Canadian Centre of Recovery Excellence Act

Summary#

This bill creates a new provincial Crown agency called the Canadian Centre of Recovery Excellence. Its goal is to research what works in mental health and addiction care, share results, and guide Alberta’s “recovery‑oriented” approach.

• Sets up the Centre as a government corporation (an agent of the Alberta government).
• Gives it a mandate to do research, evaluate programs, develop guidelines, and advise the Minister of Mental Health and Addiction.
• Allows the Centre to collect and use data, including personal and health information, with privacy rules and safeguards.
• Puts tight Minister oversight on the Centre’s budget, plans, bylaws, and day‑to‑day direction.
• Lets the Centre create a data repository and fund research through grants.
• Takes effect when the government proclaims it (not immediately).

What it means for you#

• Individuals using mental health or addiction services

  • Your service experience may become more standardized and tracked to see what works.
  • Some of your health information could be shared with the Centre for research and evaluation without your direct consent, as allowed by provincial privacy laws. The Centre must prefer non‑identifying or grouped data if that is enough.
  • You may see more public information about outcomes and best practices.

• Families and caregivers

  • More accessible, plain‑language information about effective treatments and supports may become available.
  • Program changes may focus more on recovery outcomes (like reduced symptoms, better daily functioning, or sustained abstinence for addiction).

• Service providers (clinics, community agencies, hospitals)

  • You may be asked to provide data to the Centre and take part in evaluations or program reviews.
  • Expect new or updated clinical practice guidelines and performance measures tied to recovery outcomes.
  • Possible access to grants or partnerships to test innovations.

• Researchers and academics

  • New funding opportunities, peer‑review processes, and access to a provincial data repository as permitted by regulations.
  • Collaboration with government and other partners inside and outside Canada.

• Privacy and data

  • The Centre must create policies to protect confidentiality and privacy.
  • It can request information from health information custodians (like health authorities and providers) and other bodies. If another law allows disclosure, those bodies must share the information.
  • The Minister can also require the Centre to share information, including identifiable data, for specified oversight and administration purposes.

• Governance and oversight

  • The Minister appoints the board (up to five members) and the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer.
  • The Minister must approve the Centre’s budget, plans, and bylaws, and can amend them if needed.
  • The Minister can issue binding orders and inspect operations and records.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Creates a single, dedicated hub to measure results and spread what works in mental health and addiction care.
• Supports “evidence‑based” policy by linking research to program funding, standards, and real‑world outcomes.
• Improves accountability: strong oversight ensures public funds support effective services.
• Builds a secure data resource so decisions are based on facts, not anecdotes.
• Positions Alberta as a leader and a resource for other provinces building recovery‑oriented systems.
• Clear privacy rules and a focus on non‑identifying data first help protect people’s information.

Opponents' View#

• Independence concerns: the Minister controls appointments, budgets, plans, bylaws, and can issue orders, which may bias research or findings.
• Privacy risks: the Centre can collect and share identifiable health information without consent in some cases; critics worry about data misuse or breaches.
• Duplication and cost: Alberta already has bodies that evaluate health services; creating a new agency may add bureaucracy without clear savings.
• Scope creep: wide powers to request data and conduct inspections could burden providers and chill innovation.
• Ideology concerns: tying the Centre to a “recovery‑oriented” model may sideline harm‑reduction or other approaches if not balanced by evidence.