I will foreshadow my comments with a general statement that this bill is extremely broad in its wording, and that has significant implications for Albertans accessing health care.
Section 1 is basically a bunch of legal terminology - a lexical guide to the terms used in the bill. There's not much in here to discuss, although there appear to be a few important omissions that need to be considered later on.
Section 2 is where the rubber hits the road.
This is extremely vague, and makes no exceptions for circumstances. Basically, with the way this is worded, a health care provider can deny treatment at any time on the basis of their "conscientious objections" (whatever that might happen to be).
There are many potential dangers here. For example, in an emergency situation, a caregiver may decide not to provide treatment to a patient "on conscience grounds".
If, for a moment, you think "nah - that will never happen", I would like to bring to your attention the case of Tyra Hunter. While the situation is unique in its context, it is not a particularly large leap to suspect that many of the backers of Bill 207 would quite happily join with the Paramedics and other practitioners who provided her with wholly inadequate care, only to declare that "providing treatment violated their "conscience rights" under Bill 207.
Sections 4 and 5 act to restrict the actions of provincial regulatory bodies quite a lot.