Laurie in Debate
Bill 214: Healthy Futures Act, Second Reading
Bill 214: Healthy Futures Act debate in the 26th Legislature of Alberta, 3rd Session by Ms. Laurie Blakeman, MLA Edmonton-Centre
Alberta Hansard – December 03, 2007
Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and my thanks to everyone that did stand up and participate in the debate on Bill 214, the Healthy Futures Act. I listened carefully to the points that were raised by members of the government caucus. You know, in going over the notes that I made, I really didn’t hear good arguments as to why this particular bill shouldn’t be passed. One of the strongest ones was, “Well, we can’t do it because we’re so short of physicians,” which didn’t strike me as a particularly good reason not to actually bring in something like health impact assessments. One person even said: health impact assessments are okay, just not this bill. Well, I’ll come back to that a little later because I think there’s something else going on here. We had another member who seemed to think that the bill was about joining a fitness club and some sort of wellness lifestyle and: get your vaccination, and everything will be good.
Really, the bill was based, in fact, on an environmental impact assessment, which this government currently uses or professes to use. That’s the same sort of setup, and it is intended to be evidence-based.
So contrary to what the Member for Calgary-Fish Creek was just saying, the whole point of this is that you gather information and then decide whether, in fact, it is a good idea on the balance of all things considered to proceed with a particular kind of development, not only one that government is doing itself or is funding or licensing in a large way. I think that’s important, that it is evidence-based; it is not subjective. But it does require the government to work together.
I heard a lot of, “Oh, we couldn’t possibly,” but no reasons as to why that couldn’t happen. It’s interesting, Mr. Speaker, because at the very same time that you often hear members of the government caucus raising great alarm over the rate at which the health budget is increasing, when you put something in front of them that says, “Okay. Let’s take a step back. Let’s take a long-term approach to public health and wellness. Let’s look at what we’re developing in the province that may be affecting our health and costing us a lot of money, and let’s do something about it,” it’s, “Oh, well, gee. No. Maybe not that. It’s a good idea, but not this bill.”
What I think might be happening here, Mr. Speaker, is that like many great Liberal ideas, they get pooh-poohed by the government caucus, but I suspect that the health impact assessment will miraculously be reincarnated as a government bill. We’ve seen that one before. We’ve got a health workforce strategy that the government just brought in. But oh, my goodness, when it was raised by the Liberal opposition, “Oh, we couldn’t possibly; absolutely not.” Or maybe the family violence bill that was originally brought in by the previous Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Beverly by two, Alice Hanson. Or we’ve just had a bill come through on promoting awareness of personal directives. In fact, that’s another policy position that is in the Alberta Liberal health policy book, called the red book, Creating a Healthy Future. So we have some 20-odd policies in here that, interestingly enough, are making their way into government policy. They don’t want to give the Liberals credit, but there it is. This document has been out since 2003, and we’re slowly seeing it turn up in government policy.
I suspect, Mr. Speaker, and I’m taking heart, that we will in fact see health impact assessments brought into place. This is an idea that Alberta needs. We need to balance industrial development with environmental protection and with public health and wellness. As I said, we have environmental impact assessments. Next I think we will see health impact assessments. That’s what we need to have, or we could be a very, very wealthy province with a lot of not very well people in it and not a lot of environment to support us once that development is gone. I don’t think anybody in this Assembly wants to see that.
This is a very practical idea, and I expect that we will see it come back. I’m glad that a number of people got a chance to explore the idea. They could save themselves a lot of time if they’d like to vote for it now, but I suspect – and it’s kind of sad – that just the very fact that it was brought forward by a member of the Official Opposition is enough for the government members to not support it, although, in fact, if they actually did look at it, or if it was coming from one of their members, they would support it.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[The voice vote indicated that the motion for second reading lost]
Other Sections
Youth Voice
@ The Leg
Photo Blog