The Alberta government has moved the Public Health Amendment Act to third reading. “We are amending the decision-making process during states of public health emergencies to ensure that elected, accountable, transparent and represented officials are making decisions during such events,” said Alberta Justice Minister and Attorney General Mickey Amery in a Thursday speech in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta. “We are doing this considering the Ingram court decision, which determined that public health orders issued under Section 29 of the Public Health Act in response to the COVID-19 pandemic did not align with Alberta’s legislation.”The Court of King’s Bench of Alberta invalidated the COVID-19 restrictions implemented by former chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw in July. READ MORE: Alberta court strikes down Hinshaw's public health orders that violated Charter freedomsThe Court of King’s Bench struck down these COVID-19 restrictions because they were issued by cabinet rather than Hinshaw. Hinshaw testified at trial politicians were the final decision-makers, and she provided advice and recommendations. Since they were invalidated, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms said it is expected Crown attorneys will need to withdraw charges against No More Lockdowns Rodeo organizer Ty Northcott, GraceLife Church pastor James Coates and Fairview Baptist Church.Amery called it “important that people elected by Albertans have the discretionary authority to make final decisions based on scientific and medical public health factors during a declared state of public health emergency.” As he has noted before in the Legislative Assembly, the Public Health Act in its current form requires all decisions about Section 29 be made by medical officers of health. Under amendments to Section 29 of the Public Health Act, he said they will clarify cabinet’s role in decision-making for public health orders during a declared state of emergency. Cabinet would be responsible for decisions affecting people and would retain final decision-making authority for orders impacting particular people or places. The Public Health Amendment Act guarantees the ultimate authority in decision-making during a state of emergency and the accompanying accountability and transparency reside in the hands of politicians. To further cabinet’s decision-making authority, proposed changes amount to a paramountcy clause that would provide it with the discretionary authority to reverse or vary any public health decision. Amery concluded by saying he appreciates the debate on these amendments. He expressed confidence the majority of MLAs comprehended and endorsed the purpose behind them. “I urge each member once again to cast their vote in favour of this bill,” he said. Alberta NDP MLA Court Ellingson (Calgary-Foothills) spoke against the Public Health Amendment Act. “It is disconcerting that decisions will be politicized and not based on science, nor will they be transparent, having seen this government vote down an amendment to increase transparency and ensure transparency in future decisions,” said Ellingson. “One might ask who cabinet will be seeking advice from.” Ellingson said Albertans cannot trust the government to make accountable, transparent decisions based on science. If the goal was to make scientific decisions, he said people “might ask the scientific background of those others being brought in to provide advice in decision-making.” The Alberta government introduced the Public Health Amendment Act on November 2 to clarify who is responsible for decisions in exceptional circumstances. READ MORE: UPDATED: Alberta government proposes changes to Public Health Act, with final decisions left in hands of politicians“Elected officials have a responsibility to act in the best interests of Albertans and swear an oath to duly and faithfully execute the powers and trust imparted,” said Amery. “This legislation ensures that final decision-making authority and the accountability that must come with it rest with those entrusted by Albertans.”
