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

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

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

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

As well as:

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Alberta Liberal Opposition would:

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

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

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

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

Alberta must get it right

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

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

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

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

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

The Climate Change Risk

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

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

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

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

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

Tackling Climate Change

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

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

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

At What Cost?

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

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

A Strong Plan Of Action

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

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

Innovative Solutions

Storing CO₂ underground

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

Coal-bed CO₂ injection

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

An Energy Efficiency Fund

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

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

The water policy for the Liberal Caucus.

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

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

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

That means:

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

Ensuring water quality

Provincial testing processes for drinking water need to be reviewed.

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

Watershed Stakeholders

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

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

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

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

Sustainability and Conservation

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

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

Environmental Protection

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

That means:

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

Public Participation

The Alberta Liberal Caucus vision for water management includes:

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

Environment Policy

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

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

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

THE WAY TO LOW-COST POWER FOR ALBERTA

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

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

It’s a matter of necessity.

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

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

Unfortunately, those days are gone.

DEREGULATION HAS FAILED

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

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

And Albertans are paying the price.

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

But the mess just gets worse.

DO YOU WANT TO SHOP AROUND FOR POWER?

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

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

Isn’t there a better way to do things?

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

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

LOW-COST POWER FOR ALBERTA

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

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

Under our Low-Cost Power for Alberta plan:

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

DEREGULATION HAS NOT WORKED FOR ALBERTA

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

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

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

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

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

Can Alberta be far behind?

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

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

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

All we need is political will.

Our plan is based on the following principles:

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

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

1. DISPATCH GENERATION AT MARGINAL-COST

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

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

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

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

And the cost savings would be passed on to Albertans.

2. FIXED-RATE COMPENSATION

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

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

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

3. ONE LOW RATE

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

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

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

4. ONE POWER COMPANY

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

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

5. STREAMLINE THE SYSTEM

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

6. INCORPORATE LONG-TERM PLANNING

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

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

7. CUT OUT THE MIDDLEMAN

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

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

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

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

Our plan un-bungles the mess created by deregulation.

What are these energy contracts they’re now selling?

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

Do I have to sign an energy contract?

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

What are the drawbacks of signing a contract?

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

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

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

Who should sign a contract?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Do I have to sign on the spot?

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

Do I need separate contracts for electricity and natural gas?

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

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

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

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

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

If there is a problem, who should I call?

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

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

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

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

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

Here are two places to call for help:

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

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

Loosening the Stranglehold of the Packers

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

The Alberta Liberal Plan

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

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

The Existing Environment

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

Capping the Lakeside Cargill and XL Foods Plant Operations

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

Packers and the Necessary Controls

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

Control in the Market

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

Edmonton – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition, is appalled that the Stelmach administration’s mismanagement has left Alberta Health Services with a $1.1 billion deficit – ten times what it was one year ago.

“When the nine health regions were disbanded, the collective health care deficit was $97 million,” Swann says. “In one short year, the Stelmach administration’s bungling has multiplied that deficit tenfold. The AHS deficit alone is now the size of the entire budget for Children and Youth Services…absolutely incredible.”

“Time and time again, Premier Stelmach and Health Minister Liepert have claimed that restructuring health care would help make the system sustainable,” Swann says. “Instead, the administration’s hasty, poorly planned changes have not only utterly failed to balance the books, they’ve thrown the system into chaos with reduced access and quality of care.”

Swann is calling on the Stelmach administration to provide a full public accounting of the AHS’s budget plans. At today’s Alberta Health Services board meeting, the board admitted that AHS will borrow money, if necessary, to cover the deficit, subject to a debt reduction plan.

“Today’s announcement mentioned increased revenues, savings opportunities and a debt reduction plan,” Swann says. “What does this mean to Albertans in real terms? Is the administration talking about extra fees for sick Albertans? Reduced services? Reduced hiring? Albertans need to know.”

“Premier Stelmach and his Tory administration caused this crisis. Where did this billion dollar deficit come from? How was all this money spent – and how far is he willing to risk people’s health to compensate for his mismanagement?” Swann asks.

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Denis Lapointe
Media Liaison
albertaliberalcaucus
Phone (403) 860-4330

Edmonton – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition, hopes that Health Minister Ron Liepert will keep his promise to release the final Alberta Health Services Board deficit numbers.

Liepert made the promise in response to a question from Swann in the Legislature on April 8th, and Swann hopes that the Minister will share the numbers, good or bad.

“The Stelmach administration must provide an honest accounting of the AHSB deficit,” Swann says. “It’s an opportunity for the Premier to live up to his promise of greater transparency and accountability. I hope a detailed accounting of the total deficit will be announced during tomorrow’s release of the Government of Alberta Annual Report, or at tomorrow’s public board meeting of Alberta Health Services in Calgary.”

Swann is worried that if the deficit is significantly larger than projected, the Stelmach administration will force Alberta Health Services to take the axe to health care.

“The Tory pattern is to spend like drunken sailors when times are good, and then slash programs and services when oil and gas revenues collapse,” Swann noted. “I’m afraid that if the deficit news is bad, the Premier will start delisting services, freeze capital spending or hiring, or perhaps even lay off health care professionals. Even the new South Calgary hospital, which the city desperately needs, could be at risk.”

Swann believes that better management could have prevented this mess.

“Centralizing upper management of the health care system was supposed to save taxpayers money, according to the Premier and his Health Minister,” Swann says. “And yet, the deficits keep growing – estimates range from $1.3 billion to $500 million. If Mr. Liepert keeps his promise and shares the audited numbers with Albertans, we’ll know if the situation is really as bad as it seems.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Denis Lapointe
Media Liaison
albertaliberalcaucus
Phone (403) 860-4330

Calgary – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition, has learned that yet another new clinic in Calgary will charge thousands of dollars for health care services.

A citizen in Calgary told Swann that he’s losing his family doctor because that doctor will be moving to a clinic called Provital Health and Wellness. Only patients who pay a yearly fee - $3500 the first year and $3000 every following year – at the new clinic will continue to be treated by their doctors.

“Every Alberta family needs a family doctor,” Swann says. “But should Alberta families have to pay $3000 a year or more for that privilege? In Ed Stelmach’s Alberta, it looks like the answer is yes.”

Provital is the latest clinic to follow this disturbing new business model, following Calgary’s Copeman clinic and others. Swann, who was once a practising physician, is concerned that more and more doctors, frustrated with the Stelmach administration’s incompetent handling of public health care, will be driven to these exclusive clinics. This developing trend makes it even harder for average Albertans to find family physicians.

“Given the acknowledged shortage of health care professionals in this province, it’s un-Albertan of the Premier to foster the creation of what amounts to exclusive private clinics – clinics that are, by the way, subsidized by the taxpayer, since these clinics still bill the province for medically necessary services.”

Limiting access with yearly fees creates a de facto two-tier health care system.

“Certainly these doctors have the right to offer extra services, some of them very useful to Albertans,” Swann says. “But every Albertan has the right, without paying extra fees, to see those doctors for services covered by taxpayer-funded Alberta Health Care, no matter what their economic status.”

– 30 –

For more information contact:

Denis Lapointe
Media Liaison
albertaliberalcaucus
Phone (403) 860-4330

Redford led the fight to kill Hehr’s bill that would have helped police fight crime now

Calgary – Kent Hehr, Alberta Liberal Justice Critic, wants Albertans to know that the Stelmach administration is just flexing like an oiled up body builder to appear tough for their benefit.

“This is another attempt by the government to appear tough on crime,” says Hehr. “I put forward a bill to make our streets safer. The Minister killed that bill, and now she’s playing Mad Max chasing imaginary criminals in nonexistent armoured cars. ”

The amendment to the Traffic Safety Act proposed by the Minister attempts to curtail criminals using armoured vehicles. Hehr doesn’t have a problem with the bill in principle, but feels that resources should be devoted to more immediate criminal threats.

“There is no indication that this is a necessary measure right now. This is not a real problem in Calgary, or any other part of Alberta. If I were cynical, I might conclude that this is a measure designed to feed off public fears,” he continues.

Hehr proposed a Private Member’s Bill, Bill 201, earlier this session that would have helped police cut down on gang violence immediately.

“The Minister of Transportation talks about his commitment to safer communities, but he’s reluctant to take real measures to increase Albertans’ safety, such as dealing with parents who are smoking in cars with young kids, addressing cell phone use on our roads, or punishing criminals who transport illegal firearms, which my bill would have accomplished.”

-30 –

For more information contact:
Neil Mackie
Director of Communications
albertaliberalcaucus
Phone (780) 934-4339

How can Iris Evans lecture about fiscal literacy when she’s travelling with hat in hand to borrow $5 billion?

Calgary – Alberta Liberal MLA Kent Hehr is amazed that Finance Minister Iris Evans had the gall to lecture Albertans about fiscal literacy on the very same day she was trying to borrow money to cover the largest deficit in Alberta history. 

“A couple of days ago we learned that the Stelmach administration’s projected deficit – already a record for Alberta – is spiraling higher and higher. Yet despite the Stelmach administration’s mismanagement of Alberta’s finances, the finance minister herself has the gall to lecture working Albertans about fiscal literacy even as she’s begging for billions.”

Harry Chase, Alberta Liberal Critic for Education and Children and Youth Services (and a former teacher), wonders how Evans’ fellow cabinet ministers feel about her remarks.

“By claiming that lack of proper education leads to mental illness and crime, Evans is basically saying that her colleague, Education Minister Dave Hancock, isn’t doing his job – that he’s failed to manage our public education system. And by implying that daycare means a second-rate childhood, she’s not only maligning the thousands of hard-working people in that industry, she’s saying that Children’s Services Minister Janis Tarchuk is helping to deliver sub-par service to Albertans,” Chase says.

“As a parent and grandparent, I respect the difficult choices Albertans have to make. Whether one parent chooses to stay home or both decide to work, we should be grateful that Albertans are doing their best to raise good kids. We believe that parents are the best people to decide how their children should be raised, not Iris Evans,” Chase adds.

-30-

For further information, contact:
Neil Mackie, Director of Communications
(780) 934-4339

Comments reveal Tories have no confidence in their own management of Alberta institutions

Edmonton - Alberta Liberal Leader David Swann is angered by comments reportedly made by Finance Minister Iris Evans in Toronto today and demands an immediate apology if her comments were reported accurately.

According to media reports, Evans claimed that proper child-rearing requires one parent to stay home while the other goes to work, implying that the hundreds of thousands of families with two working parents are neglecting their children. She also slammed Alberta’s public education system - the same system the Klein and Stelmach Tories have been in charge of for years - saying that a lack of education is leading Alberta kids to mental illness and crime.

“If she really said these things, she must apologize. If she doesn’t apologize, the Premier must fire her,” Swann says. “These are truly outrageous claims. I have never been as stunned by the sheer arrogance and ignorance of the Tories as I am today. This is even worse than Bill 44.”

“In a sense, Iris Evans did us all a favour, by revealing her contempt for the sacrifices made by hard-working Alberta families. It’s a fact of life in Alberta that in many families, both parents have to work - especially now! How much farther out of touch can the Tories get?”

In the past, Evans has acted as the Minister for Children’s Services, Health and Wellness, and Employment, Immigration and Industry, which makes her remarks even more shocking.

“This Minister has been in charge of all the areas she slammed today,” Swann says. “If she has no confidence in our public institutions, what does that say about her management of these departments? What does it say about Tory governance in general?

“It says that Alberta is now led by a group of small-minded social conservatives who don’t understand the problems of ordinary Albertans.  She even dismisses the genuine suffering of people with mental illnesses, blaming it on bad parenting and our schools.

“This Minister is responsible for the largest budget deficit in Alberta history, and she’s lecturing Albertans about financial management? Today, Iris Evans revealed the true face of the Stelmach Conservatives, and I am saddened and horrified by it. Only an immediate apology, and failing that, a firing, can restore a shred of Alberta’s reputation and dignity.”

-30-

For further information, contact:
Neil Mackie, Director of Communications
(780) 934-4339

Calgary – David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition, begins his Leader’s Tour of the province today at Good Earth Café in Calgary’s Glenmore Landing.

Swann’s goal is to meet as many Albertans as possible.

“As Leader of the Official Opposition, one of my most important duties is listening to Albertans. I want to hear your concerns, your challenges, and your hopes for the future,” Swann says.

The first day of Swann’s tour features stops in Calgary, Red Deer, Leduc and Edmonton. Later this summer, Swann will try to visit every major festival, rodeo and significant community gathering in the province. He will also arrange one-on-one meetings with community leaders, doctors, nurses, social workers, seniors, youth, aboriginals as well as representatives from the energy industry, environmentalist groups, human rights activists, labourers, small business owners, farmers – citizens from all walks of life. 

“I want to listen to everyone who has a story to tell or a dream to share,” Swann says. “We live in challenging times, but that’s when Albertans are at their best. Together we can get the economy back on track, fix our health care system, protect the environment and build safer communities.”

“Albertans have the solutions to today’s problems – they just need someone to listen and act.”

-30-

For further information, contact:
Neil Mackie, Director of Communications
albertaliberalcaucus
(780) 934-4339

Dr. David Swann wants to listen to as many Albertans as possible this summer! His tour starts on June 15, 2009 and includes stops in Calgary, Red Deer, Leduc and Edmonton. Watch the caucus calendar for times and places. 

Today, the World Health Organization declared that H1N1 flu is now a global pandemic.

This is a serious development. But now is not the time for any kind of panic. Albertans have faced serious challenges before, and we’ll face this one, too. Both citizens and the government must take steps to ensure that Albertans stay healthy in the wake of H1N1.

We are very fortunate that the fatality rate from H1N1 has been quite low so far. Most people show only mild symptoms.

But neither Albertans nor their government can afford to be complacent. Flu outbreaks often come on strong in the spring and then fade during the summer, only to return in the fall.

The government needs to be ready to deal with the possibility of additional H1N1 flu cases in Alberta. Such readiness requires:

• Ensuring that there is a sufficient number of doctors and nurses to care for an increase in patients
• Ensuring there is enough capacity in our hospitals to treat flu patients
• Having a sufficient supply of flu medications such as Tamiflu

Premier Stelmach and Health Minister Liepert are responsible for Alberta’s health care system. They must resolve the issues that are currently hampering our ability to respond to the flu: overcrowded emergency rooms, a shortage of doctors and nurses, and a critical shortage of beds. Alberta Liberals have warned for years that our health care system could be overwhelmed by a single catastrophic emergency, such as a sudden, serious disease outbreak.

While we hope that H1N1 does not cause any more Albertans to become ill, the need for preparedness remains. Ed Stelmach and Ron Liepert continue to experiment with our health care system at a time when we can least afford to make mistakes. I urge them both to prepare our health care system for the flu’s return.

-30-

For further information, contact:
Neil Mackie, Director of Communications
(780) 934-4339

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government has claimed that they will follow through on their promise to pay the unanticipated increase to teachers’ salaries due to changes to the average weekly earning index. 

Unfortunately, their promise has not been so far followed up with the necessary dollars to cover the salary increase. As a result, school boards have had to cut programs, reduce supplies, and raid their piggy banks to cover a promise the province made but has yet to deliver on.

To the Minister of Education: what progress has there been in determining where the money is going to come from, and what is the timeline for school boards to receive these much-needed funds?

Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, the first assumption that the hon. member makes is wrong. There has been no determination of what the actual amount of the average weekly earnings increase for Albertans has been. StatsCan had a process by which they determined it, which would have driven out an increase of 4.83 per cent. They changed their process, which under their new process drives out a 5.99 per cent. Our agreement with teachers is that their salaries will increase by the amount that the average weekly earnings of Albertans increases, and we need to determine in discussions with the Teachers’ Association and the School Boards Association and, of course, across government how to appropriately measure that. The fact that StatsCan has changed the way they measure it causes us a problem, and that’s the problem we need to resolve. What we’ve said is that we will fund whatever the appropriate amount is, and we will do that.

Mr. Chase: Unfortunately, as Alberta burns, you appear to be fiddling, and school boards can’t be waiting for that fiddling to end. You haven’t answered where it’s coming from, but maybe you will in the follow-up.

Luckily, due to its frugality the Calgary school board will not have to lay teachers off this year in order to afford the salary increase promised by this government, whatever that should be. How does the minister expect other school boards who aren’t as financially secure to find the money to pay for teachers’ salary increases?

Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, we have made it very clear to school boards that whatever the amount is, we will fund it. So there’s no reason for any school board in this province – and I’ve had that discussion with them directly on the phone to the board chairs and superintendents on budget day. I was down at the ASBA on Monday speaking to the School Boards Association, making it very clear that whatever the average weekly earning increase for Albertans is that we need to pay in accordance with the agreement with teachers, we will fund that. He doesn’t need to worry about that piece, nor do school boards. They should budget on the basis that they will have the money for their teachers’ increase. They don’t need to cut teachers to solve that problem.

What I have also said to them is that they should not prejudge that that average weekly earnings index is 5.99 per cent because if they prejudge that, they may put themselves in a very difficult position. So they should hold their budgets open. They should budget on the basis of 4.83 per cent for average weekly earnings until we determine what the actual number is with all those affected. When we do, if it’s more, they’ll get the funds for the more.

Mr. Chase: And in the meantime they’ll be forced to rehire young teachers, who they were forced to let go because of the intransigency of this government. The ASBA is looking for the government to act ASAP. It’s not happening. Given that public school boards have been forced to make cuts within their operating budgets to fulfill this province’s salary grid promise, why has the minister not proportionally reduced private school funding to last year’s levels to help make up for the public school funding shortfall? Spread the pain.

Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, he obviously didn’t hear the first two answers. Let me say it again. We have said to school boards – and they have a very clear message from us – that they should budget for average weekly earnings at 4.83 per cent. There’s no need to cut back. We’ve provided the funds to support that for teachers. We provided funds at 3 per cent, which should cover their other wage increases, and there’s no need for them to cut back on teachers or let young teachers go on that basis. If they have to budget for more money at a later date because the average weekly earnings are higher, they will have the money to do that. We’ve made that clear to school boards, and I hope now that I’ve made it clear to the hon. member.

Alberta Hansard, June 3, 2009

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With the slowing of the economy, the widespread mortgage fraud that occurred during the boom is beginning to become apparent. 

Cases of mortgage fraud are on the rise, and Service Alberta’s investigative unit assisted police on more than a thousand cases of mortgage fraud last year alone.

To the Minister of Service Alberta: what steps are being taken to address the rising number of cases of mortgage fraud in Alberta?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With respect to families facing tough times, mortgage fraud and those kinds of things, I know that our department is made aware of incidents that occur when people contact our department. On an ongoing basis we are aware of situations that go on, and we are looking at those, but again it’s about making sure that consumers know where to ask the questions and know where they can get support.

Mr. Kang: To the minister again: how is the minister increasing the enforcement ability of industry, such as the Real Estate Council of Alberta, to help deter these crimes?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have regular meetings with the Real Estate Council of Alberta and with the organizations based in Edmonton and in Calgary. They have a great emphasis on consumer education, consumer awareness when purchasers are looking at getting mortgages and on making sure that they assist with making good decisions that they can afford as well as making sure that they are working with the right individuals and are protected.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How is the minister working with the banks to investigate these crimes and prosecute the criminals involved?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With respect to the role of the banks with the federal government, again, we are aware of those situations that are going on. For Service Alberta, from the consumer education point of view, it is our department’s responsibility to make sure we give the consumers the tools and the information and to make sure they are accessing the information with respect to the federal banks and the banks here in Alberta.

Alberta Hansard, June 3, 2009

Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, as the buck passes between ministers, people are losing their homes while others can’t get off the street. 

Worse yet, the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs thinks cancelling the HEP fund program was a good-news story, and the Minister of Employment and Immigration doesn’t understand that $350 for a damage deposit, even for a single person, isn’t enough given rents for apartments in this province. Both ministers seem clearly out of touch with what’s happening on the street.

To the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs: what support, other than going to a shelter, is available for someone who is unable to qualify for emergency funding and can’t wait the two years to get a rent supplement?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can tell you that I’m very in touch with what’s happening out on the street, hon. member. I visit often with the organizations and the agencies in a number of municipalities across Alberta, and I know exactly what they’re looking for for services. What you’re referring to right now, emergent funding, is with Employment and Immigration, and I’ll ask the minister to respond.

Mr. Taylor: As I said before, the buck passes. Since the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs is no longer in charge of eviction prevention funding and likes to make that clear every time I ask a question, even dancing around the edges of that, the next questions are to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. How much money did that minister’s department receive to handle the other minister’s caseload of people who are looking for emergency funding for housing and used to look to her for it before they dropped the program?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I think the important thing to recognize is that individuals that require help will get the help on a timely basis and get the amount of help that they require to be able to find the proper accommodations. We know that in this province there is more available housing than there was a year ago, and we also know that rents in a lot of communities have gone down, so it is making it a lot easier for those with lower incomes to access accommodations or housing.

Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, no, it isn’t. Trying to keep or get into an apartment is a bureaucratic nightmare now that eviction prevention funding is under the Minister of Employment and Immigration’s responsibility. What is that minister doing to make the process easier to access, I mean, other than saying that it’s easy and other than saying that he’s got a big heart and that he’s going to look after everybody eventually? Or is the goal, ultimately, to save money by pushing people off the system and into a cardboard box in the river valley?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, our goal and our role is to provide a hand up for those particular individuals, and we want to ensure that they get proper accommodations. We do work with individuals, and those that need emergency assistance will receive that type of assistance, and those that require regular housing help will receive that help.

Alberta Hansard, June 3, 2009

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In May 2003 the government behind closed doors overruled a regulatory process and shifted all the costs of transmission upgrades onto the monthly electricity bills of Alberta consumers. 

Six years later we now know that this decision, made behind closed doors, shifted over $7 billion from the power generators to electricity consumers, who have already seen the full effects of electricity deregulation as it was implemented by this government. To the Premier: why did the government make the decision behind closed doors to overrule the regulatory process and shift an additional $7 billion onto the monthly bills of consumers and not leave it where it belonged, with the power generators?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the little devil is getting ahead of me, but I won’t listen to him. I don’t know. Maybe there was a window behind these closed doors that the hon. member was peeking into and could see who was around the table. I don’t know. Let’s be honest. Let’s be honest with all Albertans, all Canadians, and all Americans. One of the biggest issues we’re facing on this North American continent is an aging, very inefficient transmission system. At the end of the day it’s the consumer that pays the cost. If anybody says that some company pays the cost, that is bunk. That’s absolutely not true.

Now, here’s the thing. The other day we heard some comments with respect to carbon. Okay? Well, today because of this aging and inefficient system – can I just compare it to a water pipe? This water pipe has some holes. If you’re sending, let’s say, 10 gallons of water through that water pipe, you’re losing an X amount of water. Well, when somebody turns on their hair dryer or plugs in their car, all of a sudden we have to send more electricity down the line. Guess what? We lose more. This is not only adding to the carbon footprint, but we’re also burning more coal to make more electricity to lose more in the line getting to where the consumer is.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. The Premier knows full well – and he doesn’t have to get his little devil to tell him this – that the generators of electricity are the big winners in electricity deregulation and consumers again are the big losers. Now, given the fact that we need an additional $2 billion plus to upgrade our provincial interties, will the Premier guarantee here this afternoon in the Assembly to consumers that they will not have to foot the bill for the $2 billion in intertie upgrades that are needed?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, what I was referring to is a good transmission system within the province of Alberta. Here’s the issue. In southern Alberta we have a potential of generating a considerable amount of wind energy. That’s where the wind blows, except the consumer doesn’t live where the wind blows. Okay?

They live in Calgary. They live in Edmonton. We have to tie that wind energy, green energy, to a good transmission line, that we add the extra energy to, to get it to where the consumer is. We have tremendous potential in the future for more green energy. It could be even in-stream generation, power generation. It could also be more biomass. I mean, there’s a huge movement towards biomass. It’s the future, really, for Alberta. Wherever we’re creating that biomass energy, we have to also transmit those electrons to where the consumer lives. This is the discussion; this is where we’re going.

The other thing is that there are all kinds of costs attached. You know, one paper says $14 billion; one paper says $8 billion. We’ll know what the cost is when we actually get to the design stage. All I know is that we have to replace those transmission systems.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. This report which was issued yesterday indicates the total cost will be over $16 billion, and I would strongly urge the hon. Premier to read that.

Now, speaking of costs – again to the Premier – how can inflation be blamed for the skyrocketing costs for these transmission upgrades, which have increased from 3 and a half billion dollars to over $14 billion, plus the $2 billion for the intertie? How can inflation be blamed now for this dramatic increase when we see other construction projects in the province with a reduction in costs up to 40 per cent?

Mr. Stelmach: First of all, with respect to the intertie.

Mr. MacDonald: Did you read the report?

Mr. Stelmach: Can you give me time to answer? You asked the question.

Mr. MacDonald: It won’t matter.

Mr. Stelmach: Well, I guess if it won’t matter, why are you asking the question?

One of the things on the intertie is that it’s clear that the Alberta consumer won’t be paying the cost. However, to deal with this issue of aging lines and this cost of inflation, we were living in inflationary times, obviously, in the last number of years. All of these costs that we have that are quoted by the opposition and by one of the newspapers vary from $8 billion to $14 billion.

All I’m saying is that we have to make the decisions. Let’s identify where the transmission line is going to go, number one. Number two, let’s get on with the design and getting them constructed because four to five years from now there may be areas of this province of Alberta that are actually going to be short of electricity.

Workforce Employment Services

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. Given that the unemployment rate for Albertans in the construction industry is 13 per cent, for manufacturing it’s 8.7 per cent, for mining and gas it’s 8.5 per cent, and for youth in this province it’s over 12 per cent, what is this government doing to retrain these individuals so that they can get back in the workforce?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, we’ve got quite a number of initiatives to make sure that unemployed Albertans get to work or have the ability to work. Inasmuch as the member quotes numbers, we need to keep in mind that the unemployment level overall in the province of Alberta is more like 6 per cent rather than some of the numbers that he is identifying. He leads us to believe that our numbers are considerably higher. That means that we’ve got 94 per cent of Albertans working, that there are still some sectors that are short of employees.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can’t believe that this hon. member has very little sympathy for unemployed construction workers and for youth in this province between the ages of 16 and 24 who cannot find a job.

Again to the same minister: given that only 25 per cent of unemployed Albertans are receiving EI benefits, when is the Minister of Employment and Immigration finally going to stick up for and defend the interests of the unemployed in this province?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, we’re very actively engaged in offering additional training and upgrading to individuals that are looking for work. I’m very, very sympathetic to those who don’t have any jobs. Any time somebody loses their job, it’s very disconcerting for them, and I’m, again, very sympathetic to them.

We also do job matching. We’re making sure that we are continuously posting those jobs that are available. We’ve got thousands, as a matter of fact probably between 4,000 and 5,000 jobs that are posted on our website that are available. We do take a very active role in matching individuals to those particular jobs.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister. We know you’re very actively engaged in recruiting temporary foreign workers – that’s the truth – but for the unemployed people, you’re just leaving them out in the cold. Now, I personally wrote on behalf of our caucus to the federal government in February urging them to make EI payments more fair for unemployed Albertans and to make the same rules apply across the entire country. Why haven’t this minister and this government put more pressure on the federal government to make sure that the unemployment insurance rules are fair regardless of where the unemployed live, whether in Alberta or Ontario?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, there still is a good role for temporary foreign workers in the province of Alberta. Having said that, our priority is still to make sure that Albertans are first, that those individuals that the hon. member indicates – our youth, our aging population, or those from the aboriginal community or the disabled community – have opportunities to work when they can. We’re going to do everything for that to happen.

As well, Mr. Speaker, the Premier has talked to the federal government concerning EI reforms. I, too, have written to the minister. I have a scheduled phone call with the hon. minister tomorrow morning, as a matter of fact, to talk specifically on that.

Alberta Hansard, June 3, 2009

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. From fiscal ’07-08 to fiscal ’09-10 this administration’s total communications budget increased 55 per cent.

The ministries that had the largest budgets or received the largest increases are those that have the worst image problems. Alberta Environment, Energy, Health and Wellness, Sustainable Resource Development are among the big spenders, and of course the Premier’s Executive Council has received a considerable increase in the communications budget.

To the Premier: if the government needs to cut program spending in order to reduce its budget, will the Premier commit to communications being the first area audited and considered before cutting core social programs?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, a couple of things. One, with respect to the overall programs that we hold dear – health, education – we continued increases in the budget for education, advanced education, health, and social services. That is coming from our sustainability fund, that we’ve put together to deal with particular situations. With respect to the Public Affairs budget, that budget was debated here in the House. The hon. member will recall the fact that for the budget that was allocated to Public Affairs, we actually did not spend all that money in Public Affairs, and it was part of the 250 some-odd million dollars that went into savings at the end of the year to balance our budget.

Dr. Swann: Well, the Premier in his own ministry, Executive Council, spent $11 million on policy development and $25 million on communications through the Public Affairs Bureau and the new rebranding scheme. What is the Premier’s rationale for spending more on spin than on trying to improve government services?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I believe the member is referring to a three-year budget, the business plan. We are continuing with promoting Alberta to a global marketplace. It is very, very important that we do that. We get the message to the American decisionmakers. We have done some work, obviously, in Europe, and we’ll continue to do that because we do depend on exports of our commodities to markets, and that is what creates the wealth in Alberta that supports many of the social programs that the hon. member is talking about.

Dr. Swann: Well, given that some of his own ministers can’t remember the new million-dollar slogan, would the minister say to Albertans that this is a responsible way to spend 25 million public dollars?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, yes, it is. Just coming back from Europe and listening to the questions that were asked by investors – and I believe there was a few trillion dollars collectively that investors held to look at investment around the world. The fact that we were there and talked about some of the misinformation that was delivered to those investors by other groups dealing with the misinformation, giving them the correct information and inviting them to invest some of that money in the province of Alberta is integral if we’re going to keep our economy growing and support all of the programs that we enjoy.

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

Provincial Health Facilities

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Albertans find it concerning that the Premier only hears about important decisions occurring in one of the most critical ministries through internal documents we tabled in the House. Yesterday I asked the Premier questions regarding talks that Health Services is having with doctors’ groups for leasing public health facilities. The Premier did not know what I was referring to and said he would find out. Again to the Premier: will the Premier give the reason that Fort Saskatchewan hospital and the urology centre at the Rockyview are under consideration for being turned over to doctors’ groups?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’ll make it very clear. I don’t care what kind of information he has. I can assure people living in the constituency of Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville that the hospital will remain as a publicly funded institution in the province of Alberta.

No question about it.

Dr. Swann: Will the Premier now confirm that this is the reason why the Fort Saskatchewan hospital is under review and repurposing of the facility may happen?

Mr. Stelmach: I don’t know where he’s going. I just drove – actually, I stopped by to pick up some potted plants for Marie at the Home Depot. The hospital is being built just a bit south of the Home Depot and the other centre. Construction is proceeding. It looks like they’ve got the elevator shaft poured. This is, of course, a replacement facility for the Fort Saskatchewan facility that does a lot of work, a good partnership with the hospital in Lamont and other physicians in the city of Edmonton. It’s part of the ever-growing partnership and collaboration of our doctors and specialists that are doing good work in the province of Alberta, and they’ll have a brand new facility to work in.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, Albertans, including professional groups, are really unclear what this government is concealing about the plans for the health care system. Could the Premier talk about what other facilities are under consideration for professional groups, including doctors’ groups, to have a role in? Be open.

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, you know, a little angel is saying, “Don’t say this,” and a little devil is over here. He just questioned me about the cost of communication in the province of Alberta, and now we’re saying how we’re going to communicate to Albertans. We’re going to keep communicating with Albertans. Just, again, to all Albertans: we’re working very, very hard to ensure that our system, this good health system that we have, remains publicly funded, that it remains there for future generations, and we’re going to do whatever we can to improve the effectiveness and the quality of care in our province.

Alberta Hansard, June 3, 2009

Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, prior to Christmas a national news organization reported that certain tasers were firing outside the limits that the manufacturer was guaranteeing. 

In Alberta we found that we had some of these tasers in use, and the Solicitor General organized for some of them to be tested. The last time I asked this question, there were still some of these tasers out on the street that hadn’t been tested. I’m just following up on that. Have all of those tasers that were scheduled to be tested now had that procedure completed on them?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lindsay: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. To answer the question, we are anticipating that all of our tasers in this province will be tested by the end of June.

In regard to the recent article, I believe that the RCMP had 249 of the earlier models, the M26s, in Alberta. They’ve all been pulled off. In the remaining police forces in the province there were only 15 of them that were being used. They have been tested. The ones that proved to be good are back in service. The ones that weren’t have been pulled. Any that have not been tested have also been pulled. So it’s looked after here in Alberta due to our proactive testing.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Hehr: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The follow-up question – and I believe that the Solicitor General indicated this in estimates – is: will you be committing to a regular testing regime of all tasers
within this province, and if so, when can we expect this to begin?

Mr. Lindsay: Mr. Speaker, an excellent question. Yes, we did commit to regular testing. We’re putting the final finishes to that very quickly here. We’ll likely start off with a program where we will test them probably fairly frequently. Depending on those test results, we’ll re-evaluate the program as time goes on. We hope to have that in place fairly soon.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Hehr: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question for the Solicitor General. It’s my understanding through some of the research that I’ve done that the RCMP have a little more stringent guidelines on the use of tasers. People have commented on this, saying: why don’t we just simply adopt the RCMP guidelines to maybe improve on the standards already used in Alberta?

Mr. Lindsay: Again, Mr. Speaker, we did a thorough review of our guidelines a little over a year ago. We did put them in place, and they are probably the most stringent in Canada. Our guidelines are pretty much in agreement with the new guidelines that the RCMP came up with a few months ago.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Hydrogen sulphide, also known as sour gas, is highly toxic and could lead to eye irritation, sore throat, cough, nausea, and shortness of breath, and that’s at its very, very lowest levels. 

It’s average annual concentration at Mildred Lake in northern Alberta has increased 135 per cent over the last 10 years. The air in Wood Buffalo went from exceeding the standard 13 times five years ago to 350 times this last year. My questions are to the Minister of Environment. How does the minister explain exceeding the standard 350 times? What the heck is going on?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, the issue of the monitoring of air comes down to determining what are the levels at which the various operators are allowed to emit and determining when exceedances occur. The point at which the allowable limit is set is far less than the point at which there would be any risk to humans. The member is pointing out a serious concern that we have, a concern that we have taken up with the operators out there. We’ll be doing everything that we can to bring that under control, but I can assure the member that these exceedances do not equate to human health risk.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Well, thanks very much. This morning the level of sour gas at Mildred Lake was twice as high as Alberta’s standard.

To the minister: with consistent exceedances why isn’t the government forcing compliance?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, we are holding the operators accountable. I must reiterate yet one more time: there is a difference between an exceedance on an operating permit and human health risk. I can assure this member, I can assure all Albertans that should there be a point at which our air monitoring indicates that there is a health risk, we would be dealing with it in a decidedly different way.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much. Well, Mr. Minister, it’s 350 times, and it is sour gas.

My final question to the minister is: why isn’t the sour gas monitored in Fort MacKay, which is the closest populated area to Mildred Lake?

Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, we rely on a series of monitoring stations, some of which are permanent and some of which are mobile. The member knows perfectly well that we do have on occasion the ability to move mobile monitoring into locations that we feel are in need of monitoring. If the member has reason to believe that that mobile monitoring should be taking place, I would ask her to bring it to my attention.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The ability for employees to feel that their opinions and concerns are respected is one of the most important aspects in ensuring a satisfied and productive workforce. 

This is especially important when the staff involved work with vulnerable children and may feel the need to speak in the child’s best interest as opposed to that of their department.

To the Minister of Children and Youth Services: will the minister table the current internal complaints policy that is being used for issues staff have with both human resources and case-specific concerns?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Tarchuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have several mechanisms in place in which to take a look at workforce issues and workload issues. I can tell you that we have managers and supervisors on an ongoing basis that are always taking a look and monitoring workloads as well as a provincial committee that works with our unions. I think there are all kinds of mechanisms to take a look at what you’re talking about.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Chase: Thank you. You didn’t answer the question about tabling those policies. Hopefully that will follow.

Will the minister answer whether there is any whistle-blower protection within her own ministry for staff who feel that there is an issue that needs to be raised yet fear reprisal. If not, can the minister explain why this necessary protection for Children and Youth Services staff has not been implemented?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Tarchuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again I would say that I think we do have lots of mechanisms in place. I would always encourage staff to come forward to their manager or supervisors with any concerns.

Mr. Chase: Unfortunately, lots of mechanisms in place – without referring to specific mechanisms, which I’ve asked you to table, we’re just talking generically, and I’m looking for specifics. Since early March you’ve had in your possession the report regarding the Child and Youth Advocate. You’ve been asked on many occasions, including yesterday by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, to table this report, and the answer has always been that soon it will be released. Will the minister finally commit to tabling this document by the end of business today?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Tarchuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just reiterate what I said yesterday. It is true that I have a copy of the report. We have been working through a government response that I’ve mentioned in the last couple weeks. Just a reminder to the House that that response does have to go through an approval process. I can tell you that we’re very close to the end, and it is my intention to release it shortly.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Peter Lougheed hospital expansion was meant to add much-needed capacity to an overburdened health region. 

This expansion has been turned into simple replacement. In order to add 140 new beds, another 140 old beds have to be closed. This is government math that Calgarians are familiar with and are sick of. To the minister of health: why did you commit to expanding the Lougheed without any commitment toward operating funds? This makes no sense.

Mr. Liepert: Well, what makes no sense, Mr. Speaker, is that the member is making an assumption that may not be true.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When will there be sufficient operating funds given to this hospital so that an additional 140 beds will actually translate into an increase in capacity?

Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, any health facility expansion or capacity increase in this province is part of the annual budget of Alberta Health Services. I think this member was here when we passed the budget for our department. Alberta Health Services will be receiving some half a billion dollars in additional funding this year, and they will be charged to spend it accordingly.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we are getting mixed messages here. One day we are expanding the health care system. Another day we are cutting back.

To the minister again. The Peter Lougheed and the prostate laser are examples of how out of touch you and Alberta Health Services are with the citizens of Calgary. When will you begin to listen to what Albertans are telling you that they need?

Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, the only mixed messages that consistently come into this House are from that group over there, who one day want to spend and the next day want to save. They have to determine whether they’re savers or spenders. You can’t suck and blow at the same time.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The March 2009 chief executive officer report to the Alberta Health Services Board notes that at the start of this year there were 1,277 vacancies under the category of direct nursing. 

Now there is supposedly a surplus of nurses in this province. My first question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Why did the government order Dr. Duckett not to fill these 1,277 direct nursing positions?

Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, if the member has some documentation from somebody in government who he alleges made this order, I wish he’d show it to me because it didn’t come from me. What has happened in the last year are a number of things, and I think I explained it yesterday in the House. Number one, the new CEO has determined that we need to ensure that we have nurses doing what nurses are trained to do. Number two, it has been determined that, likely because of economic situations, a number of projected retirements have been put off. So there’s no real secrecy here. Times change. I guess I would ask the question: just because a number was used last year, does the opposition want us to go out and hire that many nurses if we don’t need them and then have to lay them off in a few months?

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Everyone knows that the hon. minister of health gets his marching orders from the Premier’s office.

My next question is to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. With the $45 million that is budgeted this year for health workforce development, who exactly is the government planning on training given that this minister and this Premier have ordered 1,277 nursing positions not to go filled by the Alberta Health Services Board?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I think we need to remember that nursing shortages can remain an issue in the future. As the minister of health has indicated, we need to look at it on a long-term basis and take a very long-term strategic planning approach to our workforce and the amount of people that we will need in the future of the province.

Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, given that sick Albertans are waiting in emergency rooms for services or emergency surgeries, who are they to believe, the Minister of Employment and Immigration or the minister of health? Again, to the Minister of Employment and Immigration: who ordered, to your knowledge, the 1,277 nursing positions not to be filled? Was it the minister of health, or was it the Minister of Immigration and Employment?

Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, there is nobody that has given me any orders in terms of cutting numbers or doing those changes that are happening. But I want to indicate and re-emphasize that as a government we continue to plan for the future by preparing more Albertans for health careers. That includes our physicians, our nursing – both RNs and LPNs – and anybody involved in the health professions.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, here we go again. The auto insurance rate review is under way, and the insurance industry is again calling for a whopping 40 per cent increase in premiums.

Nation-wide the insurance industry has seen a 2,000 per cent increase in its profits in the past five years, yet it still tries to make us believe that it can’t afford to pay injury claims without a cap in place. Once again this government has taken the side of insurance companies as the finance minister has contended that without the cap insurance rates will increase by 20 per cent. I’m sorry, but Albertans will find that unacceptable. To the minister of finance: does the minister agree with the proposed 40 per cent increase in insurance rates, or, put another way, where does the minister stand on the industry’s claim that that’s what it needs?

Ms Evans: You know, Mr. Speaker, as the spring session goes into the summer, I find it wonderful that the hon. member opposite and I are agreeing on an issue after all this time. He sounds as uninterested in a 40 per cent increase as I am. The request last year was 37 per cent. It made huge headlines. What did they get? Five per cent from the insurance rate board. What did they get in the years previous? Nothing until they got 5 per cent last year, and they substantiated that claim to the insurance rate board. That’s how they got it. But I am no more interested in seeing Albertans take a hike of 40 per cent than the hon. member opposite is. Good news, hon. member.

Mr. Taylor: We agree on something. Mr. Speaker, I’m gobsmacked.

Maybe the minister can explain this to me because the sense that I get is that we either all get shafted by the insurance companies with higher premiums, or the cap goes back in place and only the injured get shafted. That seems to be the choice that we’re being presented with between the industry and the minister, and that’s not much of a choice, but, you know, Mr. Speaker, I might be prepared to go along with it if the minister would table some sort of proof. Will the minister table the evidence on which she bases her claim that rates will go up by 20 per cent if the ruling against the minor injury cap is upheld on appeal?

Ms Evans: Well, Mr. Speaker, it would be premature for me to speculate further on the hon. member’s question. We still haven’t had the court ruling. We thought it was coming in December, January, February. We keep waiting for it. At that time we can more fully disclose and discuss strategy. But the hon. member makes a good point, that the requests are extraordinarily high, and we have no interest in substantiating them.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the minister: will the minister commit to implementing a freeze on auto insurance rates?

Ms Evans: You know, Mr. Speaker, I’ll just make one comment. Before we put the cap in place relative to the auto insurance, before we had that, we were having an escalation of rates that was significant. Today our rates are 13 per cent lower than they were when that cap was put in place. So we’ve had good news since 2004 because the action of the government at that time precipitated a much more reasonable insurance rate.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, fiscal conservatism is no longer an adage that can be claimed by this Tory administration. 

Unprecedented wealth has slipped through the administration’s fingers, and what are the people of Alberta left with? Cancer centres kept open by private donations, sick children being treated in tents, and a budgeting process based on the hope for improved commodity prices. These problems were created by this administration and their failure over years to manage our resources responsibly. They have failed. To the Premier: how does the Premier explain a record $4.7 billion deficit and a health care system in chaos?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, in terms of the amount of money that the government has set aside, let me start with just the last 10 years: $117 billion net transferred to Ottawa, over $23 billion paid off in debt, considerable savings in endowments to universities, the science ingenuity fund, the $17 billion sustainability fund, and since 1993 to today $41 billion in new infrastructure and actually about $19 billion just from about 2006 on in infrastructure. When you pull that all together, that’s a considerable amount of investment that went to the people of Alberta.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, I wonder how the Premier can explain the net loss in our primary savings account in this province since Premier Lougheed left office.

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I think many Canadians, Americans, and people around the world are asking that question, how through the lack of transparency in banking regulations in the United States, in Europe – I’m, quite frankly, very proud of the fact that we have stricter banking regulations in the country of Canada, that have stopped a lot of the precipitous drop in savings that, you know, has caused banks to go bankrupt in other countries as a result of rapidly decreasing, very volatile energy prices.

The other problem is that our best trading partner, the United States, is going through a tremendous economic downturn, trillions of dollars in debt. We’re going to have to watch our relationship there very carefully because I’m afraid of perhaps an increase in rates, maybe inflation coming in the future. We have to plan very carefully.

Dr. Swann: Will the Premier commit today in the public interest to an independent value-for-money audit of government spending?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we do have a very good discussion on public spending right here in this Legislative Assembly. We’ve just had, I believe, 20 days of discussion on the budget. The opposition asked questions, good questions, with respect to the spending. The budget has been delivered, and it will continue. Next year we’ll deliver another budget, and it’ll be openly debated in the House here as well.

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

Provincial Health Facilities

Dr. Swann: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. The changes this Premier has made to health care this past year have created anything but progress. Through this whole experiment the Premier and his minister have released no information and left the public and professionals guessing as to what is coming next. To the Premier. Internal Alberta Health Services documents indicate that this government is currently in talks with doctors’ groups for leasing publicly built hospitals such as Fort Saskatchewan and the urology centre in the Rockyview in Calgary. What is the Premier’s reason for turning these public facilities over to doctors’ groups?

Mr. Stelmach: You know, Mr. Speaker, just before I came here to question period, the opposition was giving out papers to the members of the media. Now he’s brought forward some allegation. I’m not aware of what’s happening in terms of a doctors’ group, not naming the doctors’ group. Without further information I can only take that question under consideration and will definitely find out what the question is all about and who the group is.

Dr. Swann: Well, let’s try the health minister, then. What specific doctors’ groups are you in talks with over private hospital use?

Mr. Liepert: Well, we talk to doctors all the time. You know, I’m not quite sure what this – Mr. Speaker, I’ve been waiting for this. The member used a term again that he’s used in this House, calling it an “experiment.” There’s only one experiment under way in this province, and that is the experiment the Alberta Liberals launched last December with this new leader, and I would suggest it’s been a failure.

Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, again to the health minister: what other facilities are you considering turning over to health groups?

Mr. Liepert: None, Mr. Speaker.

Alberta Hansard, June 2, 2009

In December, I won the leadership of the Alberta Liberal Party, the oldest, most durable political institution in Alberta. 

Since that time, I’ve dealt with a lot of issues, none more fascinating than coming to understand the role of Leader of the Official Opposition. It’s a heavy burden for anyone, because as unlikely as some of you may think it is, the role of Leader is to take over leadership of Her Majesty’s government if the current Premier is not up to the task.

This session, this Premier and this administration showed that they are not, in fact, up to the task.

My mission as Leader of the Official Opposition is to fight for a healthy Alberta. Healthy people, a healthy economy, a healthy society.

With a couple of exceptions, this session was not a good one for Alberta’s health, in any sense of the word.

Because the Stelmach administration followed their old pattern: they forgot about the law of unintended consequences.

Poor plann