Alberta Hansard — 3 May 1976, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 18, Session 2)

19760503

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1011 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Monday, May 3, 1976 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present the following petitions for private bills:

An act respecting a certain agreement between the City of Edmonton and Northern Alberta Natural Gas Development Company Limited, and dated the 16th day of November 1915;

An act to amend The Mennonite Mutual Relief Insurance Company Act;

An act to incorporate the Certified General Accountants Association in Alberta; and

An act, being The Real Estate Association Act. The first meeting of the committee on private bills will take place in the Legislative chamber on Wednesday, May 12, 1976 at 8:30 a.m., followed by a further meeting on Wednesday, May 19, 1976 at 8:30 a.m., also in the Legislative chamber. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 13 The Temporary Rent Regulation Measures Amendment Act, 1976 MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill No. 13, The Temporary Rent Regulation Meas ures Amendment Act, 1976.

The amendments are in response to the experience that the board has had in working with the existing legislation. [Leave granted; Bill 13 introduced and read a first time] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, with regard to Intro duction of Visitors, I think it is important that the House recognize the visit today of a very distin guished statesman from Europe. The Prime Minister of Belgium, Mr. Tindemanns, is in the province of Alberta today.

He wanted to come to the Legislative Assembly, but he also wanted to take a look at the oil sands, so we suggested it would be desirable if he made that visit. We've organized it, and the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources is accompanying him. I should point out the importance of the visit. First of all, it is the first official visit on record to the province of Alberta by a head of state from Europe. Secondly, it's a direct response to our mission to Europe. Thirdly, it's a result of the view in Europe — I think the growing view — of the importance of the west in Confederation, and Alberta in particular.

Fourthly, it involves the Prime Minister of Belgium, who has played a very major role in the European Economic Community, and has worked very closely with the Prime Minister of Canada in developing the contractual link between Canada and the European Economic Community. It's important that he literally insisted his visit include a visit to the province of Alberta. We're delighted that he's in this province. The Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs and I had useful talks with him last evening and this morning.

I would hope that Hansard would record the response of the Members of the Legislative Assembly to the visit of the Prime Minister of Belgium to the province of Alberta. [applause] MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I am indeed delighted today to introduce Grade 4 and 5 students from the St. Bede School in the constituency of Edmonton Gold Bar. These students are here with three of their teachers, Mrs. Rogers, Mrs. Grunier, and Mrs. Skugins. I should say that I had an opportunity to speak to this class recently on such a mundane matter as government, and I must tell you that I did learn something.

I learned how fleeting the careers of politicians are. When I asked them who was the MLA of the constituency before me, none of them knew. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the students and teachers to stand and be welcomed by this House. AN HON. MEMBER: Did they know who you were? MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure for me to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly another visitor from down under. He is Mr. David Pluckrose, a senior official of the government of the State of Queensland in Australia.

He is the Commis sioner of Consumer Affairs in the Ministry of Indus trial Development, Labor Relations and Consumer Affairs. He is on a fact-finding mission to several places in Canada, and to Paris, London, Hong Kong, and Washington, before he returns home. I'd ask Mr. Pluckrose to rise and be welcomed by members of the Assembly. MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, some 45 students from the Routhier School in Falher, the honey capital of Alberta.

They are here today for a tour of the Legislature Building, and to observe the legislative session in action. They are accompanied by their teacher, Mr. Victor Tardif, and Mrs. Tardif. They are seated in the public gallery. I would ask that they rise and receive the welcome of the Assembly. head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the finan cial statements of the Alberta Resources Railway Corporation for the year ending December 31, 1975. MISS HUNLEY: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table copies of the agreement with VS Services Limited.

1012 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Hospital Operations MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care. The question is: what type of monitoring is the minister's department doing of the decisions made by local hospital boards regarding the closure of hospital beds? MR. MINIELY: Mr.

Speaker, as the hon. leader knows, because I have indicated in the House two or three times, I have had meetings with many of the boards over a period of a few months with respect to the expenditure restraint application by the govern ment, not just in hospitals but generally in all public expenditure areas. That has served to advise me, as I've indicated to members of the Legislature, of the general situation of both co-operation and the poten tial impact reading that I've had. Generally speaking, no one needing [emergency] care will suffer as a result of the indications that boards have given to me.

As for maintaining a specific record centrally, Mr. Speaker, my view would be that it's our job to determine generally, in communication with boards, what the situation would be, that the decisions are those of the boards, and that a specific monitoring or delineation of each hospital board decision in Alberta would not be consistent with our view that those are the decisions of the hospital boards within global budgetary parameters provided to each individual hospital. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question.

Perhaps I should rephrase the question, because no one was asking for a monitoring of each individual decision that hospital boards make. Is the minister or his department doing monitoring so the minister and his department know the number of hospital beds that have been closed across the province, or are anticipated to be closed? MR. MINIELY: Well, Mr. Speaker, certainly hospital boards generally have been keeping in touch with us on their plans for the particular budgets granted to them. We've gone through a budgetary appeal procedure.

I must assume that all hospitals that were concerned about their budget did appeal, and we've gone through that procedure. We will continue, as at any other time, to be interested and ask hospital boards that are in communication with us on many areas to advise us what they are doing. Having said that they should advise us what they are doing, I think we all know, Mr.

Speaker, and the Alberta Hospital Association has indicated to me that it is their view, that the hospital boards should be working with the Department of Hospitals and Medi cal Care and the government in a consultative and advisory way, as opposed to a . . . MR. SPEAKER: I hesitate to interrupt the hon. minis ter, but it appeared to the Chair that the question was with regard to possible information the minister might have with regard to the closing of hospital beds. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the minister.

Has the minister or his department been involved in monitoring the changing staff patterns in Alberta hospitals, specifically with regard to the reduced number of registered nurses and certified nursing aides who are now on staff in the hospitals across the province? MR. MINIELY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I must emphasize again that the choice of words by the hon. leader leaves the implication that the Department of Hospi tals and Medical Care or the province of Alberta should in effect be monitoring in a formal way, if that's what the hon. leader is suggesting, the indi vidual decisions made by hospital boards.

I do not accept that view. I accept the view that our informal relationship between boards and my department is that we like to be kept advised in general terms, but that the individ ual decisions are those of the hospital boards operat ing under legislation which has been passed by this Legislature and approved generally and historically by a system that's been operating in Alberta. Beyond that, subject to the laws of the province on staff matters, this is basically as far as we should be going. Formal monitoring is inconsistent with the relation ship which exists between . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

I hesitate to interrupt the hon. minister again, but he appears to be launching on a debate concerning the pros and cons of monitoring. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the minister. As a result of the monitor ing, or whatever other term the minister wants to use, when we deal with his estimates tonight will the minister be in a position to tell us the number of hospital beds that have been closed or that he expects to be closed in Alberta, the reduction in the number of registered nurses, and the changing staff patterns as far as certified nursing aides are concerned? MR.

MINIELY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I am certainly in a position to give, as I have publicly, a general impres sion of the situation in Alberta and to indicate Alberta's position, which is very favorable in relation ship to any other province in Canada. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one further supplementary question to the minister.

Would the minister be prepared to give an undertaking to the Assembly that, between now and this evening when his estimates come to the House, he'd be in a position to tell the members of the Assembly the number of hospital beds he expects to be closed this year in the two largest metropolitan centres in Alberta? MR. MINIELY: Not in specific terms, Mr. Speaker, because some hospital boards have not made their final decisions and may in fact not be making them for another month to two months, as they work through the current fiscal year that the budget is intended to operate.

I can only give general impres sions that hospital boards have indicated to me, and which I have already indicated publicly.

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1013 ASH/Deerhome MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct the second question to either the minister responsible for relations with the Civil Service Association, the Provincial Treasurer, or the minister responsible for the Alberta School Hospital at Deerhome. My question is basically this. Did the notices of the abolition of positions go out to the civil servants in time so that [such] notifications were in their hands 60 days before the actual dissolving of the positions? MISS HUNLEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I believe that's correct.

The notices did not go out as of March 1, if that's what the hon. Leader of the Opposition is asking. Rather, the notices went out subsequent to that. We are honoring the collective agreement, which I think is not only required of us by the collective agreement, but is also what we would wish to do as conscientious and responsive employers. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Is the minister in a position to outline to the Assembly what will be involved financially in the honoring of this agreement — the cost? MISS HUNLEY: I don't know that I have it exactly, Mr. Speaker.

The ballpark figure is about $170,000, I believe. Wage and Price Controls MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question with regard to the wage and price control agreement is to the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Af fairs. Has the minister established criteria at this time to judge the success or failure of the controls in Alberta? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I think it is probably premature to try to reach any definitive conclusion as to the success or otherwise at this relatively early date. Certainly, as we move into the succeeding months of 1976, the decision will be taken by the government.

I suppose such indicators as the consumer price index, unemployment rates, and the like would be some of quite a number of the indices that would be taken into account. But to date, apart from the fact that a number of government departments and minis ters are directing their attention to that, there's been no decision taken. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary for clarification. Is the minister saying that in his department there is no formal mechanism with which to judge the success of the agreement with Ottawa? MR. HYNDMAN: There is a co-ordinated mechanism we have arranged, Mr.

Speaker, which involves a number of departments. This started about a month ago. The review will bring about inputs from a number of departments and sources, both in govern ment and outside, from the point of view of trying to reach a conclusion perhaps this fall or early next spring whether or not, and to what extent, the anti- inflation program is working and, of course, the extent to which the anti-inflation legislation of Alber ta will expire on March 31, 1977, as the bill now states. MR. CLARK: A supplementary question.

Can the minister indicate to the Assembly what outside government agencies are involved in this assessment the government is commencing? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I wasn't referring to an outside government agency; I simply meant the information, economic and financial, that is available from various sources in the media across Canada from the various statistical bodies such as Statistics Canada — that we are assessing this, as indeed I'm sure the federal government is and all the private and public sectors in Canada. I wasn't referring to any particular private consultant. There are none of that kind. MR.

CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one further question to the minister. Has the government firmed up any relationship with the Alberta Federation of Labour and the Alberta chambers of commerce with regard to ongoing input from those organizations so the government has the benefit of their advice leading to a decision that will have to be made either this fall or next winter? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, we have been receiv ing ongoing advice from those entities and others. I have no doubt that such advice will continue during the months ahead. MR. CLARK: Is any formal mechanism set up, other than meetings from time to time? MR.

HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, since 1971 we have had meetings with individual ministers, the cabinet, and the government with both those groups and quite a large number of others. Those certainly will continue. I'm sure the issue which the hon. leader talks about will come into greater prominence in the advice we'll get over the course of the next months. But we've been receiving it constantly since last October. MR. CLARK: The answer is no. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary for clarification to the minister.

The government's posi tion at the present time is flexible, so after March 31, 1977 the continuation of wage and price controls is quite possible in the province of Alberta. Is that right? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman has made a number of statements. I wouldn't want to associate myself or the government with any of them. I think we have to simply look at The Temporary Anti-Inflation Measures Act of Alberta, which under its present terms expires March 31, 1977 unless otherwise extended by the Legislature. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion.

The hon. minister indicated a mechanism which involved other departments. I wonder if, for clarification, the minister could advise the Assembly what the structure of that mechanism is.

1014 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 Is it a formally established interdepartmental task force? Just how is this monitoring set up? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, essentially it works within the existing arrangement of cabinet commit tees, which in their decision-making functions call upon and receive the best advice of people in various departments. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion for clarification. At this time is there no specific secretariat or co-ordinating organization apart from ad hoc cabinet committees? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr.

Speaker, as I think I mentioned two weeks ago, there is an informal monitoring office to monitor the anti-inflation program in the province, to secure information as necessary, and to establish an informal relationship with the Anti-Inflation Board in Ottawa. This has been ongoing. I think it simply involves one or two people. Syncrude Hiring Practices MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower. It concerns his responsibilities in manpower.

In light of the recent letter from Syncrude, to the co-ordinator of Native Outreach requesting applica tions for office or white-collar jobs as opposed to other jobs, can the government advise the House whether Syncrude is fully living up to its commitment to provide maximum native job opportunities? DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, without hesitation I would say the original intent of the provision of opportunity is being met. A whole series of programs, services, and people are in line to attempt to meet that commitment. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion to the hon. minister.

Will applications from Native Outreach be considered on a completely equal basis with job-site or long-term job applications from other sources? DR. HOHOL: Yes, they will. There are some com ments I should like to make on this matter and will be able to make on the second reading of the manpower development act. But the answer is, unequivocally, yes. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion to the hon. minister. Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly of the extent of Syncrude's commitment to hiring native people? I mean in terms of percentage of their total labor component. DR.

HOHOL: We never worked on a percentage basis, Mr. Speaker. We find that a constricting and deceiv ing kind of notion. What we have worked on is the development with Syncrude, Canadian Bechtel, and certain federal and provincial government agencies — for example, the Alberta Vocational Centres and the manpower division of our department — of opportuni ties for all people, including natives. Some success ful innovative approaches have been put on line, and are being worked out by all the agencies and groups I've mentioned. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Can the minister advise the House whether it is true that Indian Affairs and Northern Development provides a subsidy which encourages Syncrude, or other corporations for that matter, to hire Indian as opposed to Metis applicants? DR. HOHOL: I don't know this specific information, Mr. Speaker. I do know that Syncrude, in its agreement of a few days with Ottawa, addressed the matter of employment of native people. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the last supplementary on this topic. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, may I direct that question to the hon. Minister Without Portfolio in charge of native affairs.

Again, to refresh his memory, it concerns whether there is a subsidy from Indian Affairs and Northern Development which in effect provides an incentive for large corporations, Syncrude in this case, but others for that matter, to hire Indian as opposed to Metis applicants. MR. BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, the answer to that ques tion is no. Discussions about native employment have been taking place between various representa tives of the federal Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the province of Alberta as well as Syncrude. Those discussions will carry on through the management committee.

It is our intent to see that there are job opportunities for all citizens of Alberta, both Metis and treaty Indian. Canadian Citizenship Act MR. KIDD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. Could the minister comment on the progress through the House of Commons of the amendment to the Canadian Citizenship Act? MR. SPEAKER: With great respect to the hon. member, it would appear that that information might be sought directly from someone in the House of Commons. MR.

KING: Could the minister advise whether he has received from his federal counterparts any indication of their willingness to incorporate at committee stage amendments which would facilitate provincial control of the transfer of land in the province to non residents, non-Canadians? MR. HYNDMAN: No, Mr. Speaker, we have not yet received a response. Power Generating Plant MR. ZANDER: Mr. Speaker, my question is ad dressed to the hon. Minister of Utilities and Tele phones.

I wonder if the minister could inform if a decision has yet been reached by the Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board on the Dow Chemical proposal to build an electric generation plant east of

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1015 the city of Edmonton that will utilize 17.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day. DR. WARRACK: I would understand from the direc tion of the question that this is to do with the power plant. The answer is, Mr. Speaker, that the ERCB has reserved its decision on that matter and will be studying and making recommendations in due course. Foothills Hospital — Kidney Transplant MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care.

Is the minister in a position to indicate whether a kidney transplant specialist has been hired by the Foothills Hospital to reinstitute the transplant team at that hospital? MR. MINIELY: Mr. Speaker, I am not able to give a report further to what I've indicated earlier in the Legislature in response to that question. But I will check into the updated report on the matter and report to the Legislature. MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the minister indicate whether his department has a definite policy in regard to the degree of autonomy with which provincial hospitals should be run? MR.

MINIELY: Mr. Speaker, I think I was indicating to the hon. leader earlier, and have consistently indi cated, that we clearly believe the choice of individual programs and priority of programs in a hospital is with the hospital board. We do not believe that all wisdom in health matters is centralized with the provincial government. We have very many capable people in hospital administration. Frank Slide MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address my question to the hon. Minister of the Environment.

In light of the reply last Friday from the Minister of Government Services also responsible for Culture to my inquiry about the Frank Slide, I'd like to ask the minister whether he'd be able to indicate to the Assembly what progress is being made towards having the Frank Slide designated or declared a restricted development area. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, at the request of the hon. Minister of Government Services also responsi ble for Culture, the Department of the Environment did make preliminary inquiries as to the possibility of outright purchase of the Frank Slide area.

The owners didn't show much interest in that kind of transaction, so we have prepared a draft order for a restricted development area. If we're unable to reach agreement on how to proceed by declaring it a heritage site, it may be possible that that other kind of solution would be used. MR. BRADLEY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of the Environment. Has the CPR or the Winnipeg Fuel and Supply Company a licence or permit under The Land Surface Conservation and Reclamation Act to operate a pit or quarry in the Frank Slide area? MR. RUSSELL: Mr.

Speaker, I don't have that information with me, but I'll be glad to get it and report to the member. MR. BRADLEY: A further supplementary to the hon. minister. In light of the pending designation of the Frank Slide area as a classified historic site, would the minister consider issuing a stop order to the CPR or Winnipeg Fuel and Supply Company to desist operations if they do not have the necessary permits, licences, or approvals? MR. RUSSELL: That question contains a number of hypotheses, Mr.

Speaker, but I think the answer would be that, to protect the valuable aspects of the Frank Slide area, we would want to proceed legally with the companies. Syncrude Agreement MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the Premier, and ask if it's the govern ment's intention to table the Syncrude agreement now that it has been signed. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, my understanding from the Minister of Energy is that it is his intention to do so. I gather the extent of the paperwork is significant. Perhaps the documents will be tabled in the House within a day or so. MR.

CLARK: A supplementary question to the Pre mier. Perhaps the question should be more appropri ately asked of the Minister of Energy. My question basically is: prior to the signing, were there any changes of substance in the agreement? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, because of the nature and import of the question I believe I should take it as notice and have the hon. minister respond when he returns to the House tomorrow. Oil Pricing MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the hon. Premier.

Last Thursday the Ontario government released a report which indicat ed that an increase in the price of oil would seriously jeopardize Canada's export position. Has the Government of Alberta assembled statis tics and data, or prepared a report, which would refute this claim? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure whether the hon. member concurs in that Ontario point of view, but it didn't take the province of Alberta very long to come to a conclusion. Ontario is now being provided the cheapest crude oil in the world, so I hardly see how they could come to that conclusion.

I don't need to write a report to reach that conclusion. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear. MR. NOTLEY. Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion for clarification to the hon. Premier, in view of

1016 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 the fact this will be discussed at the upcoming First Ministers' Conference. Has there been any assess ment by the Government of Alberta of the impact of higher petroleum prices? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I'm sure there are a number of ways in which the impact of higher prices can be avoided. I will make the point in Ottawa on Thursday. I'll make it again later. There's a very easy answer for the Government of Ontario: simply cut its own gasoline tax in half, bring it down to Alberta's side, and none of the consumers in the province of Ontario will suffer. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I admit this is a little bit of a fishing expedition. Is the Premier in a position to advise the House whether Alberta's target at the conference is a $3 a barrel increase in the price of oil? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I think, and we've said on a number of occasions, [that] we've proved the merit of not approaching conferences of this nature by establishing a specific target on one item. It's part of the total package of negotiations, and it's proving more and more effective over the course of time. I recall the hon. members on the other side pressing the export tax during the 17th Alberta Legislature.

The position now with regard to the export tax is that it's turning into a deficit, and we're on the side of rising prices. No, we look at the negotiations totally. They will involve not just the price of crude oil, but parity regarding natural gas, the overall timing situation, any involvement in terms of economic development in the west, and the long-term situation in this province, having regard to the constitutional situation. I say all of that, Mr.

Speaker, recognizing that in going to a meeting of 11 governments, only three of which involve producing provinces, I think most members in this Legislature would agree that it is extremely unlikely there will be an agreement in Ottawa this Thursday. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion to the hon. Premier. Is the Premier in a position to advise the House whether the government is now reviewing the royalty structure above $8 a barrel? Are any studies taking place to reassess royalties, or will the present royalty structure remain in existence regardless of what the increase may be? MR.

LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, we believe we've struck a very appropriate balance. I think that the federal energy strategy for Canada has recognized that very well in the way it's set out in that document — a balance between a return to the citizens of this province and sufficient incentives for all Canadians as well as Albertans to have exploration for new oil and gas reserves in Canada. It is a matter of balance.

It's always a matter of good public policy and debate, but we think that the very fact there's been such a renewal of activity and exploration, is a very positive factor, and that the recent budgets are reflected there. I would just like to reiterate, as I have a number of times in this House, that when we deal with matters of activity in the petroleum industry, we're dealing with thousands and thousands of jobs for Albertans, and we should not lose sight of that. Gaming Regulations MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. the Attorney General.

Could the Attorney General indicate whether the present policy of allow ing the operation of only one casino in a city is going to be adhered to this year? I am speaking specifically of the Calgary Stampede and the Edmonton Klondike Days. MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, I don't think it's a policy at the moment to allow only one casino to operate in an urban centre, but it will be the policy, as announced today, after June 1. With respect to exhibition associations, we're saying that we'll only allow one casino to operate in a city at any one time.

During the exhibition periods it must operate on the exhibition grounds. MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the Attorney General indicate what the government's policy will be when there is more than one application in a city for a casino? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, I don't know the actual numbers, but perhaps I should indicate to the House that in the last year there has been a twentyfold increase in the number of applications for casino licences across the province.

I can assure the House that that is well more than we could possibly accommodate within a 365-day year in Edmonton, Calgary, or some of the other urban communities. We have come up with a new classification system with maximums of 15, 30, and 50 tables, depending on the size of the organization. Our preference is clearly for the smaller casinos rather than the major ones. We'll be working on the very difficult process of selecting those successful applicants.

Usually it's first come, first served, but with the snowball of casino applications that has occurred in this past year, it's been extremely difficult simply to handle the number of applications, much less be rational and objective in our assessment of them. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the Attorney General. In light of the announce ment he made this morning with regard to the diffi culty of policing the new regulations, I'd like to ask where the responsibility will rest for the policing of the new regulations.

Will it be with the police departments primarily in the cities of Edmonton and Calgary? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, we feel that the guide lines we have outlined today can be enforced by us in co-operation with the police forces of the province. One does not have to be a gaming or gambling expert to ensure the compliance with the guidelines we have set out. We're reasonably satisfied that pre pared police officers and prepared inspectors in the department can spot the infractions and, if necessary, suspend licences and shut them down.

We do not feel we'll have to call upon substantial police resources in Edmonton or Calgary in order to enforce it adequately. I would anticipate that in the course of

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1017 the next year we may acquire a modest increase in the inspection area of the department, headed at the moment by chief inspector Ron Sheppard. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the Attorney General. Is it the intention of the Attorney General's Department to call together those organizations that in recent years have been sponsoring or involved in the more respectable casino operations and give them, if I could use the term, a short course in the government's toughened regulations? MR. FOSTER: Mr.

Speaker, no doubt that would be appropriate in some circumstances. We will be widely circulating the guidelines I announced this morning. It may be too soon to tell whether we will have to follow up, or should follow up, with meetings of various groups and associations. It's important, though, that these guidelines be circulated broadly. Judging from the media response to date to the statement, I am confident it will be circulated broadly. MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, to the Attorney General. Does the province charge a flat fee for casino licenses, or does it in effect take a percentage of the amounts bet? MR.

FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, as I understand it we have been charging a flat fee based on the number of games or tables at each casino. In our announce ment this morning, we indicated we would be increasing that fee to $10 per game, except for the period of the exhibition weeks when it will be $25 per game. It's not based on gross or net take, however. If it were, it might provide additional substantial revenue to Her Majesty. MR. GOGO: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Has the hon.

Attorney General considered that step in making it, in view of the trends, almost as profit able as our non-renewable resource revenue? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, one of the difficulties of licensing gaming operations and of organizations becoming involved in gaming operations is that there is a tendency to develop a reliance on the income base these funds create. I would not want to see the Provincial Treasurer relying upon revenues from casinos to balance his budget. Government House MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Housing and Public Works, and ask if the committee he set up to look after Government House has met. Secondly, what are the committee's responsibilities for the renovations now taking place at Government House? MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I think it would be appropriate if I explained the nature of the committee I use with respect to Government House.

In relation to the interior design and plaster work in Government House, I met with my officials, who included the Deputy Minister; the project manager, who is also the chief architect; the assistant chief architect; and our consultant on interior decoration. I invited Mrs. Lougheed to attend that meeting. There was a series of three meetings at which time we made a number of decisions in terms of resolving some of the dif ferences of opinion with respect to the interior design of the lower floor. These decisions were in fact made.

As a result, the need for this committee — if you wish to call it that — to exist disappeared. The committee was then disbanded. The work is going ahead appropriately. There has always been an overview committee indicated to the Department of Government Services which was consulting with the Department of Hous ing and Public Works with respect to art selection. This overview committee was a committee of mem bers of the department. This committee was charged with the final selection, if you wish, or the final payment for the art.

Now, it was in connection with this committee that I had solicited the assistance of Mrs. Lougheed to provide some guidance in the selection of the art. In doing that, I had indicated that it was appropriate to spend that budget in two parts, the first part being associated with the initial purchase of art, the other half being used to a large degree to purchase addi tional art designated by the foundation which was in fact created. The second committee is going on until it finishes the final designation of the art that will be hung in Government House. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. I was really referring to the commit tee of which Dr. Rice and the Speaker are members. The question again is: what responsibility does that group have with regard to the renovations and the ongoing operation of Government House? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. leader would refer to the legislation, I think it really has nothing to do with the renovations. It will only go into effect when the building and the renovations have been completed.

The responsibility for the building is assigned by the Minister of Housing and Public Works to the Minister of Government Services also respon sible for Culture. AN HON. MEMBER: What timetable? MR. LOUGHEED: Well, the projected opening date is August 1 of this year. Probably at that date the formal shift will be made from one department to another. The responsibility of the Government House Foundation will then occur. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a question for clarifica tion to the hon. Minister of Housing and Public Works.

Were any expressed or implied commitments made to artists in Alberta for paintings in Govern ment House which the department has not been able to honor? MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I think one ought to clarify the issue of commitments. A commitment is not a commitment until such time as money is available to purchase something. In the budget of the Depart ment of Housing and Public Works, which will come up for review shortly, there is an amount of money relating to the purchase of art for Government House.

1018 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 In the process being used for the selection of art and the discussion with the artists, as well as the designation of the art from the various galleries, I don't suppose that what was a budget was construed to be a commitment in some instances. However, in terms of establishing the rapport between the two departments, I should point out the documentation very specifically states that any purchases would be subject to final approval by the Department of Housing and Public Works. This is still the case. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, one further supplemen tary question for clarification.

Were any offers made or undertakings given to artists for the purchase of paintings for Government House which will not be honored, because of budgetary considerations? MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of any such items that might be construed to be in the form of commitments. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one further supplementary question to the minister. Was the panel that was initially set up to make the selections in the area of some $70,000 advised in their terms of reference that their decisions were in fact subject to the approval of the Department of Housing and Public Works? MR. YURKO: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, a memorandum was issued by the deputy of Housing and Public Works to the, I believe . . . [interjections] I can't remember the date — quite some time ago — indicating that the final approval of the budget, as is normal, is related to the approval of the budget for a specific department, and that budget is within the Department of Housing and Public Works. Syncrude Hiring Practises (continued) MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct this question to the hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower. It's a follow-up to the question I posed before, concerning the hiring of native people at Syncrude.

Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon. minister is: can the minister outline to the House the govern ment's policy with respect to Native Outreach being the one co-ordinating employment agency to facilitate maximum native employment on the Syncrude site? DR. HOHOL: There could be different views on this, Mr. Speaker.

I know that Native Outreach is one of the significant agencies through which the native people have contact with the employer — in fact both employers, the management team and Syncrude itself — the provincial government, and the commit tee in northeastern Alberta made up of the com panies, the federal government, and the provincial government through our manpower division. They are a significant source of counselling information. So are this government, the federal government, the Metis Association, and other groups.

There is an understanding between Syncrude and Outreach, even some of it on paper, to the best of my recollec tion. While I would give it credit for doing a signifi cant job, I would not say it is the one agency through which natives get information, jobs, training, or upgrading. Foothills Hospital — Kidney Transplant (continued) MR. MINIELY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Bow Valley asked me today the current status of the Foothills Hospital's recruiting of a transplant surgeon to round out the kidney transplant team.

Since the question my office has contacted the Foothills Hospi tal, and they indicate, as of today, the following: they have interviewed six transplant surgeons; they are in the process of in-depth evaluation of all the appli cants; they have not yet made a final decision on a particular applicant. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Minister of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife revert to Introduction of Visitors? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS (reversion) MR. ADAIR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's my pleas ure today to introduce to you, and through you to the members of this Assembly, 24 students and three instructors, Mrs. Shirley Fitzpatrick, Mr. Ron Fol- berg, and Mr. Baynish Basset, from the academic upgrading department of the Northwest Territories Adult Vocational Training Centre at Fort Smith. They are in Edmonton for a week, having a look at the various sights. I certainly think they will have an excellent opportunity with the weather that is afforded them.

I would ask them now to rise and be recognized by this Assembly. head: GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill 1 The Statutes Repeal Act, 1976 MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I move second read ing of Bill 1, The Statutes Repeal Act, 1976. Quite obviously, the principle of this bill is the repeal of a large number of acts, set forth in the attached schedule, that in the view of the government are redundant or unnecessary at the present time. It would be the intention of the government, through the house leader, to assign the various bills in the

schedule to various ministers, who may answer from time to time, during the course of committee study, the reasons for the various repeals. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, in making one or two remarks on second reading of Bill No. 1, I'd like to say first of all that in reviewing the acts placed here, certainly not too many are operative at the present time or significant or having much effect on the general public of Alberta. It was very easy to repeal

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1019 the acts. I was pleased, though, that in his remarks the Premier didn't give us one of his fine speeches on how this Conservative government is reducing legis lation, reducing intervention, reducing bureaucracy, and so on, because I think that would have initiated a debate. Certainly I think we on this side would have had some foundation to show there really isn't any reduction in the size of government. It's a reduction in the size of the statutes. So I was pleased the Premier didn't take that approach in his remarks.

I think he was being very honest in what he said in those few statements. That's my first concern with regard to the act. I'm pleased to see this type of thing. I hope the government continues doing this, and certainly hope there are some acts of significance that possibly will reduce the civil servants in some areas. Maybe we could say that a couple of these here, for example, Bill 25, The Human Resources Development Authori ty Act, did reduce the size of government a few years ago.

As I wander around government, talking to a few of the civil servants and noting the responsibility of the Minister Without Portfolio responsible for native af fairs, I note that a number of those people are still around government. They're still working and doing things, have similar objectives, and are still taking a pay cheque. We've noted in the last year or two that certainly the formal research council doesn't exist, but we do have private research contracts and we have the director of the Human Resources Research Council on contract. So he's still around government. It's the same type of thing.

We really haven't changed things too much. The Highway Traffic Act is another one. I believe it was an oversight by government. They didn't quite get rid of it when they replaced it with a new one. All in all, the 42 acts really don't do that much in government. I did a little bit of statistical analysis on it, and found that over 24 of these 42 were acts prior to 1945. Thirty of the 42 were acts before 1950. They seem to have lost their usefulness just by old age. We've listed them here, so we've reduced the size of that green statute book. That's basically the purpose.

It's good, though, that the government has an intent to go in the direction they've got. From my point of view, as a more private citizen than when I was sitting in cabinet, and recognizing how govern ment affects whatever industry or business you're in, I certainly hope the government continues so this act becomes larger from year to year, the size of government goes down, and the civil service is certainly reduced accordingly. The last comment I would make is that we had a member in the last Legislature, the 17th Legislature, who introduced eight of the nine bills. My criticism to him was the very same.

I said, why don't you do something with great effect. It's good to see that the government recognized the work of the hon. Member for Calgary Bow in the last House . . . MR. CLARK: The former member. MR. R. SPEAKER: . . . The former Member for Calgary Bow, and put some of his thoughts and ideas into legislation. Mr. Speaker, certainly I will support this in second reading and encourage the government to continue. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Premier conclude the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, to use the phrase that's used perhaps far too often in the Legislature, I hadn't intended making any concluding comments. But the hon. Member for Little Bow knew he would get a rise out of me if he referred to Bill 25 on the attached schedule, The Human Resources Develop ment Authority Act. It's just possible, Mr. Speaker, that some of the newer members of the Legislature might not be aware of the import of that bill. I would think that, because after they've read it I think they would come to the conclusion they would accelerate their enthusiasm for Bill No. 1. Mr.

Speaker, we've heard a great deal in this House about the question of the cabinet's role and the cabinet's responsibility and what the cabinet can do without in any way affecting the Legislative Assembly. I would like hon. members to know and just would like to read what The Human Resources Development Authority Act says. It sets up — set up, because we're now hopefully moving to past tense — that the authority shall consist of five members of the Executive Council.

Then it goes on to say, despite what's been done in the Legislature: Where any program or service related to the function of the Authority is authorized by any other Act, the Lieutenant Governor in Council may charge the chairman of the Authority with the administration of that program or service, notwithstanding anything contained in the authorized Act. Now there's by-passing the Legislature in the extreme. Mr. Speaker, I close the debate. [Motion carried; Bill 1 read a second time] Bill 8 The Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation Amendment Act, 1976 MR. LEITCH: Mr.

Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 8. The object of this bill is to increase the capacity of the Alberta Municipal Financing Corpora tion to borrow money from its current $1.7 billion figure to $1.9 billion in order that the Corporation will be able to meet its anticipated requests during the coming year. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I certainly intend to support the principle of Bill No. 8. The only point I would make on second reading, Mr. Speaker, and perhaps ask the hon.

Treasurer when he closes debate to bring us up to date on where the government stands with respect to Municipal Financ ing Corporation loans for municipally owned utilities. It's my understanding they do not come under the sheltered interest rate. For a number of our munici palities in the province that own their own gas system, power system, or what have you, it seems to me there is a pretty strong argument that they should be able to borrow from the Municipal Financing

1020 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 Corporation at the sheltered interest rate which applies for normal borrowing. So I would ask the minister, when he concludes debate, to bring us up to date on where the government stands on that issue. It's been raised a number of times in the House. Certainly in terms of the basic principle of this bill — simply making more money available — when one sees the requirements of municipalities today, it's obvious that additional funds are necessary, notwith standing the strictures of the Minister of Municipal Affairs as they apply to rural M.D.s.

However, I suspect borrowing through the Municipal Financing Corporation is a somewhat sounder proposition than many of the other short-term moves municipalities might have to make if the principle of this bill were not accepted and Bill 8 passed. I think the fact that more money will be made available for borrowing is important particularly at this time of growth in Alberta. I support the principle, but I would ask the minister to bring us up to date on where the government sits on this other issue of utilities. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, if I could just make three points in dealing with second reading of Bill No. 8, The Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation Amendment Act. The first of three points would be simply this: I'd like to take this opportunity to say to the Provincial Treasurer that I plan to support the bill, despite what we're doing here, which is basically increasing the total lending the Alberta Municipal Financing Corpo ration can become involved in. I would urge the government again, as we on this side have done several times, to look seriously at this question of revenue sharing with municipalities.

I know we have a committee in Municipal Affairs that is nearly getting white with age looking at this whole question of revenue sharing and sharing of responsi bilities with municipalities. The fact remains that this piece of legislation isn't going to help the financial plight of municipalities on an operating basis. So I would urge the government to dust off and once again look seriously at the concept of revenue sharing. We believe there's a real advantage to moving with some dispatch in the direction of revenue sharing with municipalities.

We are frankly enthusiastic about revenue sharing with municipali ties, especially sharing income tax revenue. The second point I'd like to make on second reading of this bill is to say that as of 1974 I believe, although it may be 1973, the last figures from across Canada indicate that our municipalities would have the highest per capita municipal debt in Canada. If that's not accurate, I'm sure the Provincial Treasurer will correct me. I raise it now because that's the position we find Alberta in, from figures we've been able to get from Statistics Canada, or their new organization, for 1973 or 74.

The third comment I'd like to make with regard to Bill 8 is simply this: I suppose the Provincial Treasur er will carry the major part of the responsibility, although it will be the cabinet in the end. But once the heritage savings fund legislation is approved, if the government doesn't make some changes in that area of investments, I would urge the government to look seriously at the prospect of some debt retirement or debt reorganization for municipalities. Whether we use a portion of the heritage trust fund or not, right now I'm appealing for a look at the situation.

I'm certainly in no position to say on this occasion — although we hope to be before long — how such a program of debt reorganization might be carried out for municipalities. But it would seem to me to be one of the priorities we should certainly be looking at as far as municipalities are concerned.

As I see the Minister of Municipal Affairs sitting in his place, the last comment I'd like to make now or when we get into one of his pieces of legislation would be to find out what kind of increased interest the Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation is taking in approved lendings to municipalities, because of the comments made inside and outside the House by the minister and others about the plight some municipali ties find themselves in. The minister has indicated the Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation is obviously the lending institution as far as the prov ince is concerned.

Does the government see the Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation playing an expanded role in this whole area? The three comments on the bill are: we would like to urge the government to move as far as revenue sharing is concerned; look at this question of debt reorganization or debt retirement; and we would like to hear the Treasurer's comments with regard to the per capita debt situation of municipalities in Alberta as compared to other provinces in Canada. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Provincial Treasurer close the debate if he wishes? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. LEITCH: Mr.

Speaker, this bill attracted com ments on second reading which I thought had a somewhat tenuous connection with the principle of the bill. None the less, I'll make some comments in response. The suggestion is that there be a change in the rates of interest charged to municipalities with respect to borrowing to finance their utility opera tions. I can say we're not now contemplating any such change to the extent of providing a subsidy, as is done in the case of borrowing for general municipal needs.

We did make some alterations in the rates recently — not so much alterations in the rates, but we altered the time frame of the loans to ensure that the borrowing from the Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation was at comparable rates to borrowing by municipalities outside the province or the nation.

Without debating the question of municipalities' financial needs, because I think it's inappropriate to do so on second reading of this bill, I'd simply say that in my judgment providing additional financial assist ance to municipalities by giving them a subsidy in respect of borrowing to finance utilities would not be the correct way to achieve that objective. My reason for saying that is primarily that it would create a dislocation in utility rate charges. Some utilities are provided by municipal utilities, others are provided by utilities in the private sector.

If you're going to subsidize the interest being paid by municipalities providing their own utilities, you get a dislocation of the cost of providing utilities to those municipalities where utilities are provided by the private sector. With respect to the comments of the Leader of the Opposition about looking seriously at revenue shar

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1021 ing, I think my response to possible changes in interest rate charges would be equally applicable. It hardly relates to the question of municipalities raising funds by borrowing from this corporation. I think there are other occasions when members on each side of the House will have the opportunity to debate the issue of revenue sharing. With respect to the comments about the highest per capita municipal debt in Canada, I hesitate to either agree or disagree relying solely on my memory. That's the kind of thing I'd want to check before commenting, Mr. Speaker.

But I would want to call to the attention of the House remarks I made in this year's Budget Address to the effect that our tax rates at the municipal level, insofar as we're able to compare them, appear to be either the lowest or among the lowest in Canada. Those two facts, Mr. Speaker, are very closely connected.

In addition to that, I rather suspect — but again this is something I'd want to check — that the very rapid growth we're experiencing in Alberta would have some bearing on the municipal debt, because it involves substantial borrowings to finance certain aspects of the infrastructure used to support that debt. With respect to the comments of the Leader of the Opposition regarding the heritage fund, Mr. Speaker, again it seems to me there will be more appropriate opportunities to debate that question in the Assem bly.

I'd simply urge the support of Bill No. 8 on second reading. [Motion carried; Bill 8 read a second time] Bill 17 The Alberta Income Tax Amendment Act, 1976 MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 17. The principle involved here can be stated very simply. The proposed amendment would carry out the intent of the legislation now in force in the province of Alberta, and was made necessary simply because of the federal government's recent change in its tax law to provide for a resource allowance.

Members of the Legislature will remember that at the time of the federal government's disallowance of royalty payments to the provincial government as a deduction in calculating income tax, we introduced and passed legislation which provided for a return to those affected resource industries of that portion of their income tax which comes to the provincial government as a result of the non-deductibility of royalties. That sum was reduced by the introduction of the resource allowance by the federal government.

This proposed amendment simply alters our legisla tion to ensure that the rebate of the provincially imposed income tax is kept consistent with the former federal legislation. [Motion carried; Bill 17 read a second time] Bill 18 The Pension Statutes Amendment Act, 1976 MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 18, which proposes amendments to three acts: The Local Authorities Pension Act, The Public Service Management Pension Act, and The Public Service Pension Act. There are five items of principle contained in the proposed bill to which I would like to refer.

The first is those provisions which integrate our pension plans under those three pieces of legislation with the long-term disability insurance program recently intro duced as a result of our agreement with the CSA. Briefly, the provisions of the disability insurance plan and the pension plan are these: if an employee sustains a disability that entitles him to payments under the long-term disability insurance plan, he no longer needs to make payments to the insurance plan, but retains his entitlement to insurance.

If he continues to receive a disability payment until pen sionable age, all the options are open to that person with respect to pensions that would be open to someone who had not suffered such a disability. The second matter of principle dealt with in the bill is that as of July 1, 1976, married women would be required to participate in the pension plans in the same way as men are required to participate. Until now whether they contribute to or become part of the pension plan has been optional. This provision would be applicable only to women who were taken on as permanent employees subsequent to July 1, 1976.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, the proposed bill provides for the various pension boards to approve participa tion in the pension plans by part-time employees. What we have in mind there, Mr. Speaker, is provid ing pension opportunities to those part-time employ ees who are, in a sense, regular. They can work part-time from year to year. We're really not thinking of providing pension benefits for part-time employees of a short and non-repeating nature. With respect to the management pension plan, we've added service in the merchant navy and service as a member of the federal House as pensionable service.

This is to bring that plan into conformity with the public service pension plan. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, we've provided that the inter est rate with respect to contributions refunded to employees who leave the government service with less than five years' service and the interest rate applicable to employees who buy prior service may now be changed by the Executive Council rather than the board, as is the case under the current legislation. There are a number of other amendments in the proposed bill, Mr. Speaker, but I would regard those five as matters of principle.

The other amendments are primarily technical in nature. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to say a word or two on the principle of Bill 18, particularly in regard to the fifth principle mentioned by the hon. Provincial Treasurer, the interest rate on contributions for those who leave the government service with less than five years' service. I'm going to refer to another pension bill passed by this Legislature in connection with teachers. I don't know how many teachers who contributed to the teachers' pension plan have been told, you just can't get your money back; it now belongs to us.

I think this is a very arbitrary action, apparently sup ported by legislation. It's not the action the govern ment has taken, or set as an example in this legisla tion. When an employee leaves the government service, he can get his contributions back. While a

1022 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 teacher is teaching, there are contributions by the school board and by that teacher. I don't think, if they stop teaching, the pension board should have the right to say, this is our money; you can't have it back. I would appreciate having the comments of the hon. Provincial Treasurer in connection with this particular item. I don't particularly want to delay the second reading of this bill.

But there are a number of ex-teachers in the province who feel very strongly that they've been dealt with in a high-handed manner, and just can't get to first base with the pension board dealing with teachers' pensions. In my view, that money does not belong to the pension board. It belongs to the teacher. When the teacher has no opportunity of collecting from that pension fund, surely he or she should at least get the contributions back, with interest also. At one time we discussed the portability of pen sions, where a teacher could carry that contribution into a government pension or some other pension.

That didn't materialize. I think that would be an obvious solution for some, but certainly not for others. I just can't see why any organization, when it takes money from a person and then doesn't have to pay that pension because the person leaves that service, should keep that money and say, that money now belongs to us and you have no right to it. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, I'd also like to speak about the principle of interest and to ask for the Provincial Treasurer's point of view on the matter.

I've noted that historically, in repayment of pension benefits, it seems that the rate of interest often is much lower than, say, going rates of interest. I've always felt that a pension plan belongs to all of its members, and certainly the members themselves were losing because of that rate of interest. So the question I would like to raise with the Provincial Treasurer is the matter of how the cabinet will establish the rate of interest. Will it be established as we do in ADC or the AOC, where it's 1 per cent above prime? Will it be established just by basic judgment?

Will it be established by a certain required rate of return to the pension plan? I'd like the Provincial Treasurer to comment on the criteria, if he would. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Provincial Treasurer close the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, on the question of interest rate, it certainly is lower than the going rates of interest. I think it is 4 per cent at the present time, and of course the going rate would be a number of percentage points above that, no doubt more than double that.

But the difficulty with the interest rate is simply this: a low interest rate works to the disadvan tage of short-term employees, those who remain with the government less than five years, because on leaving the government they get back their contribu tions plus interest at 4 per cent. A higher interest rate would benefit them.

Now I should say that they have a benefit if they're married or have children, even though they do not stay with the government for five years, because if they happen to die during that period their surviving spouse or, if no spouse, their surviving children receive not only that contribution but also an equivalent contribution from the govern ment, plus 4 per cent on those two contributions.

However, if you set a higher interest rate it operates to the disadvantage of the long-term gov ernment employee who wishes to buy prior service, because the same interest rate applies to both payments, which I think is an appropriate policy. The long-term employee who wishes to buy back prior service, such as service with other government bodies or any of the prior service we recognize under our pension plans, then pays the contribution he ought to have paid, or would have paid had he been a member of the plan, plus an interest factor com pounded annually.

So if we increase the interest rate, it will be an advantage to those who stay with the government less than five years, but it's going to be a disadvantage to those who have been with the government more than five years and want to add to their pensionable service and purchase prior service. As to what criteria the cabinet would follow in setting the interest rate, that's not something we have formulated a policy on. We simply reviewed this.

Frankly, it was the suggestion of the board that the capacity to establish interest rates be changed in the act and transferred from the board to the cabinet, on the basis that that was a decision of significant policy ramifications which ought to be made by elected members rather than appointed members. But in proposing the amendment, we do not have in mind at this moment any change, nor did the board at the time they made that suggestion, although we appreciate, as did the board, that with the changing rates of interest it is something that should be reviewed. We will be doing that.

With respect to the comments of the hon. Member for Drumheller on teachers' pensions, I find it a little difficult to respond in that this legislation does not deal with teachers' pensions. The administration of that legislation, any legislation that is applicable, is with another minister. I think it would be more appropriate if that minister responded. [Motion carried; Bill 18 read a second time] Bill 22 The Alberta Investment Fund Repeal Act MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill 22, The Alberta Investment Fund Repeal Act. Perhaps I ought to give a brief history of this legislation.

It was passed in 1965 and provided for the sale of investment certificates to the residents of Alberta. The interest payment was guaranteed at 3.5 per cent annually. Approximately $2 million of such certificates were sold and securities were purchased with those funds. As a result of changing market conditions, the investment certificates at 3.5 per cent were no longer attractive. In addition, as a result of those same market changes the investments made from the funds received from the sale of those certifi cates dropped in market value. Most of the certifi cates were redeemed.

Approximately $10,000 of those certificates are now outstanding. There is also an outstanding over draft with the treasury branch of, I believe, about $200,000 which resulted from funds having to be borrowed in order to redeem the certificates. The

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1023 proposed bill would simply repeal the legislation, but provides for the government to honor the investment certificates in accordance with their terms if and when they are presented for redemption. It also provides that the government will assume the assets and liabilities of the fund. The only asset in the fund is a debenture of one of the oil companies of approximately $50,000.

The liabilities are of course the overdraft that I've referred to, and some additional funds that were supplied out of general revenue with respect to the advertising of the legislation and the fact that certificates were available for purchase. In closing my opening comments, Mr. Speaker, I suppose I could say that the proposed bill will put an end to what history has indicated was not a particu larly successful financial venture. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, just two comments on this bill. The Treasurer is likely being charitable when he says, not a tremendously successful financial ven ture.

The points are well taken. I would simply say this, Mr. Treasurer: I would hope that as a result of this experience and some other experiences govern ments have got themselves involved in, the present government wouldn't go down the same garden path with any of the heritage fund investments. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Provincial Treasurer conclude the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, there were lessons to be learned, and we think we learned them. MR. CLARK: Time will tell. [Motion carried; Bill 22 read a second time] Bill 29 The Financial Administration Amendment Act, 1976 MR. LEITCH: Mr.

Speaker, I move second reading of Bill 29. The principle involved in this bill is to increase the Auditor's salary from its current level of $43,500 per year to $45,500 per year effective August 1, 1975. There is also provision, Mr. Speaker, to authorize the Provincial Treasurer to hold securities he may have acquired which were not of the class that may have been acquired under other provisions of The Financial Administration Act.

When we assumed the assets of certain pension funds in Calgary, under the local authorities pension legislation, we acquired certain assets we couldn't have acquired under The Financial Administration Act in the first instance. This amendment would simply enable us to continue to hold those assets until it appears appropriate to dispose of them. The other amendments, particularly the one to

Section 28(1), substituting the word "includes" for "means", is merely to ensure that the definition of securities is not restricted to the particular items set forth in that subsection. The word "includes" simply means that it includes those items listed there, but may also include other forms of securities. The last proposed amendment, Mr. Speaker, is to

Section 28(8), and merely enables persons or bodies who have money in the investment fund to take it out not only for purposes of expenditure but also for the purposes of investment or loan, should the bodies who have invested money in that fund wish to do that, which of course they could only do if the legisla tion permitted. [Motion carried; Bill 29 read a second time] Bill 9 The Libraries Amendment Act, 1976 MR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill 9, The Libraries Amendment Act, 1976.

This bill will amend The Libraries Act and remove the sections that give the minister the wide range of powers to make grants to libraries. In its place, it will give the Lieutenant Governor in Council the authori zation to make regulations about how the grants will be administered, the money that will be brought through legislation for this purpose. I think this will make it possible to have a more equitable distribution of library money throughout the province of Alberta than the present legislation provides.

At the present time, the cities of this province are getting as low as 3 cents per capita in library grant money. This amendment would authorize legislation and regulations that would provide additional money for this purpose. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, in taking

part in second reading of Bill 9, might I say at the outset, with no reflection on the hon. Member for Wainwright, that I would hope the minister would take

part in the debate; because the legislation, as I look at it and as the hon. member points out, makes it mandatory for the decision on funds and so on to be made by regulation, order in council, and so on. But one can't just look at that. One also has to look at the situation that in the budget this year we have a money reduction for libraries. We have something like $571,000 for libraries in the province. So we're really in a situation from here on where the regula tions will be approved by the cabinet. I think that's a step in the right direction.

But we're really going to be approving less money for libraries in the province this year than last year. It seems to me that the library situation in Alberta right now is of the nature that all of us as legislators might well hang our heads. If the figures I have received are accurate — and I'm sure all members of the Assembly received the very excellent brief from the Library Association — we're the lowest in Canada. The minister bangs his desk when I say we're in a bad situation. That's indeed right.

In addition to being in the bad financial situation of being the lowest in Canada, I think people in library organiza tions in Alberta had their hopes somewhat buoyed up in 1973, I believe it was, or '72, when the Downey report was commissioned. The Downey report has been sitting around since June 1974. We've done nothing with it. The report was entitled The Right To Know. It made some rather basic recommendations that would go some distance towards improving our

1024 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 library system in this province. Pretty candidly, I'm going to support the legislation. But I could be much more enthused about the legisla tion if there were some amendments that dealt with some of the recommendations of The Right To Know. I don't know what has taken the government so long on this matter. As I've indicated, it will be three years this June since the report was made available. Basically, we've moved no place on it. In fact, it's one of the few areas in the budget where there's a cutback this year.

I don't think a great number of members of this Assembly advocate willy-nilly additional spending. But I suspect a large proportion of the members were a bit shocked when they saw a cutback for expendi tures to libraries across the province. Pretty candidly, I was rather shocked when I saw the legislation that came in, because there had been some advance billing on it. Really, it didn't deal with the basic recommendations at all.

If we're not going to deal with the recommenda tions, perhaps during second reading or committee, or in his estimates, the minister would give us some indication of what the government is going to do with this Right to Know report. Is it the government's intention to move on this thing? What recommenda tions does the government find reasonable? What recommendations is the government not prepared to buy? How much longer do we have to wait until we can expect some additional funding for libraries in the province? I suppose everyone likes to pick out his own figures.

I look at the money we're spending on Government House. The last figures I saw were something like $1.7 million. When we're spending that much money on Government House, and we're spending about $570,000 or $600,000 a year on libraries, I think it says something about our priorities, about the government's priorities.

I would think that most Albertans would place a higher priority on improved library services in this province than they would on improving Government House. [I have] nothing particular against Government House, but my constituents and, I'm sure, the constituents of most members in this House would get much more benefit from improved libraries than we're going to get out of the expenditure I referred to earlier for Government House. I plan to have a great deal more to say about this matter when we get involved in the estimates.

But I didn't want this opportunity to slip by, when the hon. member brings in Bill 9 for second reading, to say: yes, the legislation is a very timid, very small step in the right direction, but it doesn't deal with the two basic problems. The first basic problem is some money for libraries in the province, certainly not a cutback. The second basic problem is where the government is going as far as libraries are concerned. If we've done the Downey report and it doesn't meet the minister's fancy, the government's fancy, they're not going to move in that direction, let's stand up and say so.

We've got a lot of people involved in voluntary libraries across this province. In my own constitu ency, I don't think we have one paid person, yet I believe we must have five libraries in the constitu ency. These volunteers come to you and say, you know, where are you people going as far as libraries are concerned? That's one of the occasions when I'm rather quick to point out that I can't really assume the responsibility for what isn't happening here. But I think that all members, regardless of where they sit in the House, have some obligation to respond to the presentation made by the library people.

I think it's easy to send a letter saying, we got your brief and it's a good brief, and so on. But I would think that come this fall, if we don't have some clear indication of where we're going and some kind of commitment that there are going to be some more financial resources available so that libraries can at least get a larger portion of the provincial budget, we as members, regardless of where we might sit in this House, should bow our heads just a bit farther.

When the per capita assistance in the province of Newfoundland is something like $3.97 per person and in Alberta this year it's going to be the great sum of 26 cents per person, you know, that's a pretty deplorable situation, regardless of what riding we might represent or where we might sit. When we compare [it] to the other prairie provinces, we don't rank very well at all. Just to conclude my comments, Mr. Speaker, I think it's high time that a number of members in this Assembly, regardless of where they sit, served notice on the minister and the government and said, get on with the job.

Tell these volunteers where you are going as far as libraries are concerned. If you want their input, let's respond to them, and let's move on it. If we're not going to do anything, let's at least tell them so they can put their best efforts in some other area. Candidly, I would hope that we would move in this area and that we would move rather quickly. MR. ZANDER: Mr. Speaker, I would also rise and voice my concern about libraries and the availability of books in the rural areas of this province.

I think that, as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out, 26 cents per capita is certainly not sufficient at this time, looking at the availability of the library system in the rural areas of the province of Alberta. As you well know, in the city of Edmonton and the larger centres there is access to a larger library, which is the library system of the city. I appreciate that the city probably has paid quite a bit more to manage the library system within its own boundaries.

But I think we have to give equal time and equal recognition to the people who live in the smaller centres where library service is not available. I'm speaking of some areas that I am quite familiar with, and the volunteer labor that goes along with [library service]. These people are not being paid. They're carrying on a job for which they do not want to get paid. But they're doing an admirable job as a community service.

When I look at the libraries in the smaller centres, and in particular in my constituency, I certainly will have to say that I have to hang my head in shame, for the simple reason that there isn't sufficient funding for the libraries in the rural areas. I think the government will have to take the issue before it. The Downey report is down, it's true. I think some of the recommendations are excellent. I think we probably could have done without some of the other things we are doing. But certainly I think special attention must be given in the way of library service to the people, and in particular to the people

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1025 of rural Alberta where there is almost no library service. When we go into second reading of the bill or clause by clause study or the estimates, I think some of us will have a little more to say, because I certainly am not happy with the expenditures we have when we only spend about 26 cents per capita on library service in the smaller centres of this province. MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to join in the debate. I, too, am concerned, and I said so when I spoke in the budget debate. However, Mr. Speaker, it's not quite as simple as the hon.

Leader of the Opposition would have us believe. One of the concerns I have, coming from a large city, is that the taxpayers in the city of Calgary are paying substantial sums of money for library service. I speak now of the library service in our school system. Regrettably, the library service in our school system is spending I would say almost double what is [spent] on our public library system, in relation to the use in the community. Whether the money comes from the province or from the city taxpayer, it's still money out of the taxpayer's pocket.

I, too, would appreciate the government's position on the Downey report. But again, Mr. Speaker, I have great concerns about that. I felt that if we implemented the entire report, we'd be adding a very large bureaucracy to one that, in my view, is already of a substantial size. Again, going back to the Leader of the Opposition, I agree with his concern with regard to spending money on library services. But I think it's part of an overall realignment of financial responsibilities.

After all, we have to put in perspective the fact that the Social Credit government did rule this province for 35 years, and it's not an easy task to realign the financial relationships between the province and the municipalities. Earlier this afternoon he mentioned picking up debt costs as a suggested way of alleviating the concerns of the communities. But what about those communi ties that have no debt?

What about those communi ties that exercised restraint and borrowed money only from the Alberta Municipal Financing Corporation, as compared to those who borrowed money at higher rates of interest on the American market? These are some of the problems facing those of us on the Provincial Municipal Finance Council. To suggest that an easy way out would be to take money from the heritage fund is not looking at the whole picture, in my view. He mentions Government House. I go back to the days when the Lieutenant-Governor was held in pretty poor regard by the previous government.

I think the money spent on Government House is a wise investment. It's a symbolic centre. I think we really should have spent the money on it long ago. I agree with the hon. Leader of the Opposition that we certainly need more money in the library system. In fairness to the hon. minister, I think he's tried very hard to get more money for it. Mr. Speaker, I'm also concerned about the quality of library service in the smaller centres. I think this is where the rural members are certainly going to be able to help us in trying to make more money available. I do take one exception, Mr.

Speaker, and that is to those people who use these comparisons of so many cents in Newfoundland or so many dollars in Newfoundland, so many dollars in other provinces, but only a few cents in Alberta. Any one of us in this House can pick up statistics that will help us justify our position. I would suggest to the hon. members that when they're doing this kind of thing they present the whole financial picture, not just that part of it that happens to substantiate their position. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take

part in the debate on Bill 9, there are really three areas I would like to touch upon. First of all, with respect to the grants via regulations by order in council: as has already been mentioned by the member who intro duced the bill, that probably represents an improve ment. I'm sure hon. members will support that provision. There are really two major concerns, both of which have been raised. But I would like to express my views on these concerns. First of all, the question of financing. Various members have talked about the plight of rural areas. I think there's no question about that.

I want to come to that in a moment. But if one looks at the statistics in the urban areas, both Edmonton and Calgary, the percentage of the Edmonton Public Library which is paid through fund ing by the provincial government, and the percentage to Calgary, is really remarkably low in contrast to other parts of the country. In the city of Calgary, .76 per cent is covered by a provincial grant; in Edmonton .62 per cent. Mr. Speaker, contrast that with St. John's, 91 per cent; Halifax, 31 per cent; St. Catherines, 20 per cent; and other cities with a substantially higher percentage than either Edmonton or Calgary.

Mr. Speaker, in looking at this question I think it would be wrong to see deficiency of library services as a rural problem only. The funding of libraries is a matter of concern in the urban areas as well. Turning directly to the rural question, there is little doubt that library service throughout most of rural Alberta is spasmodic, in some cases just not ade quate, and in many cases non-existent. All one has to do is travel around the provinces and go into some of the small community libraries when they're open — and they're not open that much because one has to depend on voluntary librarians.

We are indebted to the work of voluntary librarians. But one goes into these libraries and looks at the shelves and sees books that date back — The Book of Knowledge, 1923 or what have you. In other words, Mr. Speaker, the collection in many of our rural libraries especially is not exactly current, and that's an understatement. We have to move a long way to upgrade the quality of library services in rural Alberta. That will require funding. The reason I mention the cities, however, is that I don't think we should see this as a rural/urban question.

We need more money for libraries in cities as well as rural areas. We've got a bigger job in many of the rural areas because we don't have much of a library system to begin with. Certainly in the two major metropolitan centres there are very serious difficulties in financing the library system. Mr. Speaker, the other point the Alberta Library Association has brought — in my judgment, very forcibly — to the attention of members through their

1026 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 briefs and discussions they've had with hon. mem bers is not just a question of lack of funding, but to what extent we're going to promote regional library services and to what extent we're going to have some sort of overall co-ordination agency. The Leader of the Opposition has already mentioned The Right To Know, the Downey report. It seems to me, Mr.

Speaker, that at this stage of the game, especially as it relates to rural libraries, we need a much better regional system so that rural libraries in particular can have blocks of books on an updated continuous basis, so that a little library like Hines Creek, or Berwyn, Sundre, or wherever it may be, will have constant replenishing of current topical books. To do that effectively one has to have a well-organized regional library system backed up by an overall provincial co-ordinating body such as the ALINET proposal which is contained in the Downey report. Mr.

Speaker, the Alberta Library Association raised a number of questions relating to Bill No. 9. I'm sure the minister is well aware of the questions. Pretty obviously, the very first question is the one I'm sure we would all expect: at what level will the regula tions under the act fix grant support? I suppose that really leads us back to where we began. By this legislation, one can improve the opportunity to pro vide grants. But at the same time, that has to be accompanied by a commitment in the budget to make the money available.

One of the hon. members suggested that compar ing Alberta with other provinces is somehow not fair. Frankly, Mr. Speaker, I find that a little difficult to follow because the brief prepared by the Alberta Library Association makes it very clear that in the minds of librarians in this province, they are compar ing how much we make available in Alberta to Newfoundland or New Brunswick or whatever the case may be. They are asking us the question, on what basis can we as legislators justify these dispari ties?

I look at the 1975 grant statistics from other provinces and contrast them with the 1976-77 esti mates in Alberta. As the Leader of the Opposition pointed out, Newfoundland is way ahead; New Brunswick, $2.99 per capita; Alberta, 26 cents per capita; Saskatchewan, $2.63 per capita; Alberta again, 26 cents per capita. Mr. Speaker, the other provinces, even some of the poorer provinces, are substantially ahead of us. I look at Quebec, for example: 62 cents per capita. More than twice as much is spent on libraries by that province. Nova Scotia, certainly a have-not province, spends $1.92 per capita. Mr.

Speaker, there is more to any comprehensive library service in a province than money alone. But what I think the Alberta Library Association is saying to members at this time is that this is an area where extra funding is desperately needed if we are going to achieve a properly functioning library system that we can all be proud of, so that as members of the Legislature we don't have to go back to our own riding and literally hang our heads in shame when we go into the local library and see that we indeed still have a very long way to go. Mr.

Speaker, in general conclusion as we examine Bill 9, I certainly intend to vote for the bill. But as has been pointed out by a number of other members, the question of funding is paramount. Along with that question of funding, we have to know pretty clearly what future steps this government contemplates in terms of building a library service in the province. Will the Downey report, The Right To Know, be the guidepost? What are we looking at in terms of time for the introduction of the recommendations con tained in the Downey report? To what extent are we going to provide the monetary muscle in years ahead? Mr.

Speaker, I'm not here to belabor the point with the minister. I suspect the minister would be the happiest person in the province if we got more money for libraries. I'm sure he would be, knowing his record. I'm simply saying that I think members in the Legislature should be adding their voices to the voice of the minister to get these figures up to at least the level of the maritime provinces. On that basis, we're probably going to be able to begin to look forward to improving our library system. It isn't good enough to say, we haven't had a proper library system because of X former government.

You could go back to the former Social Credit government, the UFA govern ment, or if you like, the Liberal government. The fact of the matter is, we're talking about the here and now. This is the now government. We have a now problem in our libraries. I would welcome strong support for the minister as we set out together to get more money for libraries. MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a few comments on Bill 9, particularly with regard to some of the concerns raised here by members of the Assembly in today's debate.

In my experience as a member of the Edmonton Separate School Board and at one time on the executive of the Alberta School Trustees' Association, I have always wondered why libraries are not part of the school jurisdiction program in this province. While I support the amendment today, I urge that the government take a look at placing all library facilities together and co-ordinating them as one. I can't for the life of me understand why, in the towns the hon.

Member for Spirit River-Fairview mentioned, these library facili ties can't be incorporated in the existing public building, the school in that jurisdiction. I accept the hon. member's comments that there's more to a comprehensive library service in this province than money. That is exactly it. Many of the schools are closed at 4 o'clock, the teachers are out, and nobody can make use of the books there.

I urge the hon. minister under whose department these libraries are now to try to get them transferred to the Minister of Education and place them under the one educational institution in the province, the education al system that is in that locale, [so that] whether it be a small four-by-four one-classroom school or a large, comprehensive school such as we see in some of our districts, it still has a library. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a couple of words to what has been said.

First of all, may I say that I support the principle of this bill, which of course is to remove the ceiling on grants which was imposed in the previous legislation. It's not too often I find myself in substantial agreement with the Leader of the Opposition and the Member for Spirit River-Fairview at the same time, but I must say that in today's debate I find myself in substantial agreement.

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1027 However, may I say that I believe the appropriate time to discuss the question of funding for libraries will be during the estimates of the Minister of Culture. As the president and several senior members of the executive of the Library Association of Alberta reside within my constituency, I've had an opportunity of meeting them and hearing their concerns.

Despite what my colleague the Member for Calgary McKnight may say about statistics, it seems to me that it is very difficult to brush aside the statistics presented to members of this Legislature by the Alberta Library Association. No matter how you cut it or slice it, it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that this province is at the bottom end of the scale. I would like to have an opportunity to say more on this subject during the estimates. But let us not obscure the fact that this bill is to remove the ceiling and to allow more flexibility when funds are made available.

Certainly I am one member of this House who is in full support of the concept of funding the libraries which do exist in this province. I can't for the life of me see why we are in the position we are in in this province. Therefore I would like to add my voice to those who have expressed their concerns today with regard to the question of providing a first-class library service to the people of this province. MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, I too would like to respond to the second reading of Bill 9, sponsored by the hon.

Member for Wainwright, and direct my comments to the minister and indeed to other members of the Assembly. It seems we're spending a great deal of time considering what should probably come in the esti mates. However, since that precedent has been set, I certainly intend to follow through on it. I disagree with the hon. Member for Medicine Hat-Redcliff, mainly on the assumption he agrees with other people. I don't think the whole story is out at all. I commiserate the minister. I've read statistics. I see where this year we're going to spend 27 cents per capita. But that's only part of the story, Mr. Speaker.

The city of Lethbridge this year spends $490,000 on its library, of which $25,000 comes from this government. One would think, when you talk about St. John's and Halifax, that this is a rather niggardly province in funding the libraries. However, I suggest that's not entirely true, because we have some unique situations in Alberta, and we must separate the operating from the capital. I would simply point out that British Columbia spent $.75 million on capital costs in libraries.

They were the exception, because Manitoba, New Brunswick, Ontario, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Quebec spent absolutely zero in capital assistance to the libraries,

whereas Alberta did spend something. However, we were talking about operations. I would suggest that part of that has to be considered when we look at the U of A here in Edmonton, which receives its money principally from the government. Last year it spent $250,000 on its extension library, which is primarily for the use of the public, certainly 90 per cent. Now that figure is not included in anybody's talk here today, that somehow Albertans are benefiting to the extent of a quarter million dollars, or roughly $235,000, from the U of A extension library. No one has mentioned that.

No one has mentioned that the University of Leth bridge has a facility, and they lend out to the public; indeed the Lethbridge Community College. We seem to hark back to the fact that the operational costs of the libraries average 27 cents, and we hear about the rest of Canada. I would like to point out that we in Alberta, in terms of the taxation on our property, spend considerably less, or the cost is considerably less, than in the rest of Canada. So one could make the case that the benefits in lower taxes in the community are partly offset by the increased contribution to the libraries of that city. MR.

CLARK: Pretty slender connection. MR. GOGO: Well, it may be and it may not. Certainly, as the hon. Leader of the Opposition knows, I've spoken more than once about the inadequate funding of libraries in Alberta, but I don't think it's quite as bad as some members tend to think. I think there is no question that the Downey report, The Right To Know, should be implemented almost in its entirety, and I happen to agree with the opposition in that situation. I don't think, however, the cards are on the table or the truth has been told with regard to the actual funding.

In the final analysis it's the resident of Alberta who has access to the libraries, and I suggest they are practically second to none. You can go in the library in Lethbridge, Alberta, and learn one of twelve languages. Maybe that has nothing to do with the library, but there's a lot of money spent on those tapes. You can learn every thing from Mozart to whoever in the Lethbridge library. When you start lumping in those costs with the capital costs of books to restock the shelves and replace the books, that cost of 27 cents or whatever it is per capita from this government is very well used.

I would simply wish to close by endorsing what I believe has been a very strong representation by the minister to the government to increase the contribu tions to the operating costs of libraries in Alberta, and I hope that next year he's more successful. However, Alberta can't lead in everything, and perhaps this is one exception where we're not quite leader of the pack. Thanks, Mr. Speaker. AN HON. MEMBER: Not quite. MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I hadn't intended to partici pate in this debate this afternoon.

Notwithstanding the advice of the colleagues in front of me, to either side, and beyond me, I am going to participate now for just one brief moment to say that I cannot share the opinion of the hon. Member for Lethbridge that the . . . MR. JOHNSTON: Lethbridge West. MR. KING: Lethbridge West. Thank you, Lethbridge East . . . that the Downey report, The Right To Know, should have been implemented, as I understood him to say, quickly and without too much discernment on the part of the government. I for one have some serious reservations about the content of the report

1028 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 and particularly its philosophical outlook. A number of specific proposals were made in the report that I believe have merit, and I think some of the specific proposals could have been implemented in isolation. But I would certainly differ from him in respect to implementation of the report as a whole. I think we have seen far too much evidence of the tendency toward centralization in this and other provinces. I think we should be particularly concerned about wanting to centralize just because we have the technology to centralize.

I think the question of whether we are going to increase centralization with respect to many of the activities of our life, particularly the dissemination of information and opinion, should be judged on far more than the mere question of whether we have the technological capability to centralize the decision making process with respect to libraries in some high-rise office building in Edmonton.

Whether the opinion is shared by my colleagues, I think there is a philosophical foundation underlying the production of that report which must be ques tioned very, very seriously and carefully before we implement that report holus-bolus. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I want to make a few comments on Bill No. 9 also. I'd like to say that if the people and the members are going to ask for increases in everything, we're certainly going to have to have some increased taxation and more inflation. While I would like to see some increase in library grants, it certainly isn't my top priority.

If I had the doing of it, library grants wouldn't be at the top of the list. I would have liked to see the library grant hold its own and stay the same. I hope the hon. minister, either in this debate or in the estimates, will give us the reason it was slightly reduced. There's still over $.5 million going out for libraries in the province. I find that the libraries in my constituency are very happy to receive the annual grant from the provincial government. This has been a real boost to the libraries in the constituency.

When we compare our libraries with those in other provinces, I am doubtful if I have very much to offer. I have been in the libraries in Fredericton, St. John's, Halifax, Winni peg, and Vancouver. I haven't seen a library that comes up to the Edmonton Public Library or the Calgary Public Library in any of those places. The Vancouver one does to a degree, but there are certainly deficiencies there that we have in this province. When I looked at the libraries in Frederic ton, Halifax, and St.

John's, I was amazed that many of them looked like the school libraries we have in some of our centralized libraries in this province. I would like to know how they figure out these grants of $2 per capita. I'd like to know who's getting it and where that money is going in those provinces, because their libraries, in my view, don't begin to come up to the libraries we have in this province. Having said that, I place reasonable priority on libraries even though probably half our population never goes to a public library. Maybe that's not a good reason for not wanting it increased tremendous ly.

I think books should be available. When we want a certain book, we want it, and so on. Since this bill now puts the meat of the act into regulations which will be passed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, and removes the ceiling, it seems to me the first thing the government is preparing for is to provide more money for libraries. Otherwise, why remove the ceiling? It seems a logical first step. But the meat of the act from now on will be by regulations. Consequently, it's difficult to discuss the bill without knowing just what those regulations are. I'm like the hon. member who just spoke.

I don't fall over and bow to the Downey report. There are a lot of things in it with which I don't agree, and with which the people of rural Alberta don't agree. I think a lot of input could have been given to that report concerning people in the out-of-the-way places, not just Calgary, Edmonton, Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, and Grande Prairie, the larger places, important as they might be. I've been in the library in Lethbridge and I found it adequate for everything I wanted — completely adequate. There are three or four items I would like to mention, since the meat of the act is now going to be in regulations.

Number one, I hope the regulations would leave the selection of books in the hands of the local libraries. I would point out that the library in the city of Drumheller isn't as extensive as the public library in Edmonton, but it's a good library and used extensively by the people of the area and of the rural area. But when the librarian gets the government grant every year, it's her responsibility to work out the books at the price they are in order to supplement the books asked for during the year but which we didn't have, or to bring the rest of the library up to a modern state.

I think that's important — the local selection of books should be left as a very, very tangible part of the new regulations. When we're talking about the amount of money for libraries, I would like to deal with this matter of duplication. Today we have a great deal of duplica tion in the libraries in this province. As a matter of fact, right in the city of Edmonton there's a lot of duplication among the university library, the provin cial library, and the public library. You can go in one and row after row of identical books are in both the other libraries.

If we're going to do this, I would like to see the major items in the main library and a revolving or travelling

section of books in the other libraries in the city. I believe that's what's done in Calgary. The major reference books are found in one library. The other libraries don't have those major reference books. I don't think it's out of the way to say to people that all the major references on highway building, on gasification of coal, on extract ing oil from sands, et cetera should be in one place and not duplicated in every library. I think that makes sense. I hope the new regulations will endeavor to have libraries work out the items in which they will specialize, and avoid duplication.

I really think we have a great deal of duplication today. Again, I don't think any government in Canada is quite as fair in permitting the building-up of libraries in various departments dealing with the particular items in that department. I don't think this is bad. I think it saves a tremendous amount of time for the Department of Transportation to have a library of the books that definitely concern that particular science, or for the Attorney General's Department to have a library of its own on the statutes of the various provinces.

In my view that isn't duplication; that makes good sense, because they're being used

May 3, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 1029 extensively in that area. But the duplication I'm talking about is having almost identical books within blocks. I really don't see any reason for that. The next point I'd like to deal with is the matter of travelling libraries and the revolving exchange of books. The Red Deer Valley School Division in Drumheller has an excellent library. Every school in that division has an exchange of books as often as the teacher wants it. Periodically, 40, 50, or 100 books are sent back and 40, 50, or 100 books are sent to the school. So there's a constant movement of books.

In my mind, that makes real good sense. The Drum heller Public Library does not duplicate the books found in the school library. That again makes good sense. I think that is something that can be done province-wide to good advantage, so that we can get greater value for every dollar spent on our libraries. Revolving exchange of books and travelling libraries are very excellent. To a degree I believe in regional libraries where there can be similar exchange, but I don't think we should try to duplicate everything found in the school libraries today.

I would like to see the school libraries made a little more open, so that more than just the students have the advantage of that revolving movement of those books. I can't see any reason why that can't be done. At one time our schools looked upon their gymnasiums as sacred grounds, and nobody could put a foot into the gymnasium after 4 o'clock. That's no longer the case. Because of a change of thinking over the past several years, our gymnasiums are now being used extensively Satur days, Sundays, and evenings. That's the way it should be. A lot of money is spent on those gyms, and so with school libraries.

So I would like to see a very definite liaison between school libraries and public libraries in order to make the best use of the library dollar. There's one other point I would like to mention, since the meat of the act is now going to be by regulation, and that is that there should be an escalating grant. The need is far greater in some places than in others. I would lean to the higher grant for libraries in places where there's volunteer service, providing that library is kept open a reasona ble amount of time to serve the needs of the people of that area.

I would think that that type of library should receive some special consideration in the number of books it's able to purchase, so that it can increase the reading potential. I'm thinking of the Rockyford library in my own constituency, which was happy to receive a provincial grant. The library is not open full time — it's done by volunteer service — but it's open in accordance with the thinking of the people in the area. Everybody knows the hours it is open, and it would be a waste of public money to have that library open for eight or 10 hours a day.

If somebody is prepared to give his time to keep it open two hours a day or 10 hours a week or something like that, it would certainly increase the readability and the potential of the material they're able to get if they could get slightly higher grants. I would think the grants could escalate on some type of table. Where there is a tremendous library like that in Edmonton, maybe there isn't the need to make that grant the same amount per capita as in a smaller area.

Certainly they have a much wider potential and they have different types of books, but again there are a number of sources for that type of technology. If we had the reference books on technology and the various sciences in one part of Edmonton, everyone would soon get to know that and it wouldn't be necessary. I like the idea that the provincial library uses. If I ask for a book they haven't got, they say, we don't keep that but the university library has it. Within hours the book is there, and you can have it for an hour, a day, or whatever time you've asked for. That makes good sense.

It's not necessary for the provin cial library to carry every book on every subject. There should be that liaison between various libraries in Edmonton. I think if we did more of that, followed the example of our provincial library, we could get better value for the money we're spending on libraries. I'm glad to see the ceiling raised on the per capita grants to libraries. I hope the new regulations will give some thought to a type of escalating grant, at least to some degree, in an effort to make sure we get full value for every dollar spent.

I think that's one of the things many people are looking at today: are we getting value out of this provincial money, or could it be better spent in some other way? As long as we're not duplicating, and as long as we're making availa ble the books people of that area want, I think we're providing a very excellent service, and the dollar spent there will give full value. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, before I reply to a few of the questions raised, I wonder if it would be permiss ible to revert to Introduction of Visitors? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS (reversion) MR. SCHMID: Mr.

Speaker, we have behind us in the public gallery visitors from the Federal Republic of Germany, from the Rheinische Braunkohlenwerke; also the president of The Uranerz Mining and Explora tion Company, who happens to live in Bonn, Germany. As you probably know, the mission, as the Premier has mentioned on several occasions, was most successful. One of the places we visited was the reclamation area of the Rheinische Braunkohlen werke near Cologne.

It was a revelation to all of us, I think, the excellent job that was being done there, and the possibilities which we may have in the province of Alberta to reclaim some of the land which already has been mined, and hopefully, of course, especially the land which is planned to be mined and/or reclaimed in the oil sands area. I see up there Dr. Nottmeyer, Dr. Kausch, and Mr. Peretti, accompanied by Mr. Theissen from the Department of the Environment. May I ask the gentlemen to rise and be recognized by this Assembly.

1030 ALBERTA HANSARD May 3, 1976 head: GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill 9 The Libraries Amendment Act, 1976 (continued) MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, it is a red-letter day not only because we have such distinguished visitors who will be travelling for a week in this province, studying the problems which may arise out of the mining of the oil sands in the Fort McMurray area, as well as different locations of our coal deposits in the province, but because it is the first time in the five years I have had the privilege of being a member of this Assembly that the hon.

Leader of the Opposition has spoken in support of a cultural development program. MR. CLARK: Horst, we'll get to your estimates in due course, and you prove us wrong again. MR. SCHMID: All I can say is this, Mr. Speaker: when I say the first time he has spoken in support of a cultural development program, I'm referring in this case especially to something like the libraries, which I am not aware he has spoken in support of since I have been a member of this Assembly. Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has said that the Downey report has been in our possession since June 1974.

I can only say this: I appreciate the tremendous amount of work which has gone into this report, and in being submitted to the government one can well imagine that it does take some time for different government departments, and to have the input from the librarians of the province to determine whether or not they are in agreement with what this report has to say. We have had hearings in the province, Mr. Speaker. We are now evaluating what has come to us.

If we instituted the total recommen dations of the Downey report, which in fact not even the Library Association of Alberta has asked us to do immediately, it would cost approximately $10 million in the first year alone. Last Saturday I had the privilege of attending the convention of the Library Association of Alberta at Lake Louise. It was mentioned that probably it was something like Daniel walking into the lions' den, because you can well imagine the serious concern all the librarians have regarding support of our libraries. All I can say is this, Mr.

Speaker: I am afraid that in the priorities of this government — the overall cut of the budget, which we probably will discuss later on, being about 14 per cent — it was not impossible to list the libraries of this province in the priorities which the government felt had to be looked after, such as law reform, rent, housing, and of course, hopefully, still our handicapped and our senior citizens.

Advanced Education, Education, and Alberta Cul ture are presently studying the report, trying to determine what of the report could be implemented without having to add excessive costs, without maybe centralizing, as the hon. Member for Edmonton Highlands mentioned, too much of the program into one area. All these things, hopefully, will come out as soon as possible. I have to repeat that the cost of $10 million was just too much. The hon.

Member for Drayton Valley mentioned volunteers and their contribution to the library service in Alberta, which has always been appreciated by every single resident of this province. I think one of the basic foundations of any democratic society is the volunteers who, in this case again, help in the library, not only in the distribution of books, but to keep the library buildings intact and maintained, and then, of course, even to keep the books bound the way they are supposed to be, because moneys for things like this are just not available as much as some people would like. The preservation, Mr.

Speaker, of our heritage, be it Government House or be it the written word, or for that matter any historic or archaelogical site or building, should be taken in a combined context. The preservation of a historic site such as Government House is just as important — and I'm saying just as important — as the provision of library service to Albertans. Even to compare them would not be quite correct.

Both are important if we are looking to a future which preserves what our ancestors, the pioneers, provided for in this rich province in which we are privileged to live, and to provide in writing, in novels, in all other things recorded in books, the kind of information for future generations who continue to seek not only economic betterment but also a spiritu al and scientific one. Mr. Speaker, I may be disproven by the hon.

Member for Spirit River-Fairview, I appreciate his comments, but at least as long as I have been sitting in the House — I have to read Hansard probably — but I have to say it could be another red-letter day in the hon. member's having spoken in support of the library service in the province of Alberta. Again, I appreciate his concern. I can only assure him that, as he mentioned, if the Book of Knowledge stems from 1923, what more can I say?

For 36 years the Social Credit government was in there, so it would add to it to 1959 and we still have another 10 years to go, in fact 12 years to go, to arrive at 1971 to redo what was not done for 36 years under the former government. I should also mention, of course, Mr. Speaker, and someday I would like to get the information, because I'm still not quite aware why the former government restricted the provisions for library grants and recrea tion facilities in the cities to a much lower amount than the rural areas were able to get. I'm not saying, Mr.

Speaker, that the amount spent for rural areas should have been restricted, not at all. But at least the people in the city, I think, should have equal right, should have equal opportunity, to have as much available; in fact sometimes more, because they haven't got the opportunity to enjoy the freedom of country life, which is sometimes so very stimulating in general to the quality of life in this province. Mr. Speaker, as has been mentioned, I have asked the Library Trustees' Association of Alberta and the Library Associati

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19760503
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L18 S2 19760503 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	884d1e3c03c2a7cdc0292b03f8c6be6d3d7d32dc

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