►
Description
Legislative Assembly of Alberta
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
Good
afternoon
I'd
like
to
welcome
members,
staff
and
guests
to
this
meeting
of
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices.
My
name
is
Mark
Smith
MLA
for
Drayton
Valley,
Devon
and
chair
of
this
committee.
I'd
ask
that
members
and
those
joining
the
committee
at
the
table
introduce
themselves
for
the
record,
and
then
we
will
hear
from
those
joining
us
remotely
start
to
my
right.
B
Hearing
none
for
the
record.
I
would
note
the
following
substitutions
The
Honorable
Mr
McIver
is
substituting
for
Mr
Van
Dyken
and
The
Honorable
Mr
Hunter
will
be
Deputy
chair
today,
Mr
pancholi
will
be
substituting
for
The
Honorable,
Mr,
Cece
and
Ms
lovely
will
be
substituting
for
Mr
rain.
A
few
housekeeping
items
before
we
before
business
at
hand.
Please
note
that
the
microphones
are
operated
by
Hansard,
so
members
do
not
need
to
turn
them
on
or
off
committees.
Committee
proceedings
are
being
live
streamed
on
the
internet
and
broadcast
on
Alberta
assembly.
B
B
Finally,
I'm
also
pleased
to
note
that,
pursuant
to
the
motion
passed
on
February
9th,
there
will
be
American
sign
language
interpretation,
Services,
provided
for
this
meeting
on
to
point
two.
The
agenda
a
draft
agenda
has
been
distributed.
Does
anyone
have
any
issues
to
raise
or
changes
to
propose.
B
J
B
Turning
now
to
our
main
item
of
business,
we
have
the
committee's
deliberations
and
recommendations
regarding
the
office
of
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
annual
report
for
2021-22,
pursuant
to
standing
order.
52.041
committee
members
wishing
to
propose
substantive
motions
were
asked
to
put
them
on
notice
to
ensure
all
members
would
have
a
chance
to
consider
the
various
proposals
that
may
be
raised
today.
B
C
B
It
will
be
up
shortly,
everyone,
okay,
so
we
have
moved
by
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices,
a
move
by
Mr
Hunter
that
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices
recommend
that
the
office
of
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
and
relevant
Ministries
work
together
to
identify
identify
ways
to
improve
the
outcomes
for
Children
and
Youth
in
care
in
Alberta,
and
that
should
be
up
here
presently.
B
Does
that
look
like
what
you
want?
Okay,
so
we
now
have
the
capacity
for
discussion
on
the
motion.
Miss
pancholi.
G
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair
I,
certainly
want
to
indicate
that,
of
course,
the
general
Spirit
of
this
motion
is
something
that
we
support,
something
that
the
opposition
has
been
pretty
clear
in
advocating
for
for
some
time.
G
G
This
has
this
has
been
an
ongoing
process
and
we
don't
have
the
benefit
of
years
of
practice
that
has
taken
place
with
other
offices
of
the
legislature,
such
as
the
auditor
general.
It's
a
really
new
process
and
what
I
think
we've
seen
over
the
last
three
years
is
that
there
are
challenges
in
in
the
way
that
that
relationship
is
working
between
the
advocate
and
the
Ministries
and
how
they
are
working
together
to
improve
the
outcomes
for
children
in
Youth
and
Care.
G
The
official
opposition
has
been
clear
over
the
last
three
times
that
this
annual
report
from
The
Advocate
has
come
before
this
committee
that
improving
transparency
and
accountability,
which
is
the
core
of
why
this
process
even
happens
in
the
first
place.
It
has
to
be
the
primary
objective
of
this
committee.
It
is
to
shed
light
on
the
work,
that's
being
done
to
support
the
most
vulnerable,
Children
and
Youth,
and
so
we've
heard
I
think
in
the
most
recent.
G
G
The
child
and
youth
Advocates
seem
to
have
a
different
perception
about
their
input
and
certainly
some
gray
areas
around
when
a
recommendation
was
met
or
not
met,
or
why
updates
were
being
being
given
and
or
stopped
that
were
no
longer
being
given
by
Ministries,
so
certainly
working
together
to
identify
ways
to
improve
the
outcomes
appears
to
be
clear.
G
My
I
guess
my
my
hesitation.
A
little
bit
is
that
this
is
pretty
General.
This
motion,
there's
not
a
lot
of
you,
know
concrete
advice
or
recommendations,
that's
coming
about
how
they
should
be
working
together.
G
My
concern
is
that
this
is
perhaps
doesn't
go
far
enough,
because
it
simply
leaves
it
again
to
The
Advocate
and
the
Ministries
to
work
it
out
and,
as
we've
seen
over
three
years,
it
doesn't
seem
to
be
working
out,
at
least
to
the
level
of
transparency
that
I
think
albertans
expect
for
the
severity
and
significance
of
this
issue.
G
So,
while
I
I
think
we
can
support
this
motion,
I
do
think
we
need
to
be
a
little
bit
more
Concrete
in
terms
of
what
recommendations
can
be
made
to
improve
that
transparency
and
accountability.
B
D
It
is
a
motion
that
I
can
support,
because
I
think
the
most
important
thing
we
heard
from
the
the
presenters,
both
The
Advocate
and
and
the
departmental
presenters,
was
the
need
to
to
collaborate
to
to
continue
to
have
that
conversation.
I
understand.
You
know:
everybody
works
within
the
parameters
of
their
own
legal
limits
and
responsibilities,
so
leaving
it
a
little
bit
open,
but
actually
affirming
that
they
do
need
to
continue
to
work
together,
because
clearly
there
is
more
work
to
be
done.
There's
no
doubt
about
that.
They're
they're
they're!
D
Just
you
know,
when
you
read
the
tragedies
of
the
stories
that
The
Advocate
reports,
I,
don't
see
how
anyone
could
could
not
agree
that
there
is
a
need
to
work
together.
More
I
I
do
think
there
is
a
will
on
the
part
of
all
of
the
the
players
directly
to
speak
directly
to
each
other
and
to
try
and
do
a
solution,
try
and
find
solutions
to
move
forward.
D
So
I
yeah
in
briefly
I
think
they
do
need
to
work
together
and
I'm
totally
prepared
to
support
the
motion
as
this
dance.
So
thank
you.
Thank.
F
F
This
is
a
relatively
Anodyne
statement.
Recommendation
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
here
that
anyone
could
disagree
with.
The
ideal
is
indeed
that
the
office
of
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
would
be
able
to
work
collaboratively
together
with
the
Ministries,
but,
as
my
colleague
noted
I
think
we
have
seen
that
that
has
not
been
successfully
the
case.
F
So
this
recommendation
here
certainly
does
a
good
job
of
laying
out
the
outcome,
but
I
think
there's
certainly
more
that
we
have
the
opportunity
to
do
as
a
committee,
perhaps
to
work
towards
providing
some
of
the
systemic
change
that
will
help
us
to
get
there
and
I.
Imagine
we'll
perhaps
have
an
opportunity
to
debate
a
bit
more
on
that
a
little
later.
Thank
you.
Mr.
B
J
As
presented
because
the
spirit
everyone
that
spoke
before
me,
they
all
agreed
in
general.
The
spirit
is
in
the
spirit
of
this
motion,
which
is
asking
everyone
to
work
together,
and
we
should
give
them
the
flexibility
to
work
together
rather
than
too
prescriptive,
so
I
I
support
it,
as
is.
Thank
you.
B
E
Just
be
brief,
I
think
that
this
is
one
of
those
times
Mr
chair
when
the
greater
detail
in
prescription
is
required.
This
motion
kind
of
rolled
oats
and
may
preserve
I,
won't
vote
against
rolled
oats
and
maple
syrup,
but
I
certainly
I
think
that
we
should
be
more
prescriptive
in
in
giving
direction
to
the
legislature
from
this
committee
on
what
we
have
seen
as
evidence
as
a
need
for
a
a
greater
level
of
respect,
I
guess
from
the
Ministries
towards
the
office
of
the
child,
youth
Advocate
and
responding
to
recommendations.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
Dakin
and
our
second
year
motion
that
I
also
like
rolled
oats
and
and
maple
syrup
too.
B
Is
there
anybody
else
that
would
like
to
speak
to
the
motion
that
is
before
us,
either
online
or
in
the
room
hearing.
None
will
call
the
question
moved
by
Mr
hunter
that
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices
recommend
that
the
office
of
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
and
relevant
Ministries
work
together
to
identify
ways
to
improve
the
outcomes
for
Children
and
Youth
in
care
in
Alberta
all
those
in
favor
in
the
room,
please
say:
aye,
all
those
in
favor
online,
please
say
aye
all
right.
B
E
B
We'll
give
the
the
clerks
here
sometime.
Oh
there,
we
go
here
very
good,
okay,
so
moved
by
Mr
Dak
that
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices
recommends
that
the
Legislative
Assembly
refer
to
the
refer.
The
child
and
youth
Advocate
commit
act
to
a
committee
of
the
legislative
assembly
to
review
the
requirements
of
the
government
and
responding
to
recommendations
from
the
child
and
youth
advocate
in
reports
made
under
section
15
of
the
act
and
to
provide
any
recommendations.
It
considers
appropriate
for
improving
accountability
and
transparity
transparity
transparency.
Sorry
about
that
Mr
Dak.
E
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
think
over
the
past
to
while,
while
we
were
considering
testimony
from
the
office
of
child
youth,
Advocate
became
abundantly
clear
that
there
was
a
a
difficulty
problem
in
in
the
disconnect
between
the
Ministries
and
the
child
youth
Advocate
when
it
came
to
their
interpretations
of
a
satisfaction
of
recommendations,
and
there
were
questions
as
to
who
should
have
the
final
authority
to
determine
if,
indeed,
the
recommendation
be
closed,
when
further
update
should
be
provided
or
not
and
I.
E
Think
most
members
of
the
public
would
agree
that
one
would
expect
the
body
making.
The
recommendation
would
be
the
one
who
had
actually
determined
whether
or
not
that
recommendation
had
been
satisfied
or
not.
So
there
are
a
number
of
questions
around
the
process
and
around
the
reporting
of
recommendations
as
being
closed
or
not.
E
And
perhaps
a
new
legislation
might
be
required
if
the
legislature
so
deems
it
to
provide
Clarity
to
both
parties
and
a
level
of
higher
level
of
respect
for
the
recommendations
made
by
the
office
of
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
that
we
see
given
to
other
legislative
offices
as
well.
So
I
think
this
is
a
an
appropriate
and
prudent
move
to
make
this
recommendation
to
forward
this
legislative.
E
B
D
Thank
you
Mr
chair,
while
in
essence
I
don't
disagree
with
the
intent
of
the
motion.
My
response
would
be
that
this,
in
fact,
is
a
committee
of
the
legislature,
and
this
is
in
fact
exactly
what
we
have
already
been
tasked
to
do,
and
it
would
just
be
putting
it
spinning
it
off
into
another
like
why?
Don't
we
just
do
it
all
over
again
would
be
my
point,
and
so,
while
I
I
begin
with
that,
I
I,
don't
necessarily
agree
that
there's
a
problem
or
a
disconnect.
D
There
are
definitely
differences
of
mandate
and
constraint
between
the
two
departments
or
between
the
between
the
advocate
and
the
Departments,
and
so
definitely
there.
There
will
at
times
be
because
of
those
different
constraints,
different
points
of
view
on
things,
but
the
reality
is
that
an
advocate
doesn't
really
have
the
legal
Authority
to
mandate
that
the
legislature
has
to
act
in
a
certain
way.
The
legislature
has
to
decide
that
so
for
those
couple
of
reasons,
I
would
I,
while
I
support
the
sort
of
the
idea
of
it.
G
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
I
thank
Mr
Orr
for
his
comments.
G
What
I
will
say
is,
as
I
agree
that
there
is
not
that
Clarity
in
the
legislation
that
is
governing
the
child
and
youth
Advocate,
and
that
is
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
Act,
and
that
is
precisely
what
this
motion
is
about
is
to
take
a
look
and
specifically
to
review
that
legislation
to
see
whether
there
are
changes
that
are
required.
G
I
appreciate
that
we've
sort
of
partially
begun
that
conversation
within
this
committee
about
we've
identified
I
think
an
issue
and
a
challenge
with
respect
to
the
transparency
and
accountability
of
government
Ministries
for
recommendations
made
by
The
Advocate.
G
But
the
the
Mandate
of
the
committee
did
not
really
allow
for
the
review
of
the
act
itself
and
certainly
I.
Think
we've
had
a
thorough
conversation
as
well,
or
at
least
we've
hinted
at
it
in
this
in
this
committee,
about
comparing
the
the
powers
and
authorities
of
The
Advocate
as
compared
to
other
legislative
offices,
and
it
is
of
Interest
I.
G
Think
that
the
auditor
general,
actually,
the
act
that
governs
the
auditor
generals,
will
also
doesn't
specifically
address
the
the
recommendations
and
and
how
they
must
be
met
and
who
determines
that,
but
it
has
become
out
of
out
of
a
practice.
So
my
concern
is
that
you
know
we
need
to
have
that
conversation
of.
G
Why
is
it
that
other
officers
are
have
this
format
and
and
I
think
a
committee
of
the
assembly
that
could
bring
in
and
that
sort
of
perspective
more
broadly
about
what
is
the
proper
role
of
offices
of
the
legislature
and
what
are
comparing
their?
G
You
know
their
ability
to
request
information
require
information,
deem
recommendations
met
or
not
how
long
they
stay
open
for,
and
that's
sort
of
outside
the
purview
of
this
specific
committee
that
was
brought
together
to
address
simply
the
questions
of
how
Ministries
are
responding
to
current
recommendations
from
the
child
and
youth
advocate.
So
this
motion
is
not
presupposing
the
outcome
of
that.
It's
not
saying
this
is
what
we
will
require
and
what
we
won't
require.
G
G
For
example,
had
it
not
been
for
this
opportunity
to
have
a
back
and
forth,
for
example,
with
the
ministry
of
mental
health
and
addictions,
we
would
not
have
been
aware
that
the
that
the
ministry
did
not
seem
to
know
why
the
advocate
believed
a
youth.
Specific
opioid
strategy
was
necessary,
as
opposed
to
just
a
strategy.
Generally
speaking,
to
address
drug
poisoning,
we
had
the
representation
from
the
assistant.
Deputy
Minister
was
that
she
wasn't
aware
of
some
of
the
the
the
questions
and
and
concerns
specifically
around
youth
that
The
Advocate
had
had
the
ad.
G
Had
we
not
had
this
discussion,
the
committee
I
don't
think
that
would
have
come
forward,
because
The
Advocates
certainly
thought
that
they
had
communicated
that.
So
it
is
important
that
all
Ministries
that
have
recommendations
from
the
child,
youth
Advocate,
should
come
before
a
committee.
That
is
not
clear
in
the
legislation,
but
it's
clearly
something
that
that
lends
greater
transparency
and
accountability
to
outcomes
for
Children
and
Youth.
G
It
is
something
that
we
have
supported
in
this
on
the
official
opposition
side
for
three
years,
and
it's
something
The
Advocate
has
been
asking
for
for
three
years,
so
this
motion
I
think,
is
critically
important
to
have
a
committee
look
at
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
act
specifically
with
and
looking
at
the
the
powers
and
the
reports
that
are
made
under
section
15
of
that
act
and
seeing
what
measures
can
be
changed
as
compared
to
other
office
offices
to
to
make
it
more
accountable
and
transparent.
G
We
are
joined
in
our
in
our
concerns
around
this
this,
this
very,
very
dire
situation
and
and
crisis.
That's
occurring
right
now
and
I
think
we're
simply
saying:
let's
look
if
we,
let's
look
for
ways
to
be
more
accountable
and
transparent.
B
F
Now
we
have
we.
Finally,
all
at
this
table
came
to
the
consensus
that
we
would
actually
do
something
with
that
review
and
bring
the
respective
Ministries
to
the
table
to
have
that
discussion.
That
is
an
important
step
in
moving
forward,
and
in
that
discussion
we
found
that.
Indeed,
there
are
some
still
challenges.
The
status
quo
Mr
chair
is
not
adequate.
F
F
Let's
be
clear.
This
government
has
not
been
shy
about
being
prescriptive.
I
can
tell
you
that,
as
the
critic
for
health
from
the
folks,
I've
talked
to
both
in
the
public
service
and
various
bodies
that
are
under
the
ages
of
the
Department
of
Health
and
the
provincial
government.
This
is
not
a
government.
F
That's
been
shy
about
being
prescriptive
when
they
felt
there
was
an
outcome
that
they
wanted
to
reach,
and
this
is
not
a
government
that
is
shied
away
from
doing
a
review
of
legislation
when
they
felt
it
offered
the
kind
of
political
opportunity
or
cover
that
they
needed.
As
I
recall
from
our
review
of
the
public
health
Act
after
they
passed
some
embarrassing
portions
in
Bill
10
that
they
were
forced
to
walk
back
and
we
had
an
entire
committee
that
was
dedicated
to
trying
to
erase
that
from
the
memory
of
the
province.
F
C
Mr,
chair
I've,
listened
to
arguments
on
both
sides
of
of
this
issue,
and
you
know:
I
I
think
that
we
need
to
remember
that
even
in
the
title
of
the
office,
it
is
the
office
of
the
child
and
youth
Advocate.
It
is,
it
is
not.
It
is
not
the
audit
that
we
see
audit
function
that
we
would
see
in
the
oag
that
that
they
they
play
a
different
role,
a
different
responsibility
when
this
was
set
up.
C
It
was
specifically
designed
to
to
be
able
to
have
a
second
set
of
eyes
on
issues
to
be
able
to
give
a
different
perspective,
which
we
certainly
have
seen
and
and
I
take
my
hat
off
to
to
the
direction
that
we've
that
the
advocacy
that
the
oyc
or
ocya
is
is
doing,
but
I
I
have
to
say,
like
the
the
members
opposite.
What
they're
really
truly
asking
for
is
is
to
have
a
change
in
the
role
of
the
Advocacy
Office.
C
You
know
they
can
talk
about
transparency.
Well
when
it
comes
before
this.
This
is
public.
This
is
public
information.
Everybody
gets
to
know
about
this.
This
is
enhancered
there's.
This
is
pretty
transparent,
so
I
don't
know
if
the
transparency
argument
actually
I,
don't
I.
Don't
really
think
that
that
holds
sway
here,
but
I
think
that
the
argument
that
I'm
hearing
from
the
opposition
is
that,
rather
than
having
a
an
elected
body,
an
elected
committee
make
the
decisions
on
these
things
and
elected
in
terms
of
ministers.
C
In
these,
these
departments
make
the
decision
that
they
would
prefer
to
have
an
unelected
body
make
those
decisions.
I
reject
that
Mr,
chair
and
I.
Don't
think
that
is
transparent,
I
think
that
having
an
elected
body
which
falls
under
certain
parameters
under
the
legislative,
you
know,
hundreds
of
years
of
legislative
precedence
is
really
where
the
transparency
comes
from.
C
We've
seen
it
here
and
that
that
information
that
was
presented
was
received
by
the
Ministries
and
if
the
member's
opposite
field
differently,
there
will
be
an
opportunity
in
May
of
this
year
to
be
able
to
bring
forward
to
the
to
albertans
their
value
proposition
and
and
if
they
feel
that
that
is
not
in
the
best
interest
of
albertans.
C
That's
when
they
have
the
opportunity
to
be
able
to
present
to
albertans
I'm,
actually
quite
proud
of
the
work
that
our
Ministries
have
done,
to
try
to
be
able
to
address
some
very,
very
difficult
situations,
especially
in
light
of
what's
happened
with
kobit
I
know
many
people,
people
in
this
room
that
have
have
had
children
that
have
suffered
because
of
the
the
stresses
that
covet
has
brought
on.
C
There
is
more
need
than
ever
to
have
the
support
structure
for
our
children
and
for
our
grandchildren
for
albertans,
and
so
you
know,
I
was
a
little
offended
by
The
Honorable
member
saying
that
we
are
ambivalent
to
this
I.
Don't
think
that
we've
seen
shown
any
kind
of
ambivalence
to
to
the
importance
of
this
and
I
I
would
hope
that
he
was
not
saying
that
we
are
ambivalent
to
this
Mr
chair.
So
we
are
I.
I.
C
Think
that
the
first
motion
that
I
brought
forward
clearly
articulates
what
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish
here.
This
is
a
again
public-facing
committee.
Everybody
knows
now
that
we've
directed
The
Ministries
to
work
together
collaboratively
with
the
office
and
and
I
think
that
that
is,
is
they're.
Going
to
need
to
show
evidence
that
they're
doing
that
and
I
think
that's
where
we
need
to
go
with
this.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
Hendrick,
just
before
we
then
go
on
to
another.
Individual
I
just
want
to
recognize
that
Mr
tour
is
online
and
if
you
could
introduce
yourself
to
be
put
on
the
record,
please
Mr
Stewart.
G
G
Even
in
the
you
know,
even
as
I
said
at
Mr,
chair
I
have
to
say,
I
was
saying
it
in
the
hope
that
it
would
persuade
and
perhaps
tap
into
the
to
some
values
that
perhaps
members
of
the
of
the
government
side
might
have
that
would
trigger
them
and
and
and
make
them
feel
inspired
to
actually
do
a
small
thing.
A
very
small
thing,
which
was
to
actually
support
this
motion.
G
I'm,
not
I,
wasn't
confident
when
I
said
it
and
I'm
not
confident.
Now
that
that
there
is
a
shared
objective
around
the
table
from
all
the
members
about
improving
outcomes
for
Children
and
Youth
and
care,
because
this
is
an
issue
that
we
have
been
raising-
that
The
Advocate
has
been
raising
that
those
who
work
on
the
front
lines
with
children
in
Youth
and
Care
have
been
raising
for
two
years,
which
is
the
tragic
number
of
children
in
youth
in
care
who
have
died
in
the
last
two
years.
G
It
is
not
a
new
issue,
but
yet
here
we
are
at
the
very
tail
end
of
our
legislature
of
this
legislature,
where
suddenly,
this
government
members
have
thrown
a
smallest
of
Bones
on
this
issue,
which
was
to
allow
for
some
Ministries
after
rejecting
this
for
three
years,
allowing
some
Ministries
to
come
and
take
questions
from
this
committee
on
what
they're
doing
to
implement
or
respond
to
recommendations
from
the
child
and
youth
advocate.
They
picked
a
random
assortment
of
men,
Industries
which
they
would
agree
to
hear
from.
G
As
as
we
will
all
recall,
it
was
puzzling
as
to
why
indigenous
relations
was
here,
because
there
were
no
recommendations
from
the
ocya
for
them
puzzling.
As
to
why
Health
and
Justice,
who
had
a
number
of
recommendations
made
by
the
ocya,
were
not
brought
before
the
committee,
where
there's
a
lot
of
questions
that
were
around
their
recommendations.
But
we
didn't
get
an
opportunity
to
ask.
G
It
comes
from
I
think
a
profound
indifference
and
yes,
I
will
say
ambivalence
actually
ambivalence
I
believe
implies
a
sort
of
neutral
perspective
on
things
and
I.
Think
it's
actually
a
negligence
by
the
government
to
actually
understand
the
issues
to
take
them
seriously.
G
To
call
before
this
committee,
before
public
transparency,
those
Ministries
that
have
key
obligations
with
respect
to
Children
and
Youth
in
care
and
in
the
criminal
justice
system,
and
it
shows
a
profound
ambivalence
toward
their
job
because
for
Mr
Hunter
to
say
that
we're
asking
for
an
unelected
body
to
make
decisions
shows
he
doesn't
even
understand
what
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
does.
What
they're
empowered
to
do.
G
G
G
That
is
not
a
way
to
ask
questions
and
to
elicit
actual
information
about,
what's
being
done
and
what's
not
being
done
so
if
Mr
Hunter
wants
to
take
issue
with
this
motion
at
least
understand
the
role
of
the
advocate
at
least
understand
the
work.
They
do.
The
role
that
the
Ministries
do,
the
role
that
this
committee
does
and
the
role
that
the
legislation
does.
Otherwise
we
will
assume
that
it's
not
just
ambivalence
that
it
is
negligence
about
actually
doing
anything.
You
want
to
do
the
bare
minimum.
This
is
the
least
amount
that
this
that
this.
C
G
I
believe
that
the
government
members
are
doing
the
bare
minimum
when
they
are
refusing
to
even
consider
changes
to
legislation.
The
motion
is
purely
based
on
saying:
let's
refer
this
to
a
committee,
to
take
a
look
at
it
and
how
to
improve
transparency
and
accountability,
because
those
two
issues
were
very
clearly
problems.
They
were
brought
up
by
both
The
Advocate
and
the
Ministries
in
this
process.
G
So
if
the
government
members
are
serious
about
actually
doing
something,
rather
than
just
showing
in
the
last
dying
days
of
this
legislature
that
they're
doing
something,
then
this
should
be
an
easy
motion
for
them
to
support.
Thank.
B
B
J
B
Thank
you
very
much.
Is
there
anybody
else
either
in
the
online
or
in
the
room?
That
would
like
to
speak
to
this
motion.
Mr
Orr.
A
D
Opposite
want
to
claim.
The
government
is
negligent,
that
it's
ambivalent,
that
it's
unwilling
to
do
the
bare
minimum
that
it's
not
serious,
but
I
just
have
here
in
front
of
me
from
June,
2nd,
9
2016
at
the
very
beginning
of
the
member's
opposite
term
of
office,
as
Government
emotion,
passed
in
the
legislative
assembly
of
Alberta
that
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
act,
which
is
exactly
what
they're
asking
for
here,
be
referred
to
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices,
this
committee,
for
the
very
purpose
of
conducting
a
comprehensive
review
of
that
act.
D
So
the
NDP
can
say
all
they
want
about
this,
but
at
the
very
beginning
of
the
term,
they
had
four
years
to
do
exactly
what
they're,
claiming
now
we're
not
going
to
do.
Why
didn't
they
do
it
themselves
when
they
had
the
opportunity
it
was
there.
The
Act
was
the
the
motion
was
there
they
can
throw
around
all
kinds
of
critical
and
and
condemning
ideas
toward
this
government,
but
at
the
very
beginning
of
their
own
term
they
had
the
full
opportunity
to
do
it.
D
G
The
very
fact
that
we
actually
have
the
advocate
coming
and
making
recommendations
doing
mandatory
death
reviews
is
because
of
the
changes
that
the
NDP
made
to
that
act
that
made
to
that
office
to
give
them
the
authority
to
do
those
investigations
require
them
to
do
them
every
six
months
and
to
table
that
report
with
the
legislature
and
to
include
recommendations.
But
as
I
mentioned,
this
is
a
new
process.
Mr
Orr,
and
during
that
process
we
found
out
that
things
are
not
happening.
G
The
way
we
had
wanted
them
to
the
whole
reason
that
act
was
changed
through
the
chair
the
whole.
The
whole
reason
that
act
was
changed.
Mr
chair
for
the
benefit
of
the
members
on
the
other
side,
who
don't
understand
the
history
of
this
issue
at
all
the
reason
that
act
was
changed
because
there
was
no
transparency
and
accountability
and
it
was
part
of
a
process.
G
A
Continuum
to
continually
approve,
improve
out,
comes
for
Children
and
Youth,
and
what
we've
heard
since
that
act
has
come
into
place
since
those
recommendations
and
the
changes
that
were
made
by
the
NDP
government
have
come
into
place.
Was
that
there's
more
work
to
do,
and
we
are
willing
to
do
that?
Work?
Who
is
not
willing
to
do
that?
Work
and
who
is
now
just
for
partisan
reasons
based
on
poor
information
and
a
lack
of
preparation
is
not
willing
to
support
this
motion
out
of
partisan
reasons.
G
I
mean
that's
the
that's
the
appalling
part,
if
you
just
if
the
members
of
the
of
the
government
would
just
simply
look
at
the
wording
and
and
say
do
we
agree
with
the
idea
that
there
should
be
improved
accountability
and
transparency
for
any
government,
whether
it
be
an
NDP
government
and
UCP
government?
This
is
not
about
that.
It's
about
Ministries,
being
transparent
and
accountable.
They
were
able
to
put
aside
their
Petty
partisanship.
Mr
chair
I
believe
they
would
see
that
this
is
a
motion
worth
supporting,
but
I
sincerely
doubt
they
will.
Thank.
B
B
K
Thank
you,
I
was
just
a
little
taken
aback
by
what
I
just
heard
the
I'll
remind
the
NDP
member.
That
just
spoke
that
she
has
a
wonderful
revisionist
version
of
history
in
her
mind,
or
certainly
on
her
lips.
The
fact
is,
the
NDP
government
was
drag
Kicking
and
Screaming
into
a
review
of
the
child
review.
The
way
children
are
looked
after
in
this
province
because
they
had
botched
the
job.
The
the
leader
of
the
time
had
to
fire
a
minister
or
two.
K
Certainly,
members
from
the
the
UCP
side
embarrassed
and
humiliated
the
NDP
into
looking
at
this
issue,
which
is
why
it
was
looked
at
now.
She
somehow
failed
to
mention
that,
so
what
I
hear
today
is
a
string
Mr
chair
of.
K
Yeah
I'm
I'm
addressing
the
motion
and
the
a
lot
of
the
debate
has
been
around
partisanship.
Then
what
we
see
from
the
NDP
side
is
nothing
but
partisan
ship
and
it's
it's.
It's
really
pathetic.
This
is
at
a
committee
of
the
legislature
and
they
want
to
review
it
to
Committee
of
the
legislature.
Mr
Speaker,
the
the
motion.
The
issues
of
looking
after
children
are
what's
important
here,
it's
what
we
should
focus
on.
K
Unfortunately,
the
other
side
is
trying
to
dissolve
this
into
Politics
on
the
eve
of
an
election,
and
they
haven't
really
said
anything
about
looking
after
children
and
I
would
like
us
all
to
return
the
debate
in
the
conversation
into
caring
for
the
children
that
we
are
all
responsible
for,
instead
of
trying
to
deflect
from
that
and
to
try
to
create
some
wedge
issue
before
the
election.
K
The
the
probably
one
of
the
greatest
responsibilities
that
we
have
in
the
legislative
assemblies
for
the
children
in
the
care
of
government
and
I
would
I
would
appeal
to
members
on
all
sides
of
this
meeting
to
talk
about
children
and
Care,
rather
than
let
this
dissolve
in
into
partisan
series
of
rants.
While
the
children
are
being
ignored
and
that's
what
I'm
interested
in
here
is
doing
things
to
make
sure
the
children
that
we
are
all
in
responsible
for
get
the
care
that
they
need.
B
B
If
you
want
something
to
say,
please
say
it
when
you
have
the
opportunity
as
you've
been
recognized
by
the
chair,
we
are
beginning
to
hear
some
repetition,
so
please
make
sure
that
the
points
that
you're
bringing
to
the
motion
bring
new
information
and
new
consideration
to
that
motion
and
I
believe
Mr
Shepard.
You
now
have
the
floor.
B
F
We
are
here
debating
how
we
can
improve
these
systems,
how
we
can
make
a
better
process
for
the
protection
of
children
in
the
province
of
Alberta.
Now
we
may
have
differing
interpretations.
Certainly,
we've
heard
some
creativity
from
the
government
side
as
well
just
now
in
terms
of
interpreting
how
things
have
happened
over
the
course
of
consecutive
governments
that
have
required
the
changes
that
were
brought
forward
by
a
bipartisan
committee
during
our
time
in
government.
F
And
making
the
recommendation
that
this
come
back
to
this
committee
again
Mr
chair,
it's
not
I,
recognize
that
it
may
sound
circuitous,
but
it
is.
It
is
part
of
the
point
that
we
had
this
discussion.
We
have
identified
an
issue.
It
is
not
under
the
Mandate
of
the
committee
right
now
as
a
part
of
the
review
of
the
act,
as
we
saw
at
the
last
meeting,
we
had
a
number
of
discussions
about
what
was
appropriate
for
discussion
within
the
circumstances.
F
F
B
Thank
you,
Mr
Shepard
is
there
anybody
that
has
anything
more
to
add
either
online
or
in
the
room.
B
Okay,
let
us
read
the
motion
and
then
we
will
vote.
B
Moved
by
Mr
Dak
that
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices
recommends
that
the
Legislative
Assembly
refer,
the
child
and
youth
Advocate
act
to
a
committee
of
the
legislative
assembly
to
review
the
requirements
of
the
government
in
responding
to
recommendations
from
the
child
and
youth
advocate
in
reports
made
under
section
15
of
the
act
and
to
provide
any
recommendations.
It
considers
appropriate
for
improving
accountability
and
transparency.
B
J
J
B
We
now
are
moving
on
to
the
report
to
the
legislative
assembly.
Thank
you.
Everyone.
Having
concluded
our
deliberations,
we
are
at
the
point
where
we
should
consider
providing
direction
to
the
Legislative
Assembly
office
regarding
the
preparation
of
a
draft
report.
At
this
time,
I
would
ask
Mrs
Ms
Robert
to
provide
us
with
a
brief
overview
of
this
process.
Ms
Robert
thank.
H
Typically,
at
the
end
of
a
review,
a
committee
will
direct
Research
Services
with
the
Legislative
Assembly
office
to
prepare
a
draft
report
for
the
review
and
approval
of
the
committee
reports
are
generally
organized
in
about
three
different
sections:
there's
introduction
an
introductory
section,
which
of
course
lays
out
the
statutory
requirement
for
the
review.
The
government
motion
that
made
the
referral
for
the
review.
H
The
second
section
is
about
committee
activities,
the
work
that
the
committee
did
undertook
to
receive
information
from
stakeholders
and
then
the
third
section
is
centered
around
the
recommendations
that
the
committee
has
agreed
to,
and
it
includes
the
the
text
of
the
recommendation
and
any
contextual
information
that
will
help
the
reader
understand
the
purpose
of
the
recommendation.
H
That's
the
the
the
basically
what
what
the
main
report
looks
like
and
any
minority
reports
are
appended
to
the
end
of
the
main
report.
So
that's
that's
all
there
is
to
it.
Thank
you.
B
G
B
B
B
B
That
motion
is
carried
yes,
just
to
review
that
comment
based
on
where
we
find
ourselves
today.
It
is
reasonable
to
anticipate
that
we
will
be
able
to
have
our
report
finalized
and
tabled
as
an
intercessional
deposit
shortly
before
a
session
resumes,
and
if
any
committee
members
are
considering
submitting
a
Minority,
Report
I
would
suggest
you
let
the
committee
clerk
know
as
soon
as
possible
and
be
prepared
to
provide
it
by
10
a.m.
B
B
B
In
order
to
ensure
a
complete
record
of
our
work,
we
could
consider
an
alternative
method
for
approving
the
minutes
of
this
meeting
in
other
committees.
The
chair
has
been
authorized
to
approve
the
final
minutes
after
a
copy
has
been
distributed
to
committee
members
for
their
consideration.
Does
anyone
have
any
thoughts
on
this
Mr
Orr.
I
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
just
based
on
General
experience.
There
hasn't
been
a
hard
and
fast
rule,
but
it's
certainly
in
the
order
of
a
week
or
so
normally
what
would
happen
is
once
the
minutes
are
available.
Committee
members
will
be
advised
and
given
a
deadline
to
provide
any
questions.
Comments
concerns
to
the
chair
before
things
are
approved.
B
He
said,
there's
no
hard
and
fast
rule,
but
generally
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
committee
has
the
opportunity
to
provide
feedback.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
minutes
are
acceptable
to
the
committee
and
any
feedback
that
would
be
presented
to
me
would
be
be
overseen
and
brought
back
I'm
sure
for
committee
approval.
If
there
were
any
changes
that
needed
to
be
made.
Maybe.
D
It's
not
important
because
the
staff
team
does
such
a
good
job
with
Minister
for
any
issue
anyway,
I.
B
Thought
you
were
walking
a
a
really
fine
line.
Maybe
we're
going
to
get
yourself
into
trouble
there
Mr
Orr,
no.
D
It's
just
through
the
Committees
always
strikes
me
motions
contracts,
agreements
whatever
like
when,
like
the
fair.
B
Question
and
you
have
the
right
to
ask
that
question
okay,
so
we
have
potentially
a
draft
motion
here.
B
B
Any
opposed
in
the
room
any
opposed
online
I
call
that
motion
carry.
Are
there
any
items
for
discussion
under
other
business
if
not
on
to
the
next
meeting
date?
If
another
meeting
is
required,
it
will
be
at
the
call
of
the
chair
and
would
a
member
move
a
motion
to
adjourn
in
this
lovely,
moved
by
Ms
lovely
that
the
February
16
2023
meeting
of
the
standing
committee
on
legislative
offices
be
adjourned
all
in
favor
online.
All
in
favor.