former Premier and his wife. To the Justice minister: why does the government not regard this as a potential conflict of interest?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I wouldn’t have thought I would have to explain this to this hon. member. There’s a difference between a Justice minister doing his job and an independent officer of the Legislature such as the Ethics Commissioner doing his job. The Ethics Commissioner is the one who oversees disclosures. We have 100 per cent compliance with disclosures in this Assembly, which I think everybody should be pleased with and proud of. The hon. member should just talk to the Ethics Commissioner if he has questions.

Mr. Hehr: Given that the Justice minister’s job is to amend the Conflicts of Interest Act – and the minister seems to have rejected this – to stop the practices of unlimited leadership donations, why doesn’t the minister learn from the example of True Blue Alberta, a corporation set up by Allan Farmer of the law firm Reynolds Mirth Richards & Farmer, which continued to pay taxable allowances to the former Premier and his wife years after the leadership race, and propose an overhaul to this act?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I’m not going to get involved in internal, private corporate business. I’m also not responsible for party reporting. That is the job of the Chief Electoral Officer. Also, the work of the Ethics Commissioner and the Chief Electoral Officer has been beyond reproach.

Mr. Hehr: Given that this reeks to the highest heaven and True Blue’s controlling shareholder, Allan Farmer, is a partner in a law firm whose government contracts grew from $780,000 in 2006 to $1.3 million to $1.8 million to $2.4 million and to $2.6 million in 2010 at the same time that the Premier and his wife were getting taxable allowances from True Blue, in what universe does this not sound the alarm bells of potential conflict of interest? Why doesn’t he amend the act right now so that this doesn’t continue?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of things to say about that. First of all, you only get legal work with the government of Alberta if you have one thing, and that’s expertise and profession-nal competence. There is no such thing as political competence.

The second thing I want to say is that this member and his colleagues are really proving my point. They’re rattling off this information. Where did they get it? It’s publicly disclosed.

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust, continued (December 5)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Premier: how much has been paid out in income to top up the Premier’s salary in the last four years by the Progressive Conservative Party through the leader’s benefit plan trust scheme?

Speaker’s Ruling Questions about Political Party Activity
The Speaker: Before we have another point of order on this matter, you know that that’s an internal party – I ruled this type of question out several days ago. I gave citations from the statutes that we follow, from the rules that we follow.

Go on to your second question, please.

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust
(continued)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much. I will try that, Mr. Speaker.

Again to the Premier: why does the Premier feel it is none – absolutely none – of the taxpayers’ business to know how big the subsidy is that they provide through tax credits, through the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, to the leader’s benefit plan trust scheme?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, this is a situation that I have no information about.

Mr. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, that surprises me.

Now, again to the Premier: why release publicly $1.1 million worth of expenditures in another Progressive Conservative trust that is not listed in their financial statements – we can force this information from this government and from the party – yet you still refuse to release all the details on the leader’s benefit plan trust scheme now?

The Speaker: The hon. the Premier?

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Public Health Inquiry/PC Party Benefit Plan Trust/Emergency Medical Service Delays (December 5)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week you rightly corrected me when you said that a review of MLA pay came after you received a request from the Premier. The Members’ Services Committee met and just two weeks later appointed a retired Supreme Court judge to investigate MLA pay. Why won’t the Premier take out a pen and write a letter requesting a public inquiry into critical problems, many life-threatening critical problems, in our public health care system?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I think we’ve had a very successful session of the Legislature this fall, where we’ve introduced legislation that’s mattered to Albertans. One of those pieces of legislation will do exactly what the hon. member has asked for.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, it may accomplish what we want after a nice, long delay tactic.
Given that the Premier returned $107 million in education dollars, which we all support in this House, and given that the Premier also suspended two huge transmission lines, is the Premier honestly telling Albertans that she can do all of that with the stroke of her pen, but she’s unable to keep her main campaign promise to Albertans to immediately call a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of the hon. Leader of the Opposition because what he has illustrated is that this government, since this party assumed new leadership, is keeping its commitment to Albertans. We will continue to do that. I hope that the opposition, in the spirit of that, will ensure that this legislation passes because we want to keep those commitments, and we will.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The only thing that’s changed is that they’ve become better at stonewalling.
Given that absolutely nothing can change the fact that health care workers just don’t trust the government to run a fair review process – the same government that brought in the code of conduct, the same government that was firing nurses when we needed them, the same government that wrecked the system, and the same government that created a culture of fear and intimidation – and that the Premier promised a process Albertans and these health care workers would trust, what is she trying to protect her government from by breaking this promise?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, it is important for Albertans to be able to trust the health care system. One of the reasons they’re going to be able to do that is because we are going to have an independent public inquiry that’s going to ensure that information that Albertans want will be available. At the end of the day what Albertans want to know is that this is a system that they can rely on. I have confidence that through this process we will have kept our commitment to Albertans, we will find out what Albertans want to know about the health care system, and we’ll be able to move on and trust and respect the professionals running the system.

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

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier is correct in that you can absolutely rely on front-line health care workers to care for you, but you can’t rely on the government.

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust

Dr. Sherman: A change of pace. The game of he said, she said playing out between the Premier and the PC Party president last week regarding the PC Party top-up to the Premier’s $300,000 salary and benefit plan has Albertans confused. When asked about the salary top-up scheme, the PC Party president said that there’s a lump sum and that if there’s any excess, it has to be accounted for by the leader. Will the Premier stop ducking the issue and tell . . .

The Speaker: The hon. Premier.

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I think the leader is confused because where we are is that there were comments made last week, as I understand it, with respect to what previous arrangements may have been. I was very clear on Friday that I believe there are certain expenses related to the work of the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party that it would be inappropriate for government to pay for. That is for party donors to pay for. I have not received any funds. If I do, I will publicly disclose them.

Dr. Sherman: Given that the Premier will receive a salary top-up, as confirmed by the PC Party president, will the Premier tell us what the party paid the previous Premier as his top-up?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Leader of the Opposition is making a suggestion as to what I will or won’t do. I think I’ve been very clear that if I receive any funds with respect to the party, they will be disclosed, and it hasn’t happened.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that Alberta’s Premier is already the highest paid in the land and given that many Albertans on AISH and many seniors on fixed incomes are struggling just to put food on their table this Christmas, can the Premier please tell Albertans on AISH why they still have to wait for those $400 benefits that she promised them when she’s getting so rich on her own plan? It’s sort of like the Grinch who stole Christmas.

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, this is a situation where what the hon. leader is trying to connect are a number of issues that are going to raise fear and uncertainty in people’s minds. This is a province that cares about vulnerable people. When I ran to be leader of this party and to become Premier of this province, I was committed to ensuring that we are able to deal with those AISH issues. We are going to deal with those, and these unconnected situations aren’t fair for public policy discussions.

Emergency Medical Service Delays
Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The barometer of our health system is our emergency rooms. The Health Quality Council says that ERs throughout Alberta are at their breaking point. In fact, things are so bad that the length of stay numbers on the AHS website were at 22 per cent at the Royal Alex and the Grey Nuns hospital just last week. In the face of all this evidence the Minister of Health and Wellness still claims that the number of people waiting on the ER stretchers is the lowest it’s been in years. Will the minister stop treating this issue as a PR problem and acknowledge that he played a major role in causing the crisis when he helped close down the Villa Caritas long-term care facility?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, well, there are a number of things to respond to in that question. First of all, I have made no such claim that ER wait times are the best they’ve been in years. We’re in fact working very hard on the basis of some very ambitious targets to improve the flow of patients, particularly for those who are admitted to hospital and have to wait in the emergency room. The target for that is an eight-hour target. With respect to the system overall, we are moving aggressively on continuing care, the expansion of home care, and other measures to improve patient flow.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. An eight-hour target that after billions of dollars spent on the system we’re meeting only 22 per cent of the time.
Given that the decision to close beds at Alberta Hospital Edmonton and to deport complex mental health patients to a long-term care facility like Villa Caritas caused the ER crisis and delays in care and a few potential catastrophes, why has the Minister of Justice not called a public fatality review into the death at Villa Caritas and that of Shayne Hay, people who lost hope after waiting for care?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, there is a clear procedure for fatality inquiries. The chief medical officer makes a recommendation to the fatality inquiries board. They make a recommendation to me. I’ve received no such recommendation.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The chief medical officer works in the Ministry of Health and Wellness. Will the Minister of Health and Wellness ask the chief medical officer to make a recommendation to the Justice minister to do a public fatality inquiry into the deaths that happened to Shayne Hay and the patient in the Villa Caritas, patients who were already in care? Untimely and unnatural deaths.

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, I have no way to verify the information that the hon. member is presenting with respect to those two fatalities. What I can tell the hon. member and what I’m sure he knows is that Villa Caritas is, in fact, part of the continuing care system in the Edmonton zone. It provides continuing care for hard-to-serve patients with advanced mental illness such as Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia and plays a major role in stabilizing those patients so that they can return to an appropriate community placement.

Alberta Hansard, December 5, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Democratic deficit kills amendments that could have made HQCA inquiry worthwhile

Edmonton – Official Opposition Health Critic David Swann says the government’s desperate push to ram controversial bills through the legislature will have potentially very negative consequences for Albertans, particularly the HQCA Act, which has been designed to replace and delay a true public inquiry into health care with a lacklustre imitation that is not truly independent of government.

“We had several amendments that would have improved this bill and given Albertans at least a fighting chance to hear the truth about allegations of intimidation and financial misconduct in public health care,” Swann says. “But by invoking time allocation to end the debate, none of those good amendments will be heard, let alone passed.”

Opposition amendments included:

• Removing a clause that allows inquiries and testimony to be heard in camera, behind closed doors, defeating the purpose of a true public inquiry;
• Inserting a clause that would grant an all-party committee of the Legislative Assembly the power to call for an inquiry and appoint the panel to conduct it;
• Inserting a clause requiring that at least one judge sit on the panel that will conduct an HQCA inquiry.
“The fix is in,” Swann says. “Without these amendments, the government has complete freedom to carefully manage and delay this inquiry so that it does the least possible damage to the government’s image. Democracy, the search for truth, and the public health care system are all casualties of the Tory desire to stay in power at all costs.”

Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says Premier Redford never wanted a fall session in the first place, but the government had called one before the leadership race so she had no choice.

“Most Albertans will be working hard right up to December 23rd, and they expect their government to do the same,” Sherman says. “Instead, the government is ramming through legislation that has huge impacts on Albertans. It’s undemocratic; the premier has broken her promises and Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 862-5661

[direct link to this article]

Climate Change (December 1)

Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The reality of this government’s climate change initiatives is quite different from what the minister has painted: an emission reduction strategy that won’t see reduction until 2020 at the earliest, a $15 carbon tax when experts insist that a tax has to be $75 to $150 to make a difference, and we have no plan to increase even that $15.

We ask only the largest emitters, not all emitters, to reduce intensity, not emissions. Mandatory targets for large emitters are twice as weak as the federal ones. To the minister of the environment: how does any of this show us as a world leader?

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Environment and Water.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I’ll say to the hon. member and to all in the House that Alberta is a leader with regard to this. We were the first to do this. What we have continued to say and what we’ve said in the House before and this week is that Alberta is committed to taking more action on this file, but Alberta is also making sure that when we do, as with Canada, all the large global emitters are part of that solution. Ms Blakeman: Well, Mr. Speaker, how can the minister claim that this government supports federal climate change goals when Canada will never reach its emission reduction targets with Alberta’s plan in the mix?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What Canada and Alberta have both said with regard to that is that we are committed to having a common-sense plan that will reduce our emissions and meet those emissions, but it’s got to be a common-sense plan that has real direction and has all large global emitters at the table. Canada is 2 per cent of global emissions. The oil sands are one tenth of 1 per cent. Between the United States and China that
makes up 40 per cent of the GHGs. We have to have a global plan.

Ms Blakeman: Well, that’s not leadership.

Back to the same minister: given that a decade of government resistance and inaction on health impacts has resulted in just barely signing a letter of intent, how will the minister respond when asked about health impacts from development in communities such as Fort Chip?

Mrs. McQueen: I’m very happy to answer that question, Mr. Speaker. With regard to some discussions that I’ve brought forward in this House and discussions that I’ve had with the federal Environment minister, Minister Kent, we are working on a first-class monitoring system. We’ll be meeting and having some time together with regard to that, and when we’re in South Africa, we’ll have some time. I would like to say to the hon. member and to this House and to all Albertans: “Stay tuned. That will be coming very shortly.”

Alberta Hansard, December 1, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Labour Relations Code Review (December 1)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government recently had two Edmonton lawyers quietly conduct a review of the Labour Relations Code at the urging of a coalition of antiunion employers in the construction sector.

It was reported that the findings of that review were supposed to be provided to the relevant minister by the end of October. I take umbrage with the term “relevant.” It’s “appropriate.”

To the Minister of Human Services: can he confirm receipt of that report and advise this Assembly on its principle finding?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, I’m offended that he doesn’t consider me to be relevant anymore. I’ve just about had 15 years in this Assembly, next March 12, and I’ve always considered myself to be relevant if not always on point.

To answer his question: I haven’t received it yet. I had a meeting arranged to meet with the two gentlemen in question. It turned out to be on a day when I was going to attend a Remembrance Day ceremony at a school in my riding, so we postponed the meeting. I anticipate meeting those two gentlemen, actually, Monday of next week.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister – and I do appreciate his relevance, and I know he considers me irrelevant – will he table the report in this Assembly so that Albertans can draw their own conclusions as to the validity of its claims and the objectivity of its authors?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, I can’t make a commitment to table any report right now. What I’m anticipating is some advice to a minister with respect to a number of questions with respect to productivity issues that may or may not be raised in the labour code. I have no idea at this point in time whether any action will be taken relative to that. If action is taken relative to issues that have been raised by any party in respect to productivity issues relative to the labour code, there will be a full discussion with the affected parties.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. To the hon. Minister of Human Services: can you provide us with any type of a timeline when this report might be tabled or discussed in committee? Before the election? After?

Mr. Hancock: What I can tell the hon. member is that I have just actually received today the first report that the two gentlemen were engaged to produce on MERFing, and I have anticipation of perhaps even reading that today. Once I read it and determine whether or not the policy that was put in place by this government with respect to MERFing is actually effective or not, I will be able to bring forward some changes if we need to with respect to MERFing.

With respect to the brief that was presented by Merit Contractors and others relative to productivity, that was one that bore looking into. We looked into it, and when I get the report, I’ll advise the hon. member what we’re going to do with it.

Alberta Hansard, December 1, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Emergency Medical Services (December 1)

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Emergency medical services is the canary in the mine of the health care system.

EMS workers have never had lower morale than since their mismanaged takeover by Alberta Health Services in 2009. Disturbing reports of serious delays in response, potentially preventable deaths along with frequent red alerts – a red alert is when no ambulance is available in the city – undermine safety as well as prevent professional morale from improving. To the minister: will the minister table in this House the cost of the transition of the EMS services to Alberta Health Services? What is the annual budget for EMS in the province?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, as I’ve indicated to the hon. member, I don’t have that information at hand with me today. I’m not aware of a serious morale problem among EMS workers, generally, in the province. I am aware that there have been a number of changes in the last two years which have resulted in the consolidation and in some cases the change of operator in specific communities. As I’ve told the hon. member, I’ll be pleased to get whatever information I can and provide it to him either through question period or outside the House.

Dr. Swann: Indeed, we did raise this question earlier. Since the minister’s shallow reassurances what has he actually found out about the dire straits in emergency medical services?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, we don’t conduct reviews of operations in the health care system in my ministry by asking questions about dire straits. What we do is attempt to communicate on a regular basis with stakeholders both through Alberta Health Services and externally. We collect data where we can, and we provide that data in a forum that allows us to continuously improve the system. As I said, I’d be pleased to get the hon. member any information that I can and provide it to him.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, given that the Airdrie city council recently passed a motion and has been forced to keep its fire department responding to EMS calls because Alberta Health Services ambulances cannot meet the demand – I’m tabling their document today: 196 calls in six months; 50 per cent of the time the fire department arrives before the EMS team – will the minister admit that the EMS system is broken?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, what I will do is that I’d be pleased to consider the information that the hon. member is going to table today. I will take it at face value. I will investigate, and I will reply to him.

Thank you.

Alberta Hansard, December 1, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Regulated Rate Option for Electricity/Funding for Private Schools (December 1)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, Albertans see electricity prices spike, and we hear that the minister is not happy about it. But what does he do about it?

Nothing at all. The minister could make simple changes to the regulated rate option to protect consumers without distorting his beloved market, but he refuses. This reminds me of a famous queen saying, “Let them eat cake” when the peasants were short on bread. If the minister is not happy and homeowners and small businesses aren’t happy, why does he refuse to act?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Dr. Morton: Well, of course, Mr. Speaker, we are acting. It’s the reason that we’re reviewing the AESO proposals for two new north-south lines. One of the concerns on that is the cost and the pass-along costs both to commercial users and residential users. To say that we’re not acting is absolutely not true.

Mr. Hehr: Well, given that Sheldon Fulton of the Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta has suggested two changes to help consumers without harming the market the minister loves so much, will the minister consider the suggestion of a change to the economic withholding-of-power rule and allow utilities to sign power purchasing agreements beyond 45 days on behalf of regulated-rate customers?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I guess most of us know that the opposition usually gets the material for their questions out of the morning newspapers, which is obviously the case this morning. The article that I know is the source of this has some confusion in it. There are two different electrical markets. There is the residential market and the wholesale market. Some of the comments by the individual he referred to apply to the wholesale market but not to the retail residential market.

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, I also heard that the minister wasn’t happy about this from the paper. Hopefully, that was correct.

Given that the minister is not happy, that I’m not happy, our constituents aren’t happy, and even industry groups aren’t happy, will the minister in this House commit that by this time next year the regulated option will be changed to even out the peaks and valleys for families and small businesses so that our province isn’t once again visited by the electricity Grinch at Christmas.

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, finally we find something we agree upon. He’s not happy with higher prices. I’m not happy with higher prices. I suspect nobody is happy with higher prices. We all like lower prices. What we’re happy about is that we have a province with zero – zero – public debt on electricity whereas other provinces have tens of billions of dollars of debt.

Funding for Private Schools

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Education indicated that I was against choice in private schools. I want to make it clear that I am all for choice in private schools. In a free society if people do not wish to go to the public education system, go nuts. Go to a private school. Just don’t ask the taxpayer to fund your adventure.

To the Minister of Education: given that the Webber Academy only accepts students in the 75th percentile and charges parents up to $16,000 a year – and this is just one of so many examples – why are we using taxpayer dollars to subsidize these elite private schools?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, I have to start by saying that calling the thousands of parents who choose to send their kids to private school nuts is simply inappropriate. I hope that the member withdraws that statement.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, we pride ourselves in choice in this province, and if these parents choose to send their children to private school, pay the tuition or the fees that are associated with it, they can do that. The fact is that the Alberta government does not fully fund private schools nor do we contribute to the infrastructure for private schools.

Mr. Hehr: Given that many private schools charge large tuitions and make children take, essentially, IQ tests to establish a baseline of the type of student they want, clearly eliminating those students they don’t feel are up to their calibre, why are we funding these institutions whose sole interests are to provide education to only a very specific segment of the population?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, again incorrect. There are at least a dozen private schools that actually focus and specialize in children with learning disabilities and other disabilities. There are schools that are focusing on gifted children. There are schools that are focusing on kids with sports abilities or interests. There are schools that are focusing on religious or linguistic requirements. There is a vast array of choices, and that’s what we pride ourselves on. These parents are neither nuts, nor are their choices limited.

Mr. Hehr: Given the Premier’s concern for the rise of private and charter schools and given that private schools have smaller class sizes while charging parents astronomical fees, when will the minister implement the Learning Commission’s recommendations on class sizes in our public education system, a promise that is eight years overdue?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, we’re working with all school boards on meeting the guidelines that have been put in the Maskell report on classroom sizes. As a matter of fact, the Premier has very recently, just a few weeks ago, announced an additional $107 million that was intended to go into classrooms and alleviate some of the pressures.

We are now working through our budgeting process, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that both school boards and parents and this government are working on creating the best environment for children to learn in.

Alberta Hansard, December 1, 2011

[direct link to this article]

True Blue Alberta Ltd. (December 1)

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, despite the comments from the Minister of Justice it is time the Conflicts of Interest Act was amended.

For example, True Blue Alberta, the company set up to support the former Premier, is 100 per cent owned by Allan Farmer, a senior partner in the law firm Reynolds Mirth Richards & Farmer. This firm also receives lucrative government contracts. So while True Blue is benefiting the Premier, the government is benefiting the sole shareholder in True Blue.

To the Minister of Justice: why doesn’t government policy define this as a conflict of interest?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, we do believe in transparency and openness. This legislation provides for that. Every member of this Assembly has to provide information and disclosure about what they receive. I don’t know what more I can say than that. It’s obvious that the disclosure is there, so this member is beating a dead horse.

Dr. Taft: Well, again to the same minister: given that the value of government contracts paid to this law firm, which is closely linked and, in fact, partly owned by the sole shareholder in True Blue, soared from $780,000 in 2006 to $1.3 million to $1.8 million to $2.4 million to $2.6 million in 2010, how can Albertans know that these huge increases weren’t facilitated by an inside track to the Premier’s office unless there really are stricter controls on leadership
funds?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I’m not going to answer for private business and how they make their money. This organization is not within the purview of the Justice minister. If there are problems with electoral impropriety, then we have a Chief Electoral Officer to whom people can complain.

Dr. Taft: Well, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister. The laws are clearly inadequate, and a committee of this Legislature has found it that way. Given that the Standing Committee on Public Safety and Services formally requested that the Minister of Justice – that’s you – prepare a discussion paper on leadership disclosure legislation more than a year ago, why has the minister stalled on this request?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, there was a report that was received. It is being considered, and it is being worked on.

Alberta Hansard, December 1, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust, continued (December 1)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Minister of Justice: why are the Premier and the Minister of Justice refusing to answer this very important question? How much money in tax credits is being used to finance the PC Party’s benefit plan trust for the Premier?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, our party is committed to openness and transparency. That’s why we have this legislation. That’s why we use it. It’s working well. We have no plans to change it. Everybody has to make disclosure. Again, I say that it’s working well.

Mr. MacDonald: It’s working well for some.

The Speaker: Member, question please.

Mr. MacDonald: Now, again to the same minister: how much money will the Premier receive under the PC Party’s benefit plan trust that is being set up now and is being subsidized by the taxpayers of this province through the political tax credit process?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, as I said, the legislation is working well. I don’t need to know how much money his party is paying his leader. I don’t know if it is. It’s not for me to find out, and it’s certainly not for me to disclose. Every party can disclose it if they wish. I know the third party discloses it. That’s fine. Others disclose it. All leaders have to show what they’re receiving. It’s being done now. It’s fully open and transparent.

Mr. MacDonald: To the same minister: if this is all working so well, why did a standing committee of this Assembly compel or order the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to bring back to that committee a detailed discussion paper to include issues about how the legislation around this is working, how it is to be implemented, and how it is to be recommended? If this is working so well, why was this recommendation made to your department?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, we’re always open to improving legislation. But if there are concerns about political contributions, that’s what the independent Chief Electoral Officer is for. So if somebody wants to raise some issues about impropriety, let them speak to the independent Chief Electoral Officer.

Alberta Hansard, December 1, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Public Health Inquiry/PC Party Benefit Plan Trust (December 1)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier decided to appoint a judge to review MLA pay, and, presto, in just two weeks a Supreme Court justice miraculously appeared. Yet we have been asking for a judge . . .

Speaker’s Ruling

MLA Compensation Review

The Speaker: Hon. member, please sit down. You’re absolutely wrong, and that question is out of order. The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly appointed the panel as per the direction of the Members’ Services Committee.

Go on to your next question.

Dr. Sherman: Yet we have been asking for a judge to lead a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act into what are incredibly serious problems in our public health care system, some of which are actually life-threatening. What’s more, we’ve been asking for this for more than one year. What does the Premier see in MLA pay that is so much more important than saving Albertans’ lives and protecting our public health care system?

The Speaker: Second question. Go on.

Mr. Horner: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for the clarity around who actually appointed the judge to the MLA review.

It’s a singular review versus something that we want to have as an ongoing protection for Albertans around the health care system. The Health Quality Council has been investigating issues as they related to the allegations that have been brought forward, in fact, by this member, again without a lot of proof. Again, we have a piece of legislation in front of this House which will allow a judge-appointed inquiry to be held.

The Speaker: The second supplemental on that first set, leader.

Dr. Sherman: Can the Premier simply tell us why it’s more important for MLAs to get a pay raise than to keep her promise to conduct a public inquiry into the financial mismanagement of AHS, cancer deaths, the ER crisis, and physician intimidation?

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, as you very well know and will probably admonish the hon. member, this government doesn’t give MLAs pay raises. The Members’ Services Committee does that in consultation and in an open and public process. I think that it’s almost shameful the amount of politicizing this hon. member has made of some very serious allegations which we take very seriously and will move to investigate.

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

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust
Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What’s really a shame is that it’s been a sad week for democracy in this province as Albertans have witnessed government stonewalling at its finest. First, the Minister of Justice refused to answer very basic questions regarding taxpayer funds used to top up the Premier’s salary. Now the Premier has jumped into the act by intentionally confusing the issue in this House.

Mr. Hancock: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Dr. Sherman: Will the Premier be honest and tell Albertans how much taxpayers’ money is being used by the PC Party to top up her salary?

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is trying to mislead Albertans by stating that these are taxpayer dollars. The actual fact is that these are donations to the Progressive Conservative Party. They are listed in the members’ disclosures, and I note that the unelected leader of the Wildrose Party gets paid by her party. I note that even members’ disclosure statements for the hon. leader of the fourth party, the NDP, have made disclosure in which his party reimburses him for expenses, a perfectly legitimate thing to do. [interjections]

The Speaker: We have another point of order.

The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. These are donations that are tax receipted, and the hon. leader of the Wildrose Party at least disclosed what she’s getting paid.

Given that the Premier, who is leader of the PC Party, can at any time she wishes inquire about her party’s use of tax-credited public funds, will the Premier agree to release all the details regarding the PC Party benefit plan trust that uses taxpayer dollars to top up her $300,000-a-year salary? [interjections]

The Speaker: A third point of order.

The hon. Deputy Premier.

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader should really utilize the resources that are available to him in this House because the reality is that we all disclose the revenue which we receive, and the former Premier and this current Premier will follow those rules and did follow those rules. In fact, the members’ public disclosure statements listed the amounts, which is where they got their research from. It was based on a public disclosure that will continue to be done as per the rules of this House.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that Alberta’s Premier is already the highest paid in the land and given that many Albertan families – Albertans with PDD, Albertans on AISH, and seniors on fixed incomes – are struggling just to put food on the table this Christmas, can the Premier please tell the people of Alberta and the people on AISH why they’re still waiting for the $400-a-month increase in benefits that she promised them, when all this taxpayer money is going to top up her $300,000-a-year salary and benefits.

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader should really do his homework. He should actually present facts in the Legislature. He’s good at doing the innuendo. He’s good at doing the politicizing of some very serious issues.

Mr. Speaker, all of the revenue or income that we receive as Members of the Legislative Assembly and from other sources as part of the rules are in the members’ disclosure statements. The Premier and I and you and he, I hope, although he doesn’t list any expenses reimbursed to him by his party, which is odd – that’s what we would do as Members of this Legislative Assembly.

[direct link to this article]

Taxpayers deserve to know what their premier earns

Edmonton – Official Opposition Finance Critic Hugh MacDonald says taxpayers have a right to know how much extra taxpayer-subsidized salary the Progressive Conservative party has paid its premiers over the years.

Alberta’s premier currently receives close to $300,000 in selected payments. Despite this, the Progressive Conservative party has admitted that it will provide an undisclosed amount of extra income to current premier Alison Redford, as it has done in the past for former premier Ed Stelmach.

“On the one hand, the premier has said it’s critical to be transparent about party payments to leaders, but on the other hand she and her ministers have been stonewalling Albertans on the issue,” MacDonald says. “We have very important questions they refuse to answer: how much does the PC party pay its leaders in subsidized party top ups? And why is it necessary?”

In Question Period, Premier Redford characterized the payments as reimbursement for partisan activity, but PC president Bill Smith says the party hands over a set amount of money, some used to reimburse the leader for expenses, the leftovers remaining in the leader’s hands as extra income.

“It’s clear that this isn’t simple reimbursement for routine political activity, but rather a scheme to top up the salaries of PC premiers,” MacDonald says. “And since political donations are tax-deductible, this means that Albertans are subsidizing what amounts to huge bonus payments for premiers that are already extremely well compensated.” These political donations can cost up to $5 million annually. 

Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman says it’s greedy and unfair for a generously compensated public servant like the premier to accept a taxpayer-subsidized top-up from the PC party.

“It’s called public service, not ‘get rich off the public,’” Sherman says. “These are tough economic times. Working families are really stretched; they’re struggling to make ends meet. Albertans on AISH and seniors with fixed incomes worry about where their next meal is coming from. They have a right to know how much they’re paying their premier. Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Brendan Wade, Media Liaison                           Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 904-5430                                           (780) 862-5661

[direct link to this article]

Primary Care Networks (November 30, 2011)

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A two and a half year evaluation of the primary care initiative found that relative to patients not served by a primary care network, the primary care network generated considerable benefits to patients with respect to access to a family doctor, less use of an emergency room, and greater patient satisfaction, yet we hear planning from the Premier on developing family clinics rather than decisions to strength the development of primary care networks. To the health minister: why was this costly publicly funded report kept from the public?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question. I couldn’t agree more with respect to the success we’ve seen in improved care for Albertans through primary care networks. I continue to work closely with PCNs and with the Alberta Medical Association to look at ways we can better support PCNs in the future. That said, family care clinics are also a part of the evolution of primary health care in Alberta. We’ll have more to say about that model as it is developed, but I want to make it clear to this House that family care clinics are not a substitute for PCNs.

The Speaker: The hon. member, please.

Dr. Swann: Thank you. To the minister: what is the Premier trying to fix through her family clinic proposals and at what cost?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, as I said, this is very much a model in development. The Premier has talked about family care clinics as an enhancement to primary health care in Alberta. Perhaps in future, as this is developed, we’ll be in a position to talk a bit more. But they will emphasize the use of other health professions to support physicians, notably nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and others. We intend them to offer standard hours of service in local communities, and we intend for communities to have a role in planning a family care clinic for their community.

Dr. Swann: Well, that’s good to know, Mr. Speaker, and all of these changes would be welcomed by the primary care networks, I’m sure.

Just how committed is the government to primary care networks if it keeps them funded at 2003 levels? What is the plan to strengthen them and help their development?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, certainly, financial resources are an important part of the support that’s offered to primary care net-works and to all practitioners in primary health care. I would direct the member to discussions that we had earlier this week wherein I explained to him the work we were doing collaboratively with PCNs and with the Alberta Medical Association to look at what we can do to better support primary care networks in the future. We’re very proud of the fact that there are 41 of these networks today, serving approximately 2.8 million Albertans.

Alberta Hansard, November 30, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Hydraulic Fracturing for Gas in Shale (November 30)

Ms Blakeman: Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker. Now, Alberta has more expertise in oil and gas than anywhere.

When it comes to fracking, we should have the best science, regulations, and information, but we don’t. What we do have is leading scientists in the area of deep drilling and fracking stating that the studies done to date have largely lacked vigour, quality control, follow-through, and peer review.

My question is to the Minister of Environment and Water. Why does the government state otherwise?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Certainly with regard to fracking, as I mentioned yesterday in the House, there is lots of work that we’re doing with other departments to make sure that when we come forward with a strategy, we have one that’s com-prehensive. Alberta has a great regulatory system, over 60 years of a strategy with regard to regulating in this province. We will continue to make sure that as we move forward with fracking, we do it in a way that is responsible for Albertans.

Ms Blakeman: Back to the same minister, then. When occur-rences of water contamination follow drilling in areas such as Rosebud, the Wildmere field, and the Campbell and Jack wells in north-central Alberta, why didn’t the government take every possible scientifically rigorous action to determine the cause and find any potential solutions?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I told you, what we said yesterday was that we are working to make sure that before we move heavily into fracking, we’re going to work with other ministries. We’re going to have a comprehensive plan to make sure that as we regulate the fracking industry in Alberta and that continues to grow, it is done as it has been in the past with other oil and gas activities, in a very responsible manner.

Ms Blakeman: We’ve had fracking for 15 years, and they’re just starting to think about a policy?

Okay. To the same minister: why doesn’t this government require companies to submit their fracking fluid ingredients, not the recipe but the ingredients, so that comparisons can be made scientifically with any contaminated water? There’s a starting point. Why can’t you do that?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, there hasn’t been fracking going on in this province for 15 years; it’s been going on for 30 or 40 years. There are 167,000 fracking jobs in this province. There’s not one documented instance of where the fracking itself led to contamination. Not one. In fact, the New West Partnership is undertaking to pool information precisely on the question she’s looking for, where the fracking companies will actually provide information on ingredients.

Alberta Hansard, November 30, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PDD Appeal Panel Decision (November 30)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last month the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta struck down a decision of the Persons with Developmental Disabilities Appeal Panel.

That decision was procedurally unfair, ruled the court, in part because the panel had relied on the evidence of an expert witness who was also a PDD employee.

To the Minister of Seniors. Judicial reviews can cost as much as $70,000. What about families that can’t afford this? How are they supposed to ensure that decisions affecting the supports that their loved ones receive are made fairly?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, thank you for that question. To the member opposite: I have been made aware that the justice did in fact quash the decision of the appeal panel and has remitted it back to the appeal panel for a further decision.

Mr. Speaker, you’ll have to help me on this one. The appeal panel now is going to hear that, and I think I’ll be tight on my comments.

Speaker’s Ruling Sub Judice Rule

The Speaker: Yes. And I would not know that. You’d have to explain to me where we are in the judicial process. If it is before the courts or any one of the stages within it, then the minister should be very, very careful in what he says, and so should the member raising the question, by the way.

Mr. Chase: Oh, of course, Mr. Speaker.

PDD Dispute Resolution
(continued)

Mr. Chase: How does the minister account for such procedural irregularity given that the statement of mandate and role signed by a previous minister requires that the panel provide, quote, a fair and unbiased mechanism, unquote, of dispute resolution?

Speaker’s Ruling Sub Judice Rule

The Speaker: Well, it would strike me by the very words of that that we’re within one of the processes, hon. member, so I’m going to really caution here again.

Mr. Chase: Mr. Speaker, this has nothing to do with the court process.


The Speaker: Well, I’m sorry, hon. member. You and I now have a distinct difficulty in dealing with this because I do not know where it is in the process, but you did mention appeal.

Mr. Chase: Mr. Speaker . . .

The Speaker: Hold on just a second. We’re going to deal with this in an orderly fashion. I’m sure all the legal experts, including the Member for Edmonton-Riverview, will have a statement to make with respect to this.

Did you use the word “appeal” in your second question?

Mr. Chase: No, I didn’t.

The Speaker: Did you use any word that says that it’s under further review?

Mr. Chase: No. Would you like me to read it again?

The Speaker: Fine. I just want to be very clear here.

Mr. Chase: Okay.

The Speaker: The minister has the floor now. You raised the question.

PDD Appeal Panel Decision
(continued)

Mr. VanderBurg: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The matter is now under the appeal of the appeal panel.
I can say very clearly that 417,000 seniors, 43,500 people on AISH, 9,400 people on PDD: all of those people I take very, very seriously. They’re under the care of this minister.

I know there’s a process that’s under way, and I’m going to respect that process, sir.

Speaker’s Ruling Sub Judice Rule

The Speaker: I just heard the minister say that it was under appeal. Is this not correct?

Mr. VanderBurg: Yes, sir. The justice has referred it back to the appeal panel.

The Speaker: Okay. Let’s be very careful what we’re talking about now. I will recognize the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity for the third question. But if it is in any of the stages before the law courts, we do have a sub judice rule that we have to be cognizant of. That’s all I’m advising.

PDD Appeal Panel Decision
(continued)
Mr. Chase: I appreciate that, Mr. Speaker, your qualification. This is about government policy as opposed to court process.

Why must families in this province go to court to see that justice is done for their vulnerable loved ones?

Mr. VanderBurg: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I want to assure you that people who are applying for PDD go under an intense process. It’s called the SIS program, or supports intensity scale. Everybody is judged fairly. We want to make sure that Albertans that apply for PDD are given the utmost respect.

There is a process that each and every one has to go through.

Alberta Hansard, November 30, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Elecricity Prices/Secular Public Education in Greater St. Albert (November 30)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, just in time for Christmas Alberta citizens are seeing their power rates jacked up by 48 per cent.

Businesses and families alike will pay 13.5 cents per kilowatt hour, the highest regulated monthly rate ever. This makes clear that there are continuing problems for Alberta consumers since the deregulation of the markets some 10 years ago.

To the Minister of Energy. The Premier stated that if the government finds policy and structures are not working as expected, it would be time to revisit those mechanisms. Accordingly, given that it’s clear the system is not working, what is this minister doing?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, it is true that the projected price for electricity for the month of December is going to be higher than it has been in November. Interestingly enough, November was lower than October. In the system we have the price varies from month to month, but studies have proven consistently that over time if you compare Alberta to nonhydro jurisdictions, our rates are middle of the pack and competitive.

Mr. Hehr: Given that consumer groups and energy experts alike have recommended many ways to this government to address this price volatility, why is this minister sitting on his hands and not acting on the Premier’s concerns on behalf of Alberta’s consumers?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, all of the solutions that the hon. member likes to point to that other provinces have been using have led to huge, huge public debt in their electrical and hydro systems. Quebec is $36 billion in debt right now for Hydro-Québec; Ontario, $64 billion. I’m happy to tell this Assembly that the total public debt in this province, the province of Alberta, is zero. There’s no public debt on generation.

Mr. Hehr: Given that the only conclusion Alberta consumers can draw is that they’re being royally rooked on their power bills, when will this minister sit down with the energy industry, energy experts, and academia and come up with a reasonable solution for Alberta consumers that more accurately reflects the price of producing power?

Dr. Morton: I indicated earlier, Mr. Speaker, that Alberta’s electrical prices compared to nonhydro jurisdictions are compet-itive – we’re middle of the pack – and unlike all these other jurisdictions the hon. member points to, there is no public debt in Alberta on power generation.

Secular Public Education in Greater St. Albert

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre gave Morinville mothers an award to recognize their right to fight for secular education. These parents have repeatedly asked the minister to meet with them, and he’s always denied their request.

To the Minister of Education: given the Premier’s promise of transparency and accountability, why won’t this minister make the meetings with St. Albert school boards public and include the parents in these debates?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, this member is wrong again. As a matter of fact, I met with the parents in a very interesting way. The parents were at the Legislature with their children, and believe it or not, we had a little bit of a picnic in the rotunda of the Legislature. I had the pleasure of chit-chatting with the mothers. I had a very good, constructive meeting with three of the school boards involved, and the school boards are now working on a resolution. I am very proud of the mothers, and so should the children be. They’re advocating for education, and the school board is responding.

Mr. Hehr: Well, given that the children are already crammed in a small office and that the promised modular classrooms are once again delayed, when will this government assure parents in Morinville that secular education will be provided with proper infrastructure so that you can have a good picnic?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, obviously, this member is not well apprised of what’s going on. I met with the mothers, I met with the children, I met with all of the three school boards, and they’re working on a resolution. As a matter of fact, yes, all children are entitled to a top-notch education, and as the member knows, we promote choice. Now he’s asking for choice; yesterday he was against choice. We are promoting choice, and we will make sure that at the end of the day these parents and children will get the education they asked for and deserve.

Mr. Hehr: Well, we’ll get back to talking about choice another day, Mr. Speaker.

Today we’re talking about picnics and the right of these people to have a secular school option. I will ask the minister: when will you commit to having a firm date established for when this mess in Morinville can actually be ended so that people can have a secular school option that they can go to, that they can be proud of sending their children to? Commit to a date.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, I am very happy that this member is such a big promoter of choice when it comes to secular education, but when it comes to religious education, he wants choice eliminated. That’s good to know.

However, Mr. Speaker, I will tell you that the school boards in that area have been given about a month to find a solution that is agreeable to all parties involved. The best solutions come from the local area, not from here and definitely not with that kind of rhetoric. We will resolve this issue. We will make sure that all parties involved are satisfied.

Alberta Hansard, November 30, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust, continued (November 30)

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. The disclosure statement that is made pursuant to the Conflicts of Interest Act, which is a statute, a law of this province: what is the difference between the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta’s leader’s expense reimbursement and the benefit plan trust that has been made available for at least four years for the former Premier?

As I understand it, the PC party president indicates you’re going to . . .

The Speaker: I’m afraid, hon. member, that isn’t helpful. If you have a second question, proceed.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. The disclosure statement that is issued by this House for all Members of this Legislative Assembly, which is pursuant to the Conflicts of Interest Act, clearly sets a difference between the leader’s expense reimbursement, which you talked about in the question to the hon. opposition leader, and the benefit plan trust. They are different. What is the difference, and how much is the benefit plan trust worth?

The Speaker: Once again, hon. member, I’m going to give you a second chance to refine your question, to make it applicable within the rules.

Mr. MacDonald: Wow. I’m getting lots of chances, Mr. Speaker, and I really appreciate your generosity.

Now, again, to the Premier: how much money will you receive under the benefit plan trust that is being set up and is being subsidized by the taxpayers of this province?

The Speaker: Well, I think, hon. member, I’ll invite you back tomorrow. Okay?

Alberta Hansard, November 30, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Policital Contributions by Municipal Officials/PC Party Benefit Plan Trust (November 30)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In yet another example of Alberta municipalities contravening the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act by making illegal contributions to the PC Party, the town of Hardisty voted to send as many as six people to the Battle River-Wainwright PC Association MLA fund-raising dinner.

Can the Minister of Municipal Affairs tell us how many municipalities, including those in his own constituency, are making these illegal political contributions?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are a lot of insinuations in that member’s comments. The town of Hardisty did pass a resolution to send some, but as far as our records go, no cheque came from the municipality to our constituency association. I’d like to point out to the member as well that the Chief Electoral Officer sent a letter to every single municipality in the province just over a year ago telling them they should not send cheques, and our constituency has never accepted a cheque.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, in my hand are the minutes of those meetings.

Given that this illegal activity has now spread to include some school boards such as Holy Spirit Catholic school, which sent their people to a $250-a-plate Premier’s dinner, can the Minister of Justice tell us if he is aware of this or other violations of the act and what he will do when he finds out about these issues?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, as I’ve said a number of times before, that’s the job of the Chief Electoral Officer. If the member has issues regarding this type of matter, he should talk to the Chief Electoral Officer.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, yet another abrogation of responsibility from the minister.

Given that town councils and school boards are so worried about protecting their funding that they feel compelled to misuse public funds, will the Minister of Justice finally direct Elections Alberta to conduct a full investigation on how many of these illegal contributions are being made and why?

Mr. Hancock: Point of order.

The Speaker: There’s a point of order here.

Speaker’s Ruling Referring to a Legislative Officer

The Speaker: I’m not sure, hon. Leader of the Official Opposition, that any member of Executive Council can direct an officer of the Legislative Assembly.
So let’s be very careful about the words we use here.

Minister, do you wish to say something?

Political Contributions by Municipal Officials
(continued)
Mr. Olson: Well, Mr. Speaker, you took the words right out of my mouth. If this member and his friends saw me interfering like that, I’m sure I would be hearing from them. Let the Chief Electoral Officer do his job.

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

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Minister, forgive me for assuming that you are actually responsible.

Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of interest this week and questions surrounding the top-up fund for the Premier’s salary. Unfortunately, Albertans have received very few answers in this House. The Minister of Justice, who is responsible for the election finances act, has denied any knowledge of or responsibility for the Premier’s top-up fund. As Albertan taxpayers are ultimately the ones paying to top up the Premier’s salary, is the Minister of Justice able to tell us today the total value of the Premier’s trust fund?

Ms Redford: I’m sorry. I’ve been out of the House the last couple of days. You can tell from my voice that I haven’t been able to speak, but I’m sure glad to be back, Mr. Speaker.

I understand that there have been questions with respect to how the Progressive Conservative Party pays for expenses related to the leader. I will tell you that I believe it’s important for political parties to pay for partisan activity that their leader undertakes. Our party does that. I am also aware that there are other parties represented in this House that follow the same practice, Mr. Speaker. I think it’s critical that it be transparent. I think it’s critical that if there are expenses related to pure political activity that they not be paid for by either the government of Alberta or the taxpayer of Alberta, and we’re completely above board about that.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that the Premier and cabinet gave themselves a whopping pay raise just a few short years ago, can the Premier please explain why it would be necessary to top up your whopping $215,000-a-year salary, and can you please tell us how much you’re getting paid?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is referring to the fact that there are expenses that are purely political that should be paid for by political parties. There have certainly been other disclosures in this House from other political parties clarifying that that is also the case for other political parties. I am sure the hon. member is not suggesting that the salary that I receive to be either a minister or a Premier should be money that’s being used to pay for partisan expenses. And I would ask why, perhaps, with respect to the Official Opposition they’ve never declared anything.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What I find as the Liberal leader is that the leader actually has to give the party money versus receive it from the party.

Mr. Speaker, given that Albertan taxpayers have a legal right to know how much of their public funds are used to pay the Premier, taxpayer public funds, will the Premier take some action and tell the public how much she’s getting for her expenses or her top-up salary? And for the previous Premier?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, we have a financial regulatory structure in place where all parties must disclose their party expenses. We do that as part of the normal course of events. That’s part of what we deal with under the financial disclosure act, and it’s a completely transparent process.

Alberta Hansard, November 30, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Emergency Medical Services (November 29)

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. An excellent emergency medical service in Alberta was arbitrarily ripped from municipalities to Alberta Health Services in April 2009.

Alberta EMS was considered among the top 5 per cent of services in North America before the change. Alberta Health Services promised the transition would improve quality and efficiency. Well, current staff morale is at an all-time low across the province according to workers in the field.

To the minister: what are the indicators that the EMS transition has been a success? What are we getting for $219 million?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don’t have a lot of details at hand about the transition to which the hon. member refers. I’d be pleased to get him some more information down the road. What I can tell you is that the culture within the system and particularly among EMS providers has in my view improved considerably in the last few months.

Dr. Swann: Well, I would challenge the minister, then, to do a survey, as Dr. Duckett did, and actually find out what the morale is.

Given that there used to be weekly reporting of EMS response times, why have you stopped measuring response times and performance since 2009?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member is referring to a performance reporting exercise undertaken by Alberta Health Services, I can certainly attempt to provide him with some information about that. The other alternative is for the hon. member to ask AHS on his own. I would submit to you that emergency medical services workers take the same tremendous pride in their work as all other partners in the health care team. Response times are among the highest indicators of their perform-ance. As well, their integration with other members of the health care team, their ability to have input, responsibility in day-to-day decisions, which has been a focus of AHS management, is another important feature . . .

The Speaker: The hon. member, please.

Dr. Swann: Well, the minister is right. Response times are the best indicators of emergency response. Why aren’t they measuring them and reporting them? Given that soaring overtime costs now in EMS have meant that Edmonton has been down as many as 10 ambulance units at a time, what assurance can the minister offer Albertans that emergency services will be there when they need them?

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the hon. member, I don’t have any direct knowledge that, in fact, AHS is not reporting and monitoring response times in the system. I would be very surprised if that was the case. As I said, I’d be pleased to get him some additional information on this and provide it outside of question period.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Lubicon Lake First Nation (November 29, 2011)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government is all about words and promises, but inaction remains its trademark.

A 2010 Amnesty International report states that the Lubicon nation in northern Alberta have “disproportionate numbers of miscarriages, stillbirths and other maternal concerns” as well as high rates of suicide.

To the Minister of Intergovernmental, Interna-tional and Aboriginal Relations: given these grave health problems, which include residents suffering from industrial pollution, when will the minister stand up for aboriginal rights and carry out a health investigation?

Mr. Dallas: Thank you for the question, hon. member. Mr. Speaker, the declaration that the member refers to is actually a declaration amongst countries around the world. Canada is a signatory to that. It’s not an issue for Alberta.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First Nation, second-class citizen, Third World treatment. How can you affirm working in collaboration with First Nation communities when the Lubicon Lake nation still do not having running water and sewage facilities in 2011?

Mr. Dallas: Mr. Speaker, the Lubicon people are very important to Albertans. They have some very significant challenges, that we all work together as Albertans, as Canadians to address. The Lubicon people have had negotiations over a long period of time with our federal counterparts, and those continue today.

Mr. Chase: Mr. Speaker, it’s unfortunate that the ping-pong game with the Lubicon ball continues.

Given that in July 2011 an oil spill caused irreparable damage to the Lubicon nation’s territory, how can this provincial government justify its failure to help the Lubicon rehabilitate their affected Alberta land?

Mr. Dallas: Well, Mr. Speaker, I suppose I could defer to one of my colleagues that could comment on the remediation work that’s been done there, but I understand that that work has been completed and satisfactorily.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Registry Service Fee for Municipalities (November 29)

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In what can almost be described as a comedy of errors, this government imposed a $15 motor vehicle licence information fee on municipalities and police in last year’s budget, without warning, then abruptly postponed the fee’s implementation until September, and then announced a further and indefinite suspension of the fee on the eve of its new implementation date.

To the Minister of Service Alberta: are you presently in discussions with the municipalities and the police about the suspended fee, sir?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Bhullar: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to take my first question from the member opposite. Let me be very clear. On this side of the House we listen to our municipalities; we work with them. They raised concerns. We have cancelled the fees, and if we are to move forth with any sort of fees, we will consult with them beforehand because they are partners with us and our government.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My next question: is it still your intention to reintroduce the fees in the 2012-13 budget?

Mr. Bhullar: Mr. Speaker, the budget is forthcoming. However, it is not the intention of my ministry to bring forth any fees without consulting with the municipalities. If the hon. member would like, he can pick up the phone and call an alderperson in Calgary or pick up the phone and call the mayor and ask if they’ve been consulted. If the answer is no, then my answer is no, hon. member.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister again: if the fee is absolutely off the table now, please explain how you intend to make up the forfeited revenue, and if it can be absorbed fairly easily through other means, why was it deemed a necessity in the first place?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Bhullar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me be clear. Service Alberta provides a very important service to our police services and our municipalities every single day by running that registry. There is a very significant cost to running that registry system. At present we the government of Alberta, the taxpayers of Alberta, pay for that, and we are proud to provide that service to our police services and our municipalities.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Funding for Private Schools (November 29, 2011)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, the Edmonton Islamic Academy openly states on their website that they will not enrol students with behavioural difficulties or students with special needs.

In Airdrie the Koinonia Christian school requires a confidential pastor’s report before it even considers enrolling students, and in Lethbridge a Christian school states on their website that their sole purpose is to instruct their children – and get this – in the fear of the Lord.

To the Minister of Education: how can you persist in defending these exclusive and elite schools when they openly state that they do not offer inclusive educational environments?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, I have been very clear over the last few days to this particular member. In Alberta parents are given choice in what schools they enrol their children in. We have a public education system that offers options, which is fully paid by the taxpayers of Alberta. We’re making a great investment in education. However, some parents choose to opt out and put their children either in charter or private schools at a higher cost to themselves. They pay tuition fees, registration fees, and it costs them a great deal of money. If they choose to do that, we allow for that choice to occur.

Mr. Hehr: Given that public money funds these institutions, will the minister change the legislation to make these schools inclusive by obligating them to enrol special-needs students and students with disabilities?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, it is common that taxpayers do partially fund private schools. That is correct. Alberta Education in its commitment to all children in Alberta will fund the cost of instructing the core curriculum of Alberta. However, if schools choose to deliver additional or enriched programs, be it religion or be it any other academic programming, that’s what the parents are on the hook for. There is nothing elitist about it, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Hehr: Well, given that the Premier has openly expressed her concern over the rise of private and chartered schools, why does this government insist on committing taxpayer dollars to institutions that are not interested in offering an open and inclusive environment?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Going further, Mr. Speaker, to the second part of the member’s question, if there was a situation that was to arise where a parent wanted to send a child to a private school and was ready and willing to pay whatever fees the private school has and the child had disabilities and the child was refused attendance at that school purely on the basis of the child’s disability, that would be something that my office and I personally would be interested in looking into. I am not aware of such cases right now where parents are being refused enrolment simply because their child has a disability.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust, continued (November 29)

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. It’s time the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act was amended.

For example, True Blue Alberta, the company set up to support the former Premier, is 100 per cent owned by a senior partner in a law firm. This firm also receives lucrative contracts from the government. While True Blue was benefiting the Premier, the government was benefiting the sole shareholder of True Blue.

To the Minister of Justice: why doesn’t the government bring in legislation to limit relations like these?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act applies to everybody. It applies to all parties, and it allows parties to raise money. The activities that they undertake are to support their electoral success. Again, it applies to all parties equally. So I see no reason why we should have to make changes when we’ve got legislation in place that already does the job. It does provide for disclosure.

I think this whole issue is probably precipitated by disclosures that were made several weeks ago. That’s nothing new. It’s been done for a long time.

Dr. Taft: Well, let’s try to improve that legislation, Mr. Justice Minister. Given that the value of government contracts paid to the firm of the sole shareholder in True Blue soared from $780,000 in 2006 to $1.3 million to $1.8 million to $2.4 million to $2.6 million in 2010, how can Albertans know that these huge increases weren’t facilitated by an inside track to the Premier’s office unless there are better laws?

Mr. Olson: As I said just previously, Mr. Speaker, if there are issues of conflict of interest, we have an Ethics Commissioner who polices that. This member can take it up with the Ethics Commissioner. That’s the Ethics Commissioner’s job.

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, again to the same minister: given that the current governing party has a long history of arranging special funds and accounts to pay its leaders, that are exempt from legislative controls, can this minister tell the taxpayers of Alberta if there are any special funds in place to make payments to the current Premier?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I do not answer for the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta. That’s not within my purview as Justice minister. I have no information. If the hon. member wants to ask the president of the Progressive Conservative Party, he can do that, just as he can ask the president of his own party about their finances. The rules that apply in this act are the same for everybody.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust (November 29)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. Yesterday the Minister of Justice failed to answer questions around the PC Party benefit plan trust, which has been listed for the last four years in the member’s disclosure statements pursuant to the Conflicts of Interest Act.

The minister yesterday could not answer, and the president of the PC Party would not answer.

To the Minister of Justice: again, what is the value of the PC Party benefit plan trust?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, that’s not information within my purview as Minister of Justice.

Mr. MacDonald: I disagree. It certainly is.

Again to the same minister: given that taxpayers are subsidizing the PC Party benefit plan trust, what is the amount of money provided by taxpayers to subsidize this trust?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I am responsible for the legislation. I am not responsible for the operation or administration of this act. If the member has questions, he can ask the Chief Electoral Officer, or he can ask the Conservative Party. It’s not information within my purview.

Mr. MacDonald: Unbelievable.

Now, again to the same minister: will the minister ask the president of the PC Party, the association, to release all the details of this benefit plan trust, and why is it necessary in the first place?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I’m not about to be doing the hon. member’s work for him.

The Speaker: Government House Leader, we have a point of order? Okay.

Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. True Blue Alberta was incorporated to be the legal vehicle for fundraising and for the payment of expenses relating to the leadership campaign of the former Premier. It had no other purpose. True Blue Alberta was investigated in 2007 under the Conflicts of Interest Act.

Again to the Minister of Justice: given that True Blue Alberta had no other purpose, why did it pay taxable allowances, over $5,000, to the former Premier and his spouse years after the leadership race was over?

Mr. Olson: Again, a common theme, Mr. Speaker. I am also responsible for the Conflicts of Interest Act, but I do not administer or operate everything that happens under the Conflicts of Interest Act. If he’s got questions, he can talk to the Ethics Commissioner.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, that’s unbelievable, sir, because you are responsible under the Government Organization Act for the Conflicts of Interest Act and the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act. Why will you not exercise the authority under your office?

Mr. Olson: I’m sorry. I couldn’t hear the question over all the yelling.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister, and I will speak slowly so, hopefully, he can understand. Why was it necessary to pay the former Premier and his spouse the taxable allowances from True Blue Alberta at the same time the PC Party set up a benefit trust fund?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, this organization I have no responsibility for, I have no information about them, and if he wants, he can ask them.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Leadership Race Vote Solicitation (November 29)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This fall Albertans had front-row seats to a perfect display of slimy pork-barrel politics.

The chief administrator of St. Paul told voters, quote, it is imperative for future funding, unquote, that their MLA remain in cabinet. This same MLA, now the Minister of Transportation, just gave $14 million in supplementary supply funding to his own constituency.

To the Premier or Deputy Premier: was this $14 million the price Albertans had to pay to get the right results from the PC leadership race?

Mr. Horner: Well, first of all, Mr. Speaker, I find the question offensive. It besmirches the integrity of the hon. minister, and I think that in order for the hon. member to ask such a question, perhaps he should come up with some verifiable proof.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, the only thing offensive was the activity and the allegations made in this article from St. Paul.
Given that the Minister of Transportation provided supplementary supply funding only to his constituency – and, not surprisingly, this is the same constituency that delivered 1,400 second ballot votes to elect the Premier and 1,600 votes for the Deputy Premier – how can the Premier or her deputy claim to be any different when it’s this warlord-style politics that clearly put them in their positions and they did the same by rewarding the MLA with a cabinet post?

Mr. Horner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I take great offence to the comments, that are basically an attack on the integrity of my office and of the Minister of Transportation’s office. I would ask for a point of order on that.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, Albertans take great offence at how politics are done in this great province.

Given that there are many valid projects requiring funding but only those that support the governing party get first dibs on taxpayer dollars, will the deputy put an end to this slimy pork-barrel politics that makes greasing the wheels of the PC Party a requirement for government funding?

Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, this hon. member has a history of making allegations without proof. Today is another one. The contention that a number of votes generates a lot of investment is simply not true. In the leadership race I happened to have a number of votes cast for me in a number of other ridings, including my own. That’s not to say that they’re going to get any special treatment from anyone in this House. It simply means that we’re the governing party. We look after the priorities of all Albertans.

Alberta Hansard, November 29, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Gravel Extraction Management (November 28)

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Ground and surface water interact, and alluvial aquifers, gravel beds, are key to this interaction. These shallow-bearing gravels bind surface and groundwater into one functioning body.

Now, mining of gravel is covered by municipal, for zoning, and secondly, by environment and SRD.

To the Minister of Environment and Water: since aquifers are so important to water cleanliness and movement, will this minister require local governments to consider environmental concerns in their initial stages of approval?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the member for the question. Certainly, we’ll work with local municipalities as they work through some of these applications. Groundwater is certainly important for us. As we go through different groundwater studies in the province, that’s part of it as well.

Thank you.

Dr. Swann: I think she said yes.

Ms Blakeman: No. I don’t think she said anything.

Okay. To the same minister: will the minister ensure that regulation of water, ground or otherwise, is not included under the new energy superboard?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you. Well, I don’t believe it’s called a super energy board, first and foremost. I think we’re looking at having a single regulator where all three – Environment, SRD, and the ERCB – together will regulate through that process. The government of Alberta will be responsible through those departments for policy setting. The regulator then will regulate and implement the policies that we put forward.

Ms Blakeman: Okay. That one she answered. It’s the first time out of everything I’ve asked her.

This question is to the Minister of SRD. Given the Auditor General has been making recommendations on reclamation, security deposits, and other issues surrounding gravel mining for years, what is the department doing to better verify quantities of aggregate mined to ensure a vigorous reclamation process and that sufficient security deposits are being collected?

Mr. Oberle: Well, I guess we’ll continue doing what we’re doing. We have no outstanding recommendations from the Auditor General’s office in our department, Mr. Speaker.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Funding for Private Schools (November 28)

Mr. Hehr: During her leadership campaign the Premier openly expressed concerns that the continued development of private and charter schools placed our public education system at risk of becoming a second-tier option.

Through discussions I’ve had with parents regarding this issue, some are choosing private schools as a result of lower class sizes.

To the Minister of Education: given that most private schools have smaller class sizes, why does this government continue to subsidize these organizations with taxpayers’ dollars instead of implementing the government’s own Learning Commission report, that would see class sizes in the public system be smaller, a promise this government made back in 2003?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, this member continues to attack private schools and parents’ choice for the last few days in this House already. The answer is simple. As a matter of fact, we are doing a province-wide review right now of the public education system, making sure that the public options always – always – produce the best possible education for our children. However, having said that, in this province it has always been and it will be for as long as this government is in place the situation where parents can choose what kind of a school they send their children to. There is nothing elitist about it. We simply support choice.

Mr. Hehr: Given that some private schools in Alberta charge parents up to $17,000 a year and that these schools still receive a large per-student public grant, doesn’t this go against the minister’s own mandate to create an inclusive education system?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, if these parents choose to spend that kind of money on their child’s education and, I would argue, not getting any better results than our children are getting in the public school system, that is their choice. Their money; their choice. But at the same time I can guarantee all Albertans that having my child in a publicly funded, not private system: she is receiving as good an education, if not better, than in a private school. I’m exercising my choice; they’re exercising theirs.

Mr. Hehr: Given that last week the minister was lauding a private Islamic school in his community, I was wondering if the minister knew that this school’s advertising campaign to attract people away from the public education system is to openly state that they do not let special-needs students enrol. Why are we funding an organization like this that clearly is not interested in supporting an inclusive educational mandate?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, that is offensive to the operators of these private schools. We also have a Sikh school, a Khalsa school. The fact is that private schools are mandated to accept children as long as the parents choose to put their children into those schools. We have a variety of schools, but at no point in time is the funding of public education in any way sacrificed. As a matter of fact, these children that go to private schools – those buildings are built by private dollars, which offsets some of the costs for public education.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Inspection of Long-term Care Facilities (November 28)

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In 2005 then Auditor General Fred Dunn found unsafe and degrading conditions in the province’s long-term care facilities.

Some centres used restraints without authorization. Half of the facilities visited did not ensure annual medical exams, and the majority were not following medication rules. To the minister of health: why has the minister not achieved consistent inspection and enforcement of basic service standards in the province’s long-term facilities?

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness.

Mr. Horne: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, in fact, the province has made great progress since the Auditor General’s report in 2005. While we have worked to ensure the appropriate application of standards, we’re currently doing some of what I think is very promising work to harmonize the inspection process, that often creates a burden on both patients and families, residents and families, and staff who operate these facilities.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, what proportion of institutions now have achieved the standards of inspection and enforcement?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, the inspections are carried out on a periodic basis, as the hon. member well knows. To my knowledge, all facilities in Alberta at this time are meeting the standards that are required, both for continuing care accommodation standards and continuing care health standards. Where there are deviations or where, more often, there are recommendations for improve-ment, I have every confidence those are being acted upon promptly and appropriately.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, that’s not consistent with the most recent Auditor General’s report. Given the string of broken promises, what confidence can Alberta seniors have that they will be cared for appropriately?

Mr. Horne: Well, I don’t know specifically which recommendation the hon. member is referring to. What I can tell you is that the last Auditor General’s report expressed satisfactory progress in most cases on the recommendations upon which we had been asked to follow up. We are not satisfied, obviously, with only a satisfactory rating. There is room for improvement. In fact, Mr. Speaker, we’re attempting to create a culture of continuous quality improvement.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Seniors’ Benefit Program (November 28)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In her opening speech to this House on October 24 the Premier promised: “Couples that have loved and depended on each other for decades will no longer be split up.” Yet reports have emerged of at least three senior couples in Medicine Hat driven to divorce in order to qualify for the Alberta seniors’ benefits they need to pay for long-term care.

To the Minister of Seniors: is this just another in a string of broken promises?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me get this straight. Involuntary separation is not divorce. Whoever thinks of that as divorce and whoever thinks that this department would make anybody legally separate is foolish.

Mr. Chase: I suppose, Mr. Speaker, that involuntary separation is acceptable.

Given that the removal of the daily accommodation fee cap will only increase costs further, what does the minister have to say to lower income seniors driven to take such desperate measures in order to pay for long-term care: don’t worry, it’s involuntary?

Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, just to put some further clarification into this, if a senior couple is in the unfortunate circumstance where one partner has to go into long-term care and the other partner stays at home, just pick up the phone, call our department, and we’ll make sure you have an income-splitting opportunity to maximize your benefits. No form required.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Will the minister commit today to equalizing the eligibility criteria for married and unmarried recipients of the Alberta seniors’ benefit?

Mr. VanderBurg: Again, I’ll say it slower. All you have to do is pick up the phone, let me know, let our department know. We’ll make sure that you can split your income halfway down the middle, that you both get maximum benefit on the seniors’ benefit plan. It has been working fine. Our department has been doing this for years. People don’t have trouble with it. Involuntary separation is a federal incentive to maximize the guaranteed income supplement and the old age security. We don’t require a form. We don’t require anything. Just notify us.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Political Party Financial Benefits/AIMCo CEO Personal Investments (November 28)

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Justice. Will the minister bring forward amendments to the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act to require registered political parties to disclose the exact value of any special allowances, reimbursements, financial trusts, or any other financial benefits granted by them to their leaders and sitting MLAs?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I sense a bit of a theme here. I’m going to have to investigate this question. I’m being very honest with the member when I say that I do not have the answer for him, and I’m going to have to investigate it.

Dr. Taft: Well, I sense a bit of a theme in these non-answers, Mr. Speaker. We’ll try again. Does the Minister of Justice admit that these kinds of special allowances and so on could easily become an end run to legislative safeguards that require full disclosure and protect against conflicts of interest?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure what the member is after here, but I will say that either of these members could have easily given me a call, talked to me. I could’ve prepared myself for this discussion. I would have been happy to have it with them.

Dr. Taft: Again to the same minister. Maybe we’ll return tomorrow and get full answers from him. In the interest of open and accountable government does the Minister of Justice agree that the public has a right to know who is providing what financial benefits to their Premier and other elected officials?

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, there is already disclosure made, and if the member wants to discuss it further with me, I’d be more than happy to meet with him.

AIMCo CEO Personal Investments

Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, my questions are to the Minister of Finance. Earlier this month the Ontario Securities Commission issued what was described as a stunning warning about the operations of real estate in a wealth management company. The top executive at AIMCo has been involved in the centre of this controversy and what is apparently his personal investment. Is the minister concerned that the top official at AIMCo, which manages some $70 billion in money for the Alberta government, is embroiled as a director of a company under an OSC investigation?

Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, there were a lot of inflammatory words in that question, like “embroiled” and “controversy” and all of those other things, to try and make a story out of this particular incident. I was informed by the CEO of AIMCo about this unfortunate situation and have had a chance to have a look at it. I think that everything, as far as I’m concerned, the information that I have, is perfectly fine.

Dr. Taft: To the same minister, then: what rules are in place to govern the personal investment activities of AIMCo managers so that conflicts of interest with their public-sector investments and other problems such as lost credibility are avoided?

Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, again, in the question the member is talking about, he used the term “lost credibility.” This particular organization is recognized in the short period of time that it’s been in existence as one of the premier investment organizations in the country. I had an opportunity last week to meet with the board, and I can say that we’ve got an outstanding board and an outstanding CEO.

Dr. Taft: Well, Mr. Speaker, given that before working at AIMCo, this same official managed a $35 billion public-sector fund in Australia that was caught in a scheme that lost $500 million in an investment that was made, according to investigations, on the basis of a Google search and a sales pitch, what oversight does this government have in place to protect Albertans’ investments in AIMCo?

Mr. Liepert: Well, first of all, Mr. Speaker, I will look into the googling that the member did to see whether, in fact, it has any substance or not, but the organization is one that, I said earlier, is recognized internationally, and to somehow leave the impression that a particular individual within this organization can be misappropriating Albertans’ funds is – actually, it borders, Mr. Speaker, on what I would say is – I’ll leave it at that.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust (November 28)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. My first question is to the Minister of Justice, who is responsible for the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.

Under that act are the contributions to the benefit plan trust for the former Premier eligible for tax receipts? You don’t shake your head. Let him answer the question.

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, the short answer to that question is: as I stand here right now, I don’t know the answer to the question, but I’ll get it.

Mr. MacDonald: You should.

Again to the same Minister of Justice: what is the value of the benefit plan trust of the former Premier, which is outlined on page 2 of the Premier’s public disclosure statement, made pursuant, Mr. Speaker, to the Conflicts of Interest Act, an act under your authority and one which you tabled in this Assembly last week.

Mr. Olson: Mr. Speaker, that’s information that I don’t have top of mind. I’ll undertake to provide the information to him.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. Again to the Minister of Justice: why is it necessary to have a benefit plan trust for the former Premier and the former leader of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta when in 2008 we all received such large substantial pay increases?

Mr. Olson: Same answer again, Mr. Speaker.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Long-term Care for Seniors (November 28)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government’s assault on our seniors began in 2008 by cutting public long-term care beds, privatizing the delivery of home care and long-term care, and nickelling and diming our seniors with fees to make up for a growing list of delisted services.

The Premier said that allowing industry to meet seniors’ needs will create more jobs, quote, unquote. The only extra jobs will be for bankers to count the profits off the backs of our seniors. To the Minister of Seniors: why is this government turning our seniors into commodities to be sold on the market to the highest bidder?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. VanderBurg: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for that question. You know, I totally disagree with the member’s comments. The aging policy framework, that I was very much involved with, dealt with the demographic change and where this new department is going with the Department of Seniors. There is nothing of more importance than the seniors for me as a new minister. I will make this commitment to you and to everybody here that seniors are not a commodity. They are a very important piece of this province, and they’ll be treated that way.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, I wish that were true. In fact, standing up for the seniors is what got me chucked out.

Given that the previous and current Premiers promised to add 1,000 new continuing care beds to the system without mentioning if any of them would be publicly delivered, to the minister of health: what are your marching orders from this Premier, and exactly how many of those beds will be both 100 per cent publicly funded and 100 per cent publicly delivered?

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness.

Mr. Horne: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is, in fact, the position of this government that we are working to offer a range of housing options for seniors across Alberta and, for those seniors who need health care, to offer a health care component that allows those seniors to age and to be served in place.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that the only options are a range of private, for-profit options and given that the Premier has made a promise to increase funding to home care, which has also been overly privatized, to the Minister of Finance – yeah, you over there – how much more money will go into public home-care delivery, or is it all earmarked for private contracts and your PC privatization buddies?

Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, this member knows very well that that will be part of the budget that will be delivered in the new year.

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

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier’s maiden speech shows that this government has no clue how to fix public health care. It doesn’t see the link between jammed emergency departments and ideological starvation of public home care and public long-term care. Now couples who can’t afford private facilities face involuntary separation or abandonment in the hospital emergency departments. To the Minister of Finance: will you end this government’s betrayal of our respected seniors and the values that Alberta was founded on and invest more in the public delivery of health care services to our seniors?

Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure where this member has been. This government supports seniors better than any other government in the country of Canada, and this minister here will ensure that that continues to happen.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know exactly where I’ve been. I was on the wrong side.
Given that the Premier plans to open Pandora’s box by lifting the seniors’ housing cap and allowing private operators to charge whatever they can get away with, will the Minister of Seniors, please – will you, please – show some mercy to middle- and lower middle-income seniors, who will be priced out of the market by the Premier’s decision, and please reverse this ill-advised plan?

Mr. VanderBurg: Well, Mr. Speaker, I want to make sure that all people on the programs that we have today know that low-income seniors will always be guaranteed the support of this government. I was just looking at a list of recent announcements. Banff, Beaumont, Black Diamond, Calgary, Camrose, Claresholm, Edmonton, Leduc, Red Deer, Rocky View, Spruce Grove, St. Albert, Vegreville, Tofield: we’re building seniors’ facilities, and the Premier has made a very strong commitment that . . .

The Speaker: The hon. leader. [interjection] The hon. leader, please. [interjection] Third time, the hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that Albertans are waiting for action and results, not announcements, and given that the Premier’s misguided quota system creates a huge crowd of second-class citizens waiting in the breadline for affordable housing and home care and the line grows every single day, doesn’t the Minister of Seniors see how wrong – how wrong – it is to leave so many of our seniors without any options that they can actually afford?

Mr. VanderBurg: Again, Mr. Speaker, let’s not feel that the public sector is the only way to resolve this issue. The private sector does have an opportunity to play a great role in this. It’s the outcome that I’m interested in – the outcome. Let’s talk about some of these projects that will be completed in the next 12 months: Grande Prairie, Edmonton, Peace River, Strathmore.

Mr. Speaker, we are acting on our commitments.

Alberta Hansard, November 28, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Sherman’s questions show how PC government is failing seniors

Edmonton – During today’s Question Period, Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman held the PC government accountable for failing seniors on the key issues of long-term care and affordable housing.

“This government’s assault on our seniors began in 2008 by cutting public long-term care beds, privatizing the delivery of home care and long-term care, and nickel-and-diming our seniors with fees to make up for a growing list of delisted services. The Premier said that allowing industry to meet seniors’ needs will create more jobs…The only extra jobs will be for bankers to count the profits off the backs of our seniors,” Sherman said in his preamble. “Why is this government turning our seniors into commodities to be sold on the market to the highest bidder?”

In reference to the Premier’s promise to increase funding for home care, Sherman asked the Minister of Finance “How much more money will go into public home care delivery, or is it all earmarked for private contracts and your PC privatization buddies?”

Sherman also touched on the shocking news that some seniors have reportedly been forced to divorce in order to qualify for the Alberta Seniors Benefit and thereby afford to pay living expenses.

“Couples who can’t afford private facilities face involuntary separation or abandonment in the hospital emergency departments,” Sherman noted. “Will you end this government’s betrayal of our respected seniors and the values that Alberta was founded on and invest more in the public delivery of health care services to our seniors?”

Sherman says that Alberta deserves better.

“I raised these questions in the Legislature today because Alberta’s seniors deserve so much more dignity and respect than they’re receiving from this entitled old government,” Sherman says. “I also pointed out that the Premier wants to lift the senior housing cap to allow operators to charge whatever they can get away with, pricing many seniors out of the market for care. She’s going to create even longer lines for long-term care, and in doing so she’ll make wait times for surgery and ER treatment longer still. Seniors deserve better; Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Brendan Wade, Media Liaison                           Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 904-5430                                           (780) 862-5661

[direct link to this article]

Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (November 24)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The last few months have seen economic crises rippling through Europe, tipping the world’s economy toward the verge of disaster.

Italy’s, Portugal’s, Greece’s, and Ireland’s economies are spinning out of control and bringing down those closest to them. At the same time this government is participating in negotiations to bind us to this turmoil, putting our economy at risk.

To the Minister of Intergovernmental, International and Aboriginal Relations: will this government step up to the Premier’s promise of more transparency in government and make public the Canada-EU trade agreement negotiations it has taken part in?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Dallas: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, I will comment and appreciate the hon. member’s question. The negotiations that the hon. member is referring to are negotiations between Canada and the European Union. Those negotiations have advanced through nine rounds of consultation, and at the side of the federal government all of the provinces have been closely involved. We continue to make progress on that, but no agreement has been reached at this time.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Hopefully, Albertans will have a part in setting that agreement and will be informed along with the progress. Given that the scarcity of water is a concern for all Albertans and that many communities are worried about the sale of this resource, can the minister reassure Albertans that the sale of our water is not a part of these international negotiations?

Mr. Dallas: Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear. The Premier has always been very clear. Our water is not for sale.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. With reference to the Premier’s clarity, it can change at a day’s notice.

To the same minister: what guarantees can the minister promise Albertans as to debt contagion from Europe after this agreement is signed?

Mr. Dallas: Well, Mr. Speaker, there’s no relevance between this agreement and financial issues that are raging in the European economy. We trade on a best-efforts basis with any and all trading partners around the globe, so I don’t see the relevance of a particular jurisdiction’s financial issues.

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Highway Maintenance (November 24)

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government plans to purchase an extra $15 million of salt, sand, and gravel for use in highway maintenance.

Last year the province bought an extra $10.4 million worth of salt, sand, and gravel above the budget of $25 million and in 2009-10 an extra $13.6 million worth. To the Minister of Transportation: when the department misses the set $25 million budget consistently for three years, doesn’t that mean more should be budgeted in the first place?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to remind the hon. member that in Alberta the weather is very volatile, and at times we need to be prepared. We need to ensure that we do have the sand and gravel and we have the salt so that if we have a weather system that comes through, we don’t leave Albertans at risk. This is about safety on our roads.

Mr. Kang: This is three years in a row, Mr. Speaker. Can we plan in the first place? We can put more money aside. To the minister again: given that, why is the government buying salt, sand, and gravel for highway maintenance at all when we have contracted out highway maintenance in the province?

Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day it is the expense of the government however the maintenance takes place. I want to just make a little reference to the comment that the individual member made at the beginning. That was three years in a row we had excess or we bought more. I want to say to you that I would rather buy three years of excess sand than I would have one year of not having sand and salt.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that, did the government invent a time machine over the summer and now knows that this year we will use 60 per cent more salt, sand, and gravel than it predicted at budget time, or did the government’s groundhog see its shadow earlier this year and predict six extra weeks of winter?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, just a little on-the-side comment because if the hon. member can predict weather better than that, then he should be in a different occupation because all of the agriculture, all of the support industry, the maintenance industry that we have in this province would very much like to have that information.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say to you that this government needs to be prepared because we need to ensure that the maintenance of our highways is maintained, and we are ready.

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Funding for Bedbug Infestations (November 24)

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Bedbugs are costing my constituents living in apartments, condos, seniors’ residences, and shelters huge problems and a lot of money, but because there’s no disease, the Alberta government considers them pests and has not developed an income support policy for low-income Albertans, including seniors and those on AISH.

Without an official policy people have to know to seek director approval for any support. It’s a wicked, wicked hide-and-seek for people under stress. To the Minister of Human Services: will the minister please co-ordinate with AHS to produce a public information campaign on recognizing bedbug infestations and the need for fast treatment?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For a moment there I thought we were going to be asked for an income support program for bedbugs.

I understand the hon. member’s concerns and the issue that she’s raising. It is a very important issue with respect to bedbugs this year in Alberta, as I understand it. I don’t understand much more about it, and I will talk with the hon. member further about what’s happening in her area and how we can assist those who are unable to afford the process themselves. It is an infestation that causes a problem we need to resolve.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Back to the same minister: well, Minister, given that treatment for bedbugs requires people to spend money to rewash clothes, purchase extra cleaning supplies, bags to wrap clothing, and to move and store furniture, will the minister direct his department to develop and distribute a policy on financial support for low-income seniors and AISH recipients for funding for bedbug infestations?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, I’d go a little bit further than that to say that what I have indicated to people in our department is that they should use principle-based decision-making with respect to support for children and families who need support. In working with individuals who have a financial issue, they need to work through those issues with them and assist them with the right kind of support at the right time. We will be looking at our policies in that area. One of my mandates is looking at the whole social policy framework and, within that, the context of income supports so that we’re supporting people in the right way at the right time, not just with financial support but also with family support to determine how they can do better for families.

The Speaker: The hon. member, please.

Ms Blakeman: Good. Thank you again. Back to the same minister. In some cases seniors and others may be required to find overnight accommodation while their unit or their floor is treated for bedbugs. Will the minister develop and distribute a policy to cover the cost of hotel accommodation if family or friends are unable to provide short-term accommodation?

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I’m trying to establish as we move forward with the social policy framework and really look at our income support within that context is that rather than reacting to each specific instance with a new rule and regulation and a new policy, we look generically at issues to say: how do we need to support people so that they can live in human dignity, and how can we assist them to be as independent as possible? This would, in my view, fall within that purview of saying: how do we need to help people when they need help in the right way without a knee-jerk reaction of writing a new rule or a new policy?

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Bitumen Royalty in Kind Program/Funding for Private Schools (November 24)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy. It just appears that the left hand of his government does not know what the right hand is doing.

One minute you have a Premier saying that we believe there is an opportunity to do more upgrading in Alberta, and next we have a minister saying that upgrading in Alberta is a crapshoot. In any event, can the minister tell me: are they getting even deeper into the business of upgrading by extending the BRIK program, or are they getting out of the business of being in business?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, the record is very clear on this. This government is proceeding with the BRIK program with the North West upgrader. We’re in the process of negotiations with North West and CNRL at the moment. This is a risk-sharing operation between CNRL and North West and the government, and as I indicated in my earlier answer, it’s going to provide 8,000 jobs in construction, 600 permanent jobs, new tax base in the county, and supplies of diesel, so less chances of the recurrence of the diesel shortage that was referred to in the earlier question.

Mr. Hehr: Well, given that the Minister of Energy, well known for his firewall letter wherein he stated that Alberta should be pulling government out of the business of subsidizing business, can this minister assure us today that he’s not going to let blind Conservative philosophy get in the way of doing what is in the best interests of the Alberta people, which may well be to have our government play a larger role in bitumen upgrading?

Dr. Morton: I think what I said quite clearly, Mr. Speaker, is that I fully support and am taking responsibility for advancing the North West project. In terms of a go-forward basis I agree completely with our Premier that what’s needed now is a robust discussion of the various instruments that government has at its disposal to incent more upgrading. That’s the discussion that will be taking place in our caucus in the coming months.

Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s good to talk not only to your caucus members. Given that it’s always important for the Minister of Energy to consult with industry players on something as major as bitumen upgrading in this province, can the minister share with us what views are being expressed to him about the possibility of the Alberta government being more involved in the upgrading process?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows full well, there is a whole spectrum of opinions on this subject. We receive all of them. There is a spectrum of opinions within our caucus. I think that if you paid close attention to what the Premier said in her remarks last night, she is inviting a full debate on what the options are. I think that’s one of the marks of this new government: a full policy debate about not just choosing one option and charging down that road but discussing what the options are in advance.

Funding for Private Schools

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, government should support equality of opportunity. Equality of opportunity is the principle that whether you’re born into a rich family or a poor family, you’ll have the opportunity to succeed. This is a cornerstone of any democratic, equitable society. The way governments ensure equality of opportunity is through a publicly funded and delivered education system. To the Minister of Education. Given that the Premier stated that she is concerned with the continuing development of private and charter schools and that because of these the public system is at risk of being a second-tier level of education, how is the minister going to ensure that this does not happen?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, our Premier, like me and everybody on this side of the House, we are committed to a public education system. But we are also committed to choice. The problem is what we’re hearing from the other side, this member for the last three days going out of his way trying to characterize private schools as elitist and only for the rich. As a matter of fact, that’s not the case. We have Sikh schools both in Edmonton and Calgary. We have Islamic academies in Edmonton. We have many private schools that do not cater to the rich, do not cater to the elite of Alberta but simply cater to parents who want to exercise choice.

Mr. Hehr: To the same minister: given the Premier’s concerns about the continuing development of private and charter schools what is this minister doing to address this situation given that we are creating a system that divides the wealthy from the poor and the religious from the secular? Does the minister understand that this is not developing an inclusive system?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, this member should be less concerned about the Premier’s concerns and be more concerned about facts because he is as far away from facts as he possibly can be.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, it’s not a secret. It’s a world-known fact that Alberta education is in the ranks of the top five always and usually the top three. Finland and Korea and Alberta, not Canada but Alberta, usually are the countries considered to be the leaders in education and partly because of the fact that we have choice. I choose to send my daughter to a Catholic school system. You may choose to send your children to public. Another person can send them to a charter, and the list goes on.

Mr. Hehr: Given that this government divides our children by funding private schools with public funds up to $127 million a year, will the minister cut public funding to private schools in order to act on the Premier’s concerns about the continued growth of private and charter schools?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Again, concerned about the Premier’s concerns and not concerned about the facts.

Mr. Speaker, we fund private schools only at a rate of some 70 per cent of regular funding. They build their own infrastructure. One could actually argue, if you want to use the twisted logic of the opposition, the fact that the private schools subsidize public schools because kids go to school and we don’t have to pay for the infrastructure.

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Mental Health Services (November 24)

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta psychiatrists are blowing the whistle on the critical lack of mental health beds and professionals in Alberta.

According to Dr. Lloyd Maybaum, a Calgary psychiatrist threatened with dismissal when he expressed concerns, quote, the planning and announcement of the new fiveyear mental health action plan is another brutal example of the autocratic approach that Alberta Health Services and Alberta Health and Wellness routinely adopt. To the Premier: why were psychiatrists not consulted in this plan? Is this what you call engagement?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, everything that Alberta Health Services has done and everything that has been done in Alberta Health and Wellness is about building a system that can provide wraparound services with respect to mental health. These suggestions that certain professions have not been consulted are entirely incorrect. We have people who are part of our health care system both as private medical practitioners as well as in Alberta Health and Wellness who’ve been fully consulted with respect to implementation. As we move ahead, let’s remember that the way that government works right now is that we introduce plans, we consult ahead of time, and then we consult during further development. My understanding with respect to mental health plans at the moment that are being undertaken by the government is that we’re going to do exactly that.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Swann: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. That flies in the face of the evidence.

The new mental health plan makes no indication of the critical shortage of beds. What is this so-called plan based on?

Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe that a suggestion from the hon. member is proof or evidence of any particular fact. If he has further information, I’d certainly be happy to take that.

Mr. Speaker, what this mental health plan does is speak to the services that need to be available across this province for people that are dealing with those issues. Of course beds are a part of that, but one of the things that we know is that we’re going to have services, some of which are in treatment and some of which are out of treatment and in the community. I will tell you as we move ahead that this suggestion that there is a critical shortage of beds is nothing more than an allegation from the opposition.

Dr. Swann: Well, it’s clear that the Premier doesn’t make a connection between shortage of psychiatric beds and ER wait times. Very unfortunate that she doesn’t understand that. Will the Premier admit that such plans ignore both the evidence and the people primarily involved in mental health care and that this plan is a sham?

Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, there’s an awful lot of people that I will take advice from about the health care system and whether or not emergency wait times and mental health care beds should be connected. I’m fortunate, I’ll have to say, that one of them is not the member of the opposition because at the end of day there are many people who have opinions on the mental health care system and on the health care system. The job of government is to ensure that we have put in place practitioners and managers that understand the system intimately and understand the intricate connection between the day-to-day operations. All of these wild allegations that create fear in the health care system are not responsible.

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

PC Party Benefit Plan Trust (November 24)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My first question is to the Premier. Is the benefit plan trust for the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta funded from money collected by the party through the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act?

Speaker’s Ruling
Questions about Political Party Activity

The Speaker: I’m sorry. Questions dealing with political party activities are not part of the purview of the question period. [interjection] I’m sorry. That’s in the rules.

Mr. MacDonald: That’s not in the rules.

The Speaker: Okay.

The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore.

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Public Health Inquiry/Mental Health Services (November 24)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier said in her emergency debate that we are not defined by our hopes and wants but by our actions.

I disagree. Albertans are defined by their hopes and wants and actions, and they want a safe public health care system. By not calling a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act, the Premier stands in the way of the truth, improving the lives of our seniors, cancer sufferers, mentally ill, and all Albertans waiting in the waiting rooms. Does the Premier want to be defined as a flip-flopping promise breaker, or will she . . .

The Speaker: The hon. the Premier.

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, we are doing the right thing. We’re introducing legislation that’s going to allow for a public inquiry that’s independent, that’s judge led, that can compel witnesses. That’s going to ensure that we have a strong public health care system that serves Albertans.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, the Premier’s answers are confusing because I have these articles saying that she promised a public inquiry, not a public relations exercise and a delay exercise as we already have the tools in place under the Public Inquiries Act to call the inquiry. Did the Premier really call for a real public inquiry, or are her comments in all of these recently tabled articles wrong?

Ms Redford: What we’re doing as a government is entirely consistent with what I said that we would do. We are having an inquiry. It will be public. It will be independent. It can be judge led, and it can compel witnesses. Mr. Speaker, it can also ensure that a council that understands the issues related to health care is involved in the inquiry, and that’s what matters to Albertans.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, the only thing that’s consistent here is that the government is consistently breaking its promises. Given that the Premier’s promise is well documented in these articles, news reports, and even her own website, will the Premier just end the charade and the confusion and say plainly whether or not she will call a public inquiry today under the Public Inquiries Act, and if so, when?

Ms Redford: The only person who seems to be confused is the Leader of the Official Opposition. We have been very clear, Mr. Speaker, that the most important piece of work in this legislation is that this inquiry will be fully independent, and we’ve put legislation in place that I hope this House passes so that we can ensure that public health care is supported in the province.

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

Mental Health Services

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Here is another confusing issue. When questioned yesterday about kicking the mentally ill to the curb, the Premier said that opposition questions undermine the independence of provincial offices and institutions. Apparently, democracy under her rule is when everyone just shuts up and does what she says. Immediately after taking office, the Premier made political coronations that meddled in the ruling of a quasi-judicial body, the AUC. Isn’t the Premier’s interference in the regulatory process more dangerous to independence? How much more of this can Albertans expect as her reign continues?

Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, there’s no doubt that that was a confusing question. I’ll try to answer both parts of it. What I’ll say is that we have a regulatory structure in this province that allows for independent decisions to be made. I respect that process and in no way interfere with that process.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The only confusing thing is what one minister says and what the Premier says. Given that questioning the Premier is clearly thought of as dangerous to her democracy and our democracy and our provincial institutions, doesn’t the Premier think it’s equally dangerous not to understand the difference between having competent management staff and giving them the resources that they need to do their job so that you don’t have to kick the mentally ill Albertans, as stated in this memo, to the curb?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I believe we’re now talking about mental health issues. Again, I’m very happy to speak about that. They’re very important to Albertans. One of the issues that came up yesterday subsequent to question period was comments from a Dr. Owen Heisler, who is the medical director for Edmonton zone, who made it very clear that there has never been anyone discharged to the streets who may have had issues that needed to be dealt with around mental health and the health care system.


The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s clear that there are many psychiatrists who have been discharged out of their profession and out of this province and country. Given that over three years ago the Auditor General recommended properly implementing the mental health plan, creating better standards, accountability, funding, planning, and reporting of mental health services – and the list goes on and on – at a time when the Premier was in charge of SafeCom, why didn’t this government take these recommendations seriously before Albertans were kicked to the curb? In light of this evidence what’s the Premier and the government going to do to rectify this?

Ms Redford: The Auditor General’s report, which has been the topic of this week, actually refers to the fact that a number of the recommendations that have been made with respect to mental health care and services for people that might have mental health care issues had been acted on in every respect. There was progress made on all of them, Mr. Speaker. I would remind the hon. House that as a government we’ve introduced the safe communities initiative, which has brought mental health beds to every community across this province that identified a need. In addition to that, we’ve seen a very active mental health plan that has begun to address these issues overall in rural communities.

Alberta Hansard, November 24, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Funding for Private Schools (November 23)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, this summer when the now Premier was stumping for her new position, she participated in an educational debate where she said the following: what I am quite concerned about right now is that we could very well see, with the continuing development of private and charter schools, the public system being a second-tier level of education, and that can’t happen.

To the Minister of Education: since you became minister, has the Premier had a chance to indicate to you this concern, that she previously discussed in the debate at the Alberta Teachers’ Association summer meetings?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, obviously the Premier, like myself and any other parent, is concerned about making sure we have the best education possible. Every parent as a partner in education wants to make sure their children receive the best education possible.

You know what, Mr. Speaker? A little bit of bad news. I said already in this House that the Prime Minister of the U.K. just told us that Alberta has the best system of education in the entire English-speaking world, and he was referring to the public system. Yes, we do have private schools and charter schools and Christian schools and Islamic schools. The list goes on and on. Altogether that’s what makes Alberta Education so great.

Mr. Hehr: To the same minister. Given the Premier’s words can the minister explain why this government is currently subsidizing some elite private schools, some that charge parents up to $17,000 a year, with provincial tax dollars?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, again, as I said, that’s what makes Alberta Education so fabulous. This member would like to misrepresent private schools. As a matter of fact, the majority of private schools are not elitist. I have a private school in my riding, the Islamic Academy, where I would venture to guess that the average income of the parents could possibly be below the provincial average. We want choice for parents. We want choice for children. Children learn differently. Parents have different values and different expectations. In Alberta we offer a full buffet of education that suits everybody’s needs.

Mr. Hehr: Given that my previous example makes it clear that in the main the average working family cannot afford private schooling, will this minister take the Premier’s words to heart and look at cutting funding to private schools?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, the answer is simply no. Again, what this member is doing is misinterpreting what the Premier may have said. The fact is that I know of private schools – I have private schools in my riding – where, as I said earlier, the majority of children in that school are children of immigrants. The average income is probably below the provincial average. To misinterpret the reality of private schools is simply wrong. Our kids deserve choice. Our parents deserve choice. They deserve the best education possible, and they’re getting it.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Southwest Calgary Ring Road (November 23)

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The failure to build the Calgary southwest ring road frustrates Calgary commuters, businesses, and truckers, and it seems like now the talks with the Tsuu T’ina Nation are on the back burner.

To the Minister of Transportation. The Premier committed during the leadership campaign to either secure an agreement with the Tsuu T’ina Nation or build a road through Bragg Creek along highway 22 or 22X. Can the minister tell us what plan is going forward?

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to say that I have been talking to the chief of the Tsuu T’ina Nation, and I will say that we’ve had good discussions. We met. I had some questions, and so did he, and we’re going to meet in the future.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that the Premier stated in her first election campaign that if elected MLA, she would get the southwest ring road done and still after almost four years nothing has been done, can the minister, with a straight face, tell us: is progress being made?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In fact, progress is being made all the time. As I said a couple of seconds ago, I had discussions with the chief of the Tsuu T’ina Nation, and we are continuing to have discussions. So is progress being made?

Very much so.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the progress being made is at a snail’s pace. I think we have to speed things up, Mr. Minister. To the Minister of Transportation again: given that Alberta Transportation’s own website lists ongoing consultation of new possible roads for the ring road, none of which fulfill the Premier’s campaign promise, will the minister commit to ending the Calgary southwest ring road planning study started in December 2009 or . . .

The Speaker: The hon. minister, please.

Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, I need to say that when we have discussions with the Tsuu T’ina Nation, we are having discussions, progressive discussions, about the needs of the Nation as well as the needs of Calgarians and the surrounding province.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

International Trade Offices (November 23)

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First, without a competitive job interview process the Premier dispatched her main political rival to Hong Kong.

Then the Premier nominated her envoy to Washington with a similarly closed and opaque process. This leaves us wondering about the Premier’s promise to review the province’s international strategy. To the Minister of Intergovernmental, International and Aboriginal Relations: what was the point of your department’s review of our international strategy last year when the new Premier has unilaterally disregarded its findings?

Mr. Dallas: Thanks to the hon. member for the question. Mr. Speaker, in fact we did not review all of the operations of our international offices last year, and we are, as the Premier has indicated, conducting such a review now. We’re looking very carefully at our trade relationships, the locations of our offices, how those offices are resourced, and how we need to position to get the maximum benefit for Albertans.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. Given the Premier’s promise of transparency and accountability, will the minister defend taxpayers’ dollars and commit to making international offices accountable for their expenses, which currently they are not?

Mr. Dallas: Mr. Speaker, all of the expenses of the ministry are accountable and transparent, and we’re responsible for all of those. I’m not sure where the member is coming from on this.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I previously asked the hon. minister to table the evaluation of money for risk in those offices. Given that many international offices have little to account for, will the minister provide to Albertans a detailed breakdown of their accomplishments, especially for trade, agriculture, and tourism?

This is the second time I’ve asked.

Mr. Dallas: Mr. Speaker, I’m not entirely sure that’s correct. However, we do report on an annual basis on the operations. But I have and the Premier has committed, too, that as part of this strategic review we’ll carefully contemplate the outcome measurements that we’re looking for, and we’ll report on those measurements.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards (November 23, 2011)

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. This government throws out a whack of options to companies on greenhouse gas intensity emissions, allowing companies four measurements and five calculation methods, but in the end the government doesn’t know what was measured, how it was measured, or how it was verified.

Bottom line: Albertans don’t have an accurate picture of whether emissions are getting lower. There is a total, but we don’t know if it’s accurate. To the minister of environment: on what information is the ministry basing its assertion that this program is working?

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Environment and Water. Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the member for the question. First of all, I’d like to say that we support the Auditor General and the help he is giving us to finetune our system. It is a good system, but it’s still new, and it’s one that we still need to refine, but we’re committed to constant improvement with that. We’ve worked with the Auditor General to identify some of those gaps. We’re happy that his team was able to work with us, and we’ll work on continuous improvements in these areas.

Ms Blakeman: Goodness gracious, that was a lot of talk and no information.

Back to the same minister: how does the government know if Albertans are getting value for this program?

Mrs. McQueen: Well, there are a number of ways that we’re getting value for the program. With regard to some of the issues that the hon. member has mentioned and that the Auditor General has mentioned, it’s with regard to the review of the protocols that we have. We ensure that protocols are reviewed with regard to tillage protocols and the issues that the Auditor General has raised with regard to that. Protocols will be updated by the end of this year to address those issues as well.

Ms Blakeman: Oh, boy. Back to the same minister: will this minister continue to employ the strategy of confusion and conflicting instructions, which makes it impossible for anyone to, one, comply and, two, confirm the results? Is any of that going to change?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What we’ll continue to do is make this system a world-leading system in North America. We will continue to refine it and make it a better system as we go on. When you look at North America, there are not places that are doing the kind of work that we are doing with reducing greenhouse gas emissions and addressing the issues that we are. And through the protocols and the review of the protocols and working with the Auditor General, we will continue to have continuous improvement. There were several protocols, and only a couple of them didn’t pass the audits report.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Mental Health Services/Inspection of Long-term Care Facilities (November 23)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A memo by Alberta Health Services dated September 14, 2011, regarding bed pressures, addiction, and mental health, Edmonton zone, reads: “The Edmonton Zone is currently experiencing a critical demand for inpatient mental health beds in the region. Any possible patient discharges are deeply appreciated.”

Why is this government now throwing the mentally ill out on the street?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, Alberta Health Services is competent and capable of managing our health system. Alberta Health Services communicates, I’m sure, by e-mail, BlackBerry, and memos. I don’t think that it would be a surprise to any Albertan to know that on a day-to-day basis the managers in Alberta Health Services have to shuffle resources. I think that’s what people do in every part of their life every day. There is no reason to believe this suggestion that there’s anyone whose life is at risk as a result of the fact that Alberta Health Services is doing their job.

Mr. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, if this government was competent and capable, these outstanding recommendations from the Auditor General’s report, which are three years old, would have been met by now.

Given that we have this memo that indicates that you are throwing mental health patients out on the street, is this this government’s idea of wait-time management for those who are mentally ill?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, there are so many ways that I need to answer this question. The first is that it’s an unfounded allegation. To draw conclusions from a two-line memo that’s been written by someone who is a competent manager in Alberta Health Services I think is suspect.

The second thing I’ll say is that with the report of the Auditor General what we see are substantial and solid recommendations that the government of Alberta has accepted and is implementing.

Now, I’ll tell you, Mr. Speaker, and I think Albertans know that sometimes, once a recommendation is made, it takes some time to implement. We are committed to responding to those reports. We did so again yesterday and will continue to.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, in the Auditor General’s annual report there are at least eight outstanding recommendations on how to improve mental health and mental health program delivery in this province, yet we find this government is using a memo and discharging the mentally ill onto the street. Why is this government failing again to protect the mentally ill by forcing them out onto the street because of your incompetence and your inability to manage the health care system?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, there is nothing in that memo to support the allegations that the hon. member has made. There is no doubt that mental health is an issue that’s important in public health. I’ll tell you that one of the things this government has done is invested in mental health beds in the past three years under the safe communities program, including 18 new beds in Medicine Hat. This government takes that issue seriously, and we’re acting on it.

Inspection of Long-term Care Facilities

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. A question to the Minister of Seniors, please. Why has this government failed to set uniform province-wide inspection systems for long-term care facilities six years after the office of the Auditor General demanded that it be done?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In fact, our department does set the accommodation standards and the fees. We do inspections. Under the great leadership of the previous minister that was posted on the website so that we can all see it and enjoy it for our evening reading.

Mr. MacDonald: Given that last year Alberta Health Services spent over half a billion dollars on facility-based continuing care services, why again has this government failed to approve updated standards for facility-based continuing care? Your version of this is totally different from what the office of the Auditor General suggested to the media and the public yesterday.

Mr. VanderBurg: Again, Mr. Speaker, I’d really like to tell you that there’s a great care facilities review committee. There’s great work done by this ministry. Today I had an opportunity to look at the website. You know, if any of you from Edmonton are interested, there’s the Dianne and Irving Kipnes Centre for Veterans, the Edmonton Chinatown Care Centre, the Edmonton General Continuing Care Centre, Extendicare Eaux Claires, Extendicare Holyrood, Good Samaritan Society. It’s all public. You can read about it.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister: if all of this is true, why are there so many discrepancies in the current inspection system for those facilities?

Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, of course it’s all true. It’s all on the website. We’re transparent. We have a great process and a great group of administrators to make sure that these facilities are reviewed each and every year. If a complaint comes up, we’ll address it.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Mental Health Services, continued (November 23)

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To quote the memo, there are currently eight emergency room patients waiting for beds in this zone. “Any possible patient discharges are deeply appreciated.”

Coincidentally, today the Peter Lougheed reported seven cases in their emergency room waiting for beds. Alberta has 50 per cent of the psychiatric beds per thousand population of the national average. To the Premier: does the Premier see a connection between the lack of psychiatric beds and long emergency room wait times?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I think we have a number of challenges to face in the health care system. We’ve been completely honest about those. The direct correlation that the hon. member is trying to make is not an appropriate correlation, and the answer is: no, sir, I do not.

Dr. Swann: The current mental health plan released recently downplays the need for more psychiatric beds in Alberta. How do you suggest professionals deal with critical psychotic cases needing continuous observation and treatment if not as an in-patient?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I actually believe that the way patients should be dealt with is the way that Alberta Health Services is currently dealing with patients. I expect that they make clinical diagnoses, they ensure what the treatment should be, and they provide the appropriate services. These memos illustrate exactly that competency.

Dr. Swann: How do they do that without the appropriate services and support? How many of our most vulnerable people will die for lack of the essential mental health care? How many more?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, this is a serious issue. We should not be playing politics with this. This is an unfair correlation that causes people to be afraid when they have no reason to be.

Thank you.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Public Health Inquiry/Mental Health Services (November 23)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Empire of No has established its rule over Alberta with broken promises as its flag, and the Premier’s subjects are worried that she’s incapable of saying yes even to her own promises.

Calling a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act is so easy, and the Premier has the sovereign power to do so with the simple wave of a hand. Is the Premier willing to say, “Yes, I will call a public inquiry today under the Public Inquiries Act”?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the legislation before the House clearly sets out my commitment to Albertans to have an independent public inquiry that will get to the bottom of this, judge led, which is going to allow witnesses to be compelled, and that’s critical because that allows witnesses to come forward and actually be protected. This is the way forward that’s going to allow Albertans to really get to the bottom of the issues that they’re concerned about in health care, and I’m looking forward to the debate.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, witnesses can already be compelled under the Public Inquiries Act. Given that the Premier has said publicly that failing to hold a public inquiry for fear of harming the government’s re-election chances is cynical politics, will the Premier now explain to Albertans why her government is playing the same cynical politics that she railed against just a few months ago?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, legislation before the House that can be publicly debated to support a public inquiry is not cynical politics. It’s good legislation, it’s good public policy, and it’s what Albertans want.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, we already have good legislation. There’s no reason to pass more good legislation. Given that two AMA presidents, a CMA president, the HSAA, many health professionals, and average Albertans have overwhelmingly endorsed a true public inquiry, why does the Premier continue to disagree with honest Albertans and avoid calling a real public inquiry? Why have you broken your promise, Madam Premier?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, there’s no disagreement with average Albertans. There’s disagreement with the Leader of the Opposition.

What we need to do in this province is ensure that Albertans can have confidence in public decision-making systems, and one of the reasons we need to ensure that is because much of the commentary that comes from the Leader of the Opposition and other opposition parties undermines the independence of offices and institutions that are independent already in this province. We will strengthen those institutions so that Albertans can have confidence.

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

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, ample Albertans and organizations have come forward to agree with this Leader of the Opposition.

Mental Health Services
Dr. Sherman: Let’s change topics here. These AHS memos from September emphatically state that there’s an acute shortage of mental health professionals and a critical demand for mental health beds in the Edmonton zone. As a result, our hospitals are being forced into the inhumane decision of dumping the mentally ill onto our city streets. Will the Premier tell us why her government’s policy is to kick them to the curb as opposed to caring for them?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, there is correspondence within Alberta Health Services that is doing exactly what Alberta Health Services should do, and that’s manage the health care system. I’ll tell you that we on this side of the House are not going to second-guess the competent, professional management that’s taking place with respect to mental health in the Edmonton zone.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, these memos clearly suggest that discharging the mentally ill to the streets is the government’s solution to the overcrowding problem and lack of staff. Can the Premier please tell us and all front-line staff and Albertans why mentally ill men and women are receiving compromised care or no care at all?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, this Leader of the Opposition is jumping to conclusions that are entirely unfounded. This is communication by managers in Alberta Health Services who are capable and competent and compassionately managing the needs of Alberta mental health patients, and that’s a fantastic thing.

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, if I have to jump to stand up for the truth, I’ll jump every day. The only one jumping here is the Premier, jumping out of the way.

Given that these damning memos show that the overburdened and demoralized staff clearly could not handle the volume walking in the door, can the Premier please tell us how many mentally ill Albertans have been kicked to the curb and what happened to them afterwards?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is jumping to conclusions with respect to events that have not happened. What we know is that Alberta Health Services on a day-to-day basis has to manage volume. That’s what we do in a health care system. They’ve done it competently, they’ve done it compassionately, and they’ve done it within their mandate to do it.

Alberta Hansard, November 23, 2011

[direct link to this article]

AHS memos reveal crisis in mental health

Edmonton – The Official Opposition has obtained two memos from Alberta Health Services revealing a serious crisis in mental health care.

The memos, both dated September 14, 2011, are from Dr. Richard Hibbard, the Edmonton Zone Clinical Department head for Alberta Addiction and Mental Health. The first memo, sent to all psychiatrists in the Edmonton Zone, states “The Edmonton Zone is currently experiencing a critical (emphasis original) demand for inpatient mental health beds in the region. Any possible patient discharges are deeply appreciated.” The second memo notes a significant backlog of patients waiting for inpatient beds in the Edmonton Zone, and states “Alberta Hospital Edmonton is currently experiencing an acute shortage of psychiatrists. In order to avoid any bed closures, we are asking if there are any zone psychiatrists who would be willing to provide locum services…”

“For the department head to openly plead for additional psychiatrists and patient discharges to clear space is a deeply, deeply troubling development,” Swann says. “Our mental health care system is under enormous pressure – there simply aren’t enough health care professionals to meet the demand and as a result Albertans with mental health problems could be forced onto the streets.”

Swann says the government must follow the many outstanding recommendations of Auditors General past and present, who in successive reports have criticized the government for their poor performance in providing mental health services to Albertans.

“As the Auditor General has repeatedly said, Alberta needs provincial standards for mental health services and a properly implemented mental health plan, as well as more mental health professionals – Alberta has 20 percent fewer mental health beds than the number recommended by the Canadian Psychiatric Association,” Swann says. “Albertans with mental illnesses are not getting the level of treatment they need. The government is failing these Albertans, and incurring greater costs to the taxpayer through lost productivity, homelessness and greater usage of emergency rooms by mentally ill Albertans who have no place else to go.”

“These damning memos show that overburdened and demoralized staff clearly could not handle the volume coming in the door,” says Official Opposition Leader Raj Sherman. “I want to know exactly how many mentally ill Albertans were kicked to the curb and what happened to them afterward. This is tragic and unacceptable. Albertans deserve better.”

– 30 –

Attached: AHS memos on mental health

For more information contact:

Brendan Wade, Media Liaison                           Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 904-5430                                           (780) 862-5661

[direct link to this article]

Logging in the Castle Special Management Area (November 22)

Mr. Chase: This year is the United Nations International Year of Forests. This should be a joyful occasion to celebrate our natural heritage and biodiversity.

Unfortunately, Alberta reality isn’t so. This government has sold out against citizens’ will an ecologically significant forest treasure with the upcoming logging in the Castle area.

To the Minister of SRD: given that the vast majority of Albertans are opposed to the devastating effects of clear-cutting, will the minister commit to banning this unsustainable practice from our province?

Mr. Oberle: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is probably not aware or, I would say, definitely not aware that there has in fact been logging in this region for over a hundred years. I think the evidence speaks for itself. It’s done in a responsible and sustainable manner.

Mr. Chase: To the Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation: given that clear-cutting will have a negative impact on local business and provincial tourism, how can the minister justify going against his own mandate, which is to promote Alberta as a tourism destination?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s exactly what we do, promote Alberta as a tourist destination, one of the very finest in the world. So that the hon. member understands, it’s against the law in Alberta to take timber in a park.

Mr. Chase: And that’s my next question. Thank you very much. Given that the vast majority of residents in southwest Alberta want reinforced special places protection for the Castle area, will the minister defend our natural heritage and proclaim the Andy Russell I’tai Sah Kòp wildland park?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, we will treat this advice that we’re getting from Albertans as we always treat advice from Albertans. If it’s what, in fact, they want, it’s what I’m expecting they will get. We want to protect as much of Alberta’s eastern slopes as we possibly can because it’s such a treasure not just to Albertans but to the rest of the world.

Alberta Hansard, November 22, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Postsecondary Education Funding (November 22, 2011)

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. During her leadership campaign the Premier promised new funding for postsecondary students.

The harsh reality is that in the past two years Alberta students have seen millions of dollars cut from grant programs. Students, like all of us, are tired of empty promises.

To the minister of advanced education: given the $3 billion deficit and the already scarce funds in our postsecondary system where and when is the minister going to get this additional funding? Or is he going to break the Premier’s promise?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Weadick: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to stand up and answer that question. You’re right. This Premier has spoken often about her commitment to education, to postsecondary education, and to health, and we’re pleased with that. This is a very opportune time to talk. We are in budget discussions right now. We’re talking about how we can fund the budget into the future. We’re also looking at how we can do student finance differently to make sure that we have finances available for those students that need it most as well. So it’s going to be a combination of moving forward with new funding for growth within the postsecondaries, new funding for new pro-grams, as well as student finance options.

Dr. Taft: Well, Mr. Speaker, a promise is a promise. So what precise timeline and amounts can the minister give us, other than the sort of vague reassurances we just got, as to the new bursaries that the Premier promised?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Weadick: Thank you. The budget will come out early in the new year, and all of those items will be included in the budget, the things that have been promised and discussed as well as some really exciting new things that I think everyone in the House here will be pleased to see. Postsecondary students are being consulted as we speak. We’re working with our postsecondaries and looking for lots of great opportunities to continue to grow chances for both rural and urban students to get the best possible education they can.

Dr. Taft: Well, since Alberta literally is the richest place on earth, will the minister place accessibility first and restore the millions of dollars that were cut from student grants in the last budget?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Weadick: Thank you. I think you’re probably referring to the access to the future, or at least as part of that, because that funding did flow through in support of grants and bursaries.

Last year we also made some changes. We removed some small grants but also increased significantly the amount of loans that were available to students because they’d asked us to increase those numbers in both how much they could borrow for living costs and all those things. We’ve tried to respond to what the students have asked for. The new program where students can volunteer for bursaries that will help them to gain both the experience in the not-for-profit sector and get bursaries and grants that they can use for their education is a wonderful new program that’s only new this year. So I think we’re doing a lot of good things for the students and for their finances.

Alberta Hansard, November 22, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Secular Public Education in Greater St. Albert (November 22)

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, I was present at the Alberta School Boards meeting this morning and had the opportunity to listen to the Minister of Education’s comments.

In his address the minister used the term “equity” and discussed applying that principle throughout the education system. When the minister spoke and used the term “equity,” I immediately thought about the situation in Morinville, a situation where parents are wanting a secular school for their children but still do not have that opportunity.

To the Minister of Education: why do parents in Morinville have to send their children to a school that is not a fully secularized public school?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that good question. When I talk about equity, what I’m saying is that every child anywhere in Alberta, no matter where they live, deserves the same high quality of education. That doesn’t always mean equality; it means equity because in some areas certain added resources need to be put in place to bring that level of education to the same level.

With reference to Morinville, Mr. Speaker, indeed there are concerns relevant to the provision of Catholic and secular education. The school board, whose trustees are duly elected by residents of that area, will have an opportunity to address that issue and resolve that issue. Hopefully, my office will not have to be involved in addressing a local issue.

Mr. Hehr: Well, given that the minister is in charge of this file and that that situation has been dragging on for some time and given that Morinville parents do not have a secular school of their own and that they are forced by government inaction to send their children to a holy parade of religious teaching, does the minister consider this equitable?

Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of faith in and a great deal of respect for locally elected authorities. In that area there are duly elected trustees, and I know that they have the best interests of all children in the area in mind. I know that they have the ability to sit around a table – and I will be meeting with them, by the way, within the next couple of days. They will sit down around their common table and see if they can locally arrive at a solution so that one is not superimposed by my office. Locally arrived at solutions are always better than the ones put in place by a minister.

Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, this situation has dragged on for a number of years now. When will the minister take his skates off, do the right thing, and provide a solution to this problem where Morinville children cannot go to schools that provide a secularized schooling opportunity for their parents and for their children? Enough is enough. Let’s make a decision.

Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, this member obviously is not well informed on the nature of the issue and the seriousness of the issue. These parents indeed are looking to a resolution, but as I said earlier, there are reasons to believe that a resolution can be found at the local level.

This is not an issue that should be politicized. There is no skating going on. We have parents who have certain rights and want to exercise them. We have trustees that have the ability and the tools to resolve that issue. We’ll let them resolve it immediately. If not, my office ultimately will have to make a decision. But that’s not the ultimate way of bringing peace into that part of the world.

Alberta Hansard, November 22, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Residential Construction Standards (November 22)

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. The 2008 building envelope survey done by the government with the city of Calgary said that Alberta’s “system of construction and inspection is not performing adequately to protect the home or condominium owner.”

In real terms that means that Albertans can be paying tens of thousands of dollars to fix badly built new homes and condo-miniums. To the Minister of Municipal Affairs: why is it that in three and a half years the government hasn’t adopted a single change relative to new residential construction?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to thank the member for asking me my first opposition question.

Mr. Speaker, we’re aware of some of the challenges around the province with condominium owners and homeowners. We’re reviewing the home building standards right now, and we’re working on making sure that the right punitive measures are in place and the proper timelines to make sure that those who are not building appropriately are punished as opposed to those who are doing a great job around this province.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much. Well, this is a recurring theme.

Back to the same minister. Given that the government suggested in June of this year that adoption of new homeowner protection measures was imminent, like, right away, like, soon, why are condo owners and homeowners still waiting for even one of those measures to be put into place?

Mr. Griffiths: I’m sorry, Mr. Speaker. I can’t comment on what was promised by the department earlier. I know that our depart-ment is working on it right now, and they are coming forward. We’re hoping for some adoptions to the code this spring.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you. As minister you’re responsible for now and before.

Last question. Why hasn’t this government been able to find the courage to increase the woefully inadequate Safety Codes Act fines? I mean, they’re a joke. They’re a cost of doing business. This department keeps reviewing and reviewing, but nothing is happening. When are we going to see it happen?

Mr. Griffiths: Mr. Speaker, my comment was not that I’m not responsible, but I can’t comment on what exactly happened in the process at the time because I wasn’t the minister.

This spring I will be bringing forward legislation that takes the six-month period when violations can be identified and fines can be levied to a three-year period because it usually takes that long for those sorts of structural challenges to be identified. We’re raising the fines on the first offence from $15,000 to $100,000 and from $30,000 to $500,000, and it will punish those who are not building to code.

Alberta Hansard, November 22, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Federal Police Officers Recruitment Fund (November 22)

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. Three years ago the Solicitor General received over $42 million from the federal government to recruit much-needed police officers across the province under the police officers recruitment fund.

My first question is to the Solicitor General. Can the minister please provide this House with an update on where and how much of the $42 million has been used in the last three years under the police officers recruitment fund?

Thank you.

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Denis: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As this member is probably well aware, since 2008 we have provided 108 new police officers here in Edmonton, 123 in Calgary. We will continue to support law enforcement in this province as part of our safe communities initiative, that the Premier started herself when she was Minister of Justice.

Mr. MacDonald: Again to the Solicitor General – and I’m talking specifically about the $42 million that was provided by the federal government to hire new police officers across the province – why has $30 million of the $42 million of this money not been used when Alberta continues to have the second-lowest ratio of police officers to citizens in the entire country? You, sir, are not doing your job.

Mr. Denis: Mr. Speaker, I take umbrage with that member’s comments. This is conduct unbecoming a member here.
This member knows our safe communities initiative has consis-tently reduced the crime rate in Alberta, and that is something that we can be proud of.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. I would request, first, that this minister read his own annual report, and he would see where this money has been left on the table. Given that the city of Edmonton, unfortunately, has a very high homicide rate, why is this federal money being left on the table instead of being used to support our hard-working police officers across this province?

Thank you.

Mr. Denis: Mr. Speaker, I’ve read this report, and I would suggest that this member opposite get a dictionary so that he can read it himself as well. The crime rate is going down. Our safe communities initiative is supporting this entire province’s police officers. This is something that we can be proud of, and we can stop this partisan rhetoric.

Alberta Hansard, November 22, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Public Health Inquiry/Fixed Election Dates/Fiscal Accountability (November 22)

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is also the first anniversary of me being ejected from the government caucus for standing up for Albertans.
During the leadership campaign the Premier unconditionally promised a public inquiry.

She said, quote: my call for an inquiry is about finding out the truth and putting a stop to practices that go against my personal and political values. Unquote. Now she has broken her promise and is towing the party line. Why is the Premier putting her political fortunes ahead of the truth?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, it was a wonderful day to be able to have the legislation tabled with respect to the Health Quality Council. It’s going to strengthen their ability to do exactly what I would like them to do. You know, what’s great about this is that they’re going to do it independently, they’re going to do it in public, they’re going to be able to compel witnesses, protect witnesses, and it can be judge led. That’s transparent, and that’s the commitment. I’m very proud of that.

Dr. Sherman: Given that exactly a year ago today my expulsion happened for standing up for public health care, positions the Premier supported in her own leadership race – the Premier was quoted as saying that failing to hold a public inquiry for fear of harming the government’s re-election chances is cynical politics; that’s her quote – why was the Premier silent on health care when Albertans needed her the most, only to speak up when she needed their votes the most, only to reinvent a different public inquiry and delay the truth?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, Albertans care about public health care. I care about public health care. This government is committed to public health care. This caucus is committed to public health care and will continue to be committed to public health care.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that several mem-bers of the government caucus who are against a public inquiry and, in fact, caused the health care crisis that we faced last year and still face today may not be seeking re-election, is delaying a public inquiry the Premier’s way of avoiding the tough questions that Albertans want answered before an election?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I’m not quite sure I understood the question, or maybe it’s that I don’t understand the hon. member’s reality of politics. But I’ll tell you that we are committed to moving ahead on this, to answering those questions, to ensuring that the Health Quality Council will have the ability to do exactly what we want them to do in the best interests of Albertans.

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

Fixed Election Dates

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me ask another question and offer another reality. The Premier’s performance on keeping her promises is the same as the government’s record on health care: only about 30 per cent, a failing grade. Half measures, flip-flops, and backtracking have defined this government. The Premier promised democratic reform with fixed election dates. Now she proposes fixed election seasons. Why is the Premier breaking yet another promise to Albertans?

Ms Redford: It is wonderful to come to the House again today for question period and to be able to see what the work of this House was yesterday: Bill 21, Election Amendment Act, 2011; Bill 23, Land Assembly Project Area Amendment Act, 2011; Bill 25, Child and Youth Advocate Act; Bill 26, Traffic Safety Amendment Act, 2011. This is a government that keeps its word, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The question was about fixed election seasons.
Given her work with great world leaders, the Premier must have learned the importance of true democracy. How can the Premier call her leadership open and transparent when it only seems to be about power and control, the very democracy those world leaders fought against?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, my recollection is that within two hours of me being elected leader of this party, I heard comments from many people in the hon. opposition saying: we need to make sure we have a fall session. We have a fall session. We have legislation that represents work done by a caucus that is committed to serving Albertans. I can’t think of anything more transparent than being in the House debating legislation that matters to Albertans, having question period, and knowing that any issue the opposition would like to raise, they can raise. That’s transparent and accountable.

The Speaker: The hon. leader. Hon. leader, I’ve called you.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I understand that it’s question period. It would be nice if it was also answer period.

Given that this Premier seemed to be more concerned about polling than democracy and fairness, why does the Premier insist, with these fixed election seasons, on having a 50-yard head start on what is a 100-yard dash when it comes to the next election?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, Albertans want to know there’s going to be an election every four years. We think this legislation, that’s before the House and can be fully debated in a fully transparent manner, represents what Albertans want to see. They want certainty. They want security. I’d suggest that if the opposition is concerned about ensuring that they have a head start, they can read the legislation to get ready for a provincial election. That’s democracy.

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

Fiscal Accountability

Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, we all want certainty and security, yet with this government we get uncertainty and insecurity. Yesterday the government painted a gloomy picture – a very gloomy picture – of a $3.1 billion deficit, setting up yet another Conservative public relations election strategy saying no to the people. How can the Premier ask her subjects to trust the government to balance the books by 2013 when their own forecasts jump so wildly based on the math skills of whomever is sitting in the Finance minister’s chair?

Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I find the hon. Leader of the Opposition’s comments quite interesting. Last time I checked, this was a democracy. I don’t have subjects; I have people that can choose who to vote for, and they’re going to be able to do that in the next election.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The subject that the government needs to worry about is math.

Given that the government has a history of massaging the numbers, can the minister tell us how much better the deficit will be just before the next election?

Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, I’ve got news for the hon. member. What we presented yesterday was not a lot different than what was presented and debated in this House six months ago. Our projec-tions are that our budget deficit is . . . [interjections] If they would have allowed us to yesterday, we would’ve tabled these documents. They could’ve read them for themselves. I’ll repeat: our projected deficit is what we said in the House on the budget.

The Speaker: The hon. leader.

Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that when you plug in the current oil price and the Canadian dollar figures, which are near a hundred bucks a barrel, you arrive at an actual deficit that’s about a half billion dollars less than the minister claims, did the Minister of Finance intend to mislead Albertans by making the deficit look worse, or can he simply not add?

Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, I think what this particular member has to realize is that what we’re projecting is what the price of oil will be for the entire year, not what it is today. If the member just takes a look back in history, a very short two or three months ago the price of oil was about $80 a barrel. So what we’re projecting is what the average price of oil will be. Quite frankly, if it’s higher at the third quarter, we’ll report that it’s in a better position than at second quarter.

Alberta Hansard, November 22, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Auditor General report reveals PC government is failing Albertans again

Edmonton – Official Opposition Finance Critic Hugh MacDonald says today’s report from the Auditor General shows that the government continues to fail Albertans in a number of ways, from its inability to budget to its failure to protect seniors and the food supply or to fight climate change. There are 42 recommendations that have been outstanding for three years or more and nearly 250 recommendations still outstanding in total.

According to the Auditor General, $60 million in offsets allocated to emitters has not been properly accounted for, leading to the possibility that Alberta’s carbon emission reduction targets have not been achieved.

“The best way to protect our energy industry is to show the world that we’re taking real action on reducing emissions,” MacDonald says. “But the government has no idea if it’s getting any value for the money. That’s very troubling.”

MacDonald is particularly concerned about the state of Alberta Treasury Branches, which according to the Auditor General is lacking in key systems and key controls to protect Albertans’ assets.

“Thousands of Albertans have significant investments in ATB,” MacDonald says. “The government needs to do a much better job of securing those assets.”

Speaking of assets, MacDonald notes that the government still isn’t estimating bitumen and gas royalties correctly.

“According to the Auditor General, there’s a ‘risk of financial misstatement’ if the Department of Energy doesn’t improve its method of measuring royalties,” MacDonald says. “That sounds fairly innocuous, but we’re talking about significant dollars, money that belongs to Albertans, money that pays for schools and hospitals, teachers and health care professionals, long-term care for seniors, roads and bridges. You can’t budget if you don’t have a full and accurate understanding of your revenues.”

“If this were a midterm report card, it wouldn’t be an F, but it would be just a grade above it,’” MacDonald concludes. “This report shows that the government still isn’t properly monitoring basic service standards at seniors care facilities, despite the fact that seniors have died in care. That recommendation is six years old now! They’re still not performing adequate food inspections, despite the serious health implications. And they still can’t budget to save their lives, nor are they correctly reporting royalty revenues. It’s sloppy, sloppy work – they’re failing the taxpayer.”


– 30 –

For more information contact:

Brendan Wade, Media Liaison                           Brian Leadbetter, Director of Communications
(780) 904-5430                                           (780) 862-5661

[direct link to this article]

Alleged Intimidation of Physicians (November 21)

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In the joint submission to the Health Quality Council of Alberta made by the Alberta Medical Association and the Canadian Medical Association, widespread physician intimidation is described as well as an environment of “chronic instability” in Alberta’s health care system.

Since last March the AMA, the Alberta Medical Association, has had no master agreement with this province. To the minister of health. During negotiations the ministry threatened to terminate programs such as the physician and family support program and cast doubt on the future of other programs and staffing of physician offices. Are these the tactics of a government intent on eliminating intimidation of physicians?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows full and well, discussions between the government, Alberta Health Services, and the Alberta Medical Association on a new agreement have been ongoing for some time. The discussions, I can report, are positive. They’re constructive. The new president of the Alberta Medical Association, Dr. Linda Slocombe, and I have spoken several times. We are continuing to work toward a new agreement with Alberta’s doctors. I see nothing but positive and constructive dialogue in the months to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Dr. Swann: Well, I’m glad the minister is so optimistic, Mr. Speaker.

Given that such deplorable tactics persist, what confidence can Albertans have that current negotiations will result in an agreement fostering meaningful physician engagement in our health care system?

Mr. Horne: Mr. Speaker, the very act of the negotiations and the issues that are discussed are evidence of this government’s commitment to a constructive, positive relationship with physicians. My barometer is the feedback I receive from Dr. Linda Slocombe, the AMA president, on behalf of her members. As I will continue to report to this House, we’re on a very positive path toward addressing a number of the issues raised by the hon. member.

Dr. Swann: A lot of ground to catch up, Mr. Speaker, on the loss of confidence in this province among physicians. When will the province do what most provinces have done and implement continuance provisions that allow the building of trust and for the AMA to transition from one agreement to the next?

Continuance provisions.

Mr. Horne: Well, Mr. Speaker, obviously, it would be inappropriate for me to stand here and discuss specifics of discussions that may be under way between government, Alberta Health Services, and the Alberta Medical Association. What I will say is that this government is committed to continuing to provide an environment of stability and predictability for physicians that practise in this province. The same is true for all other health professionals. The discussions that are under way now reflect that spirit on both sides, and I have every reason to believe that will continue.

Alberta Hansard, November 21, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Electricity Regulation (November 21)

Mr. Hehr: Over 10 years ago this government decided to deregulate electricity. The promise of better service and lower costs to consumers never happened.

This change has led to significantly higher energy prices and unstable, unpredictable markets. My question is for the Minister of Energy. How is it that every time you promise lower prices, our electricity bills continue to grow?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, as usual the hon. member is about half right and half wrong. It is true that prices for electricity have increased since January – I’m happy to explain the reasons why – but if you compare Alberta to other nonhydro-dependent electrical systems, we are in the middle of the pack and very competitive.

Mr. Hehr: Well, given that five electricity producers control 70 per cent of the market and that the Market Surveillance Administrator identified over 46 violations of market manipulation in the past year, why aren’t you defending Alberta consumers?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’m happy to report that just recently the Market Surveillance Administrator did identify an irregularity in one generator’s practice, investigated, found there was an irregularity, and has negotiated with the company and imposed both a fine and a payback to the pool to make up for that transgression. So the system is working.

Mr. Hehr: Do you really think that a $125,000 fine for causing 5 and a half million dollars in damage is an appropriate fine? Is that what I’m hearing from the minister?

Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a wonderful imagination in coming up with imaginative figures in terms of total damage, but I can assure you that if there is a problem with the fine and the compensation, the decision made by the Market Surveillance Administrator goes to the Alberta Utilities Commission, which has the final word on the appropriateness of the penalty.

Alberta Hansard, November 21, 2011

[direct link to this article]

Environmental Monitoring of Oil Sands (November 21)

Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Albertans want an oil sands industry they can be proud of, and industry wants to be innovative and respected internationally for its environmental record, but this government’s continual foot-dragging is making both things impossible.

We’ve had no new standards for oil sands water monitoring, no new CCS, no health impact studies. All promised; not delivered. To the Minister of Environment and Water. Industry will step up to the challenge if it’s provided, so why does this government insist on dragging its feet on implementing environmental standards?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, I wouldn’t say that we’re dragging our feet at all. I would say that what we’re doing is working with the federal government to come up with a world-class monitoring system here in Alberta that Albertans can rely on. We looked at the portal that we announced a week or so ago. The transparency of the information is there. I would say that in the last month that I’ve spent here as minister, we’re not dragging our feet.

Ms Blakeman: Well, Mr. Speaker, back to the same minister. Given that this government’s inaction has led the federal government to step into our oil sands to a degree never seen before, what tangible evidence can the minister offer us that would show that they’re encouraging environmental innovation in the oil sands on a scale that can’t be denied internationally?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, I would say that we share the jurisdiction with regard to the environment with the federal government. Rather than having two separate monitoring systems for air, land, water, and biodiversity, we’re doing what makes sense, and we’re having one first-class system in Alberta. Albertans will see the transparency with that, and that is what we’re doing with the federal government because we share that jurisdiction.

Ms Blakeman: I can’t wait for transparency from a provincial and a federal government. Good Lord.

Back to the same minister: given that climate change is real and a threat to our biggest industry, what will the minister do to ensure Alberta is leading the way in environmental innovation rather than toddling along 10 steps behind?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. McQueen: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I’d like to say that I’m very proud that Alberta is leading the way and has been leading the way. We’re the first one with regard to putting a price on carbon. We’re the first one with regard to putting in a huge commitment with regard to carbon capture and storage, a $2 billion investment that around the world is seen as a huge investment, taking real steps, real concrete steps to real projects on the ground. These are just a couple of the things that we’re doing that are taking real leadership in Alberta, and quite frankly I’m proud of that.

Alberta Hansard, November 21, 2011

[direct link to this article]