Dr. Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday in the House the Premier was asked questions that came directly from guests in the gallery. 

The Premier was dismissive and perhaps disrespectful of the guests by not answering their questions. Today we ask the Premier to do the right thing and provide real answers, that the guests were seeking.

To the Premier. The Seniors budget shows $119 million allocated to supports for the delivery system. What does this money pay for, and why is there such a large difference in how this is allocated across six PDD regions?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we have provision for discussion of estimates. All departments are bringing their estimates forward. I believe the opposition has close to two hours on each department to ask these questions. The ministers are able to provide specifics to every line item in that budget.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, another question from yesterday: why is $915,000 going to board governance when the board members are typically volunteers? Why is there such a large difference in this spending between the six regions?

Mr. Stelmach: A very good question. We’ll find out during the estimates why the discrepancy, and if there are some boards that are charging more for their input as board members than others, then we want to know about it. If some are doing that on a volunteer basis, we certainly commend them and will try and find out why other boards aren’t doing it.

Dr. Swann: Well, since Seniors is already done, Mr. Speaker, I guess I would ask a third question to the Premier. The minister of seniors stated that the PDD budget will not be increased but that any efficiency savings that come from her department would be directed to front-line staff. How much will need to be found in efficiencies to accommodate PDD caseloads, that are increasing by 50 to 100 per year?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the overall support for the vulnerable has increased in the budget, but the question I would have to the hon. member is: why is it that the good questions have now come from those that offered those questions and not from members across the House? Now he’s saying that we’ve already done the estimates and that we can’t ask those questions. I would say: put those questions all in writing, and the minister will give detail to every question.

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

Municipal Sustainability Funding

Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government likes to talk up its municipal sustainability funding. In fact, in press releases it’s claiming that the municipal sustainability initiative will be maintained over time, but this program is now being stretched out far beyond the original number of years. Again to the Premier: given that the government is providing less each year than was agreed upon when the MSI was signed three years ago, why is the government claiming in press releases that funding has actually increased?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we are committed to $11.3 billion over 10 years. Given this economic downturn I spoke very honestly in open dialogue with municipalities and said: “Look, we can’t dip even further into savings than we have already to date to sustain municipal funding. Would you be open to stretching that 10-year period another year or two?” All municipalities agree that that’s the way to go. They appreciate the funding. Notwithstanding the fact that it isn’t as much as what they thought they were going to receive in the original plan, it is still much more than any other province supports their municipalities anywhere in the country of Canada.

Dr. Swann: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, the question was: why is the government claiming to be increasing the funding?

Mr. Stelmach: Municipalities are receiving today more for infrastructure than back in 2007. That’s very clear.

Dr. Swann: Well, Mr. Speaker, the original deal promised to stretch out over 10 years, but now the money is going to be stretched over more, so less money each year. Does the Premier accept that his government broke its word again to municipalities in the province?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, we’re working in partnership with
municipalities.

The other thing is that we are receiving some very, very, very good tenders on infrastructure in the province, whether it be the building of roads, replacement of water or sewer, improvements to infrastructure no matter where we are in the province of Alberta, sometimes with as much as 40 per cent savings. So there may be less going this year in terms of some very specific grants, but on the other hand we’re getting a very good buy for the money that we’re investing in infrastructure. I would say that most municipalities said that it more than equals what they’ve seen in reduction in their municipal funding.

Alberta Hansard, February 25, 2010

[direct link to this article]