As a result of COVID restrictions and other attempts to manage the activities and private utterances and beliefs of members of self-governing, professional associations, the Alberta government undertook a review of legislation pertaining to such associations. That review has been completed, and the government has tabled Bill 40, the Professional Governance Act.Having been an active member of one of those professional associations, I am naturally interested in the outcome of the review. What follows may cause a complete rupture in my continued membership in that professional association. We will see.The primary function of Bill 40 seems to be mostly administrative in that it consolidates the governing legislation of twenty-two associations into a single document and offers standardized guidance to all the affected professions under the Ministry of Advanced Education. Streamlining the legislation makes eminent sense. .The boilerplate provisions of the proposed act are suitable but not sufficient, however. The proposed bill offers general guidance about the areas of expertise that need guidance from the government. There must be statements of qualifications for new members of the professional associationThere must be requirements stipulating ongoing education of all membersThere must be committees to implement and audit practice reviewsThere must be governance bodies to manage the affairs of the associationsRegistrations and membership lists must be kept up to dateThere must be a process to handle complaints, investigations and disciplinary reviews There must be an appeal processThe proposed bill ends with a series of transitional provisions.If this were 1980, I would find the proposed bill to be adequate to my understanding of the legislative need. But it is 2025 and to me, it seems there are a few things missing. If I may, the following are some suggestions to the Honourable Minister for added guidance..The issue that drove the need for this legislative review was not just the duplication of legislation. It was the overreach of some of the professional associations into areas of personal worldview, that went beyond the appropriate purview of these professional bodies. Ensuring compliance with COVID mandates was not the business of professional associations. Diversity and inclusion mandates are determined by other pieces of legislation and managed by other areas of the government. Including them in the governance of professional associations arguably reduces rather than enhances public safety. Ongoing education mandated by the professional association should be restricted to the technical and legal aspects of professional work and not be expanded to include the social development dreams of a small group, which may have hijacked the Board of Directors. .My conclusion is that Bill 40 will profit from the inclusion of clear guardrails to prevent enthusiasts for particular social changes from imposing rules that are not relevant to the work of the association members. One can argue that such guardrails are best imposed by the relevant governing authorities but defining negative and positive guardrails at the legislative level is a simple application of public interest determination at a higher institutional level.It may be that my insistence upon guardrails for all self-governing professional associations may yet come in the form of the proposed “Peterson Law." If so, then well and good. If not, then changes to Bill 40 are needed.
