Whitehorse, Yukon

Thursday, June 3, 1993 - 1:30 p.m.

Speaker: I will now call the House to order. We will begin with Prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

Speaker: We will proceed with the Order Paper.

Introduction of Visitors.

Are there any Returns or Documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I have some legislative returns.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I have for tabling three legislative returns relating to Community and Transportation Services.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: I have for tabling a batch of legislative returns pertaining to Health and Justice, as well as the annual report for Health and Social Services.

Hon. Mr. Devries: I have a legislative return for Government Services.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I have a few legislative returns for tabling.

Speaker: Are there any Reports of Committees?

Petitions.

Introduction of Bills.

Are there any Notices of Motion for the Production of Papers?

Are there any Notices of Motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

Motion No. 47

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I give notice of the following motion:

THAT the Yukon Legislative Assembly, pursuant to section 8 of the Northern Inland Waters Act, nominate Jean Gordon to the Yukon Territory Water Board.

Speaker: Are there any Statements by Ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Gender equity in the education system

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I rise today to advise Members that the Department of Education and the Women’s Directorate are developing a policy of gender equity in the education system. Gender equity means providing equality of opportunity and the realization of equality of results for all students, based on individual aptitudes, abilities and interests, regardless of gender.

A number of recent national and international studies have addressed the subject of young women and the gender bias they face in their daily lives. In 1990, the Canadian Teachers Federation produced a report entitled, “A Cappella”, which concluded that many young women feel quite positive about themselves. Many others, however, are facing problems that can seem overwhelming, from sexual abuse and pregnancy to feeling depressed and alienated. Alcohol, suicide, drug use and abuse were reported high on the list of their concerns.

The health implications for girls who suffer from low self-esteem are alarming: eating disorders, such as anorexia and bulimia; the fastest growing group of smokers; the number of suicide attempts; adolescent pregnancy; and substance abuse. The list goes on.

Other reports conducted at approximately the same time in both Canada and the United States verified the findings of the “A Cappella” report. The picture these reports have collectively painted is disturbing. Adolescent women face gender inequities in the school, family and community on a daily basis. At the same time, young women are conditioned to believe they have the same chances as young men to achieve success in life.

In response to this alarming information, the Women’s Directorate and the Department of Education have struck a working group to develop a policy of gender equity, guidelines for implementation and a four-year action plan of initiatives that will ultimately improve the quality of young women’s lives.

Some of the initiatives that will be implemented or continued are: developing a public awareness strategy for youth on healthy relationships to increase respect and decrease incidents of dating violence; developing curricula that emphasize the value of both genders in today’s world and the contributions made by both in the past; reviewing resource materials to ensure that they are gender equitable; ensuring that instructional and assessment practices offer equal opportunity to both genders; promoting a gender-equitable school environment so that students and school staff of both genders are given a wide range of opportunities and treated with the same dignity and respect; providing student and teacher development programs, which are gender  equitable; making gender equity a part of the school’s relationship with the community through involving the community in planning and implementing gender-equity programs and providing leadership in this area; and, assessing and documenting progress through achieving gender equity in the education system.

In closing, I would like to advise Members of this Assembly that the community-based steering committee, A Cappella North, is also working toward improving the quality of life for girls in Yukon schools. This committee was established by the Yukon Teachers Association in response to a call from the Canadian Teachers Federation, which was conducting a follow-up to its initial “A Cappella” report. Through teachers associations in each jurisdiction, community representatives attended regional conferences to brainstorm strategies to improve the lives of young women.

Some organizations that were invited to participate in the A Cappella North community include the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the Yukon Indian Women’s Association, the Yukon Status of Women Council, the Canadian Congress of Learning Opportunities for Women, the First Nations Education Commission,  the Department of Education, the Women’s Directorate and a young woman from F.H. Collins.

As one of its first initiatives, this committee is planning to conduct an A Cappella North survey to hear from young Yukon women. As most of the national studies have not included data on the Yukon, the committee believes that this is a very important first step. I am pleased to advise this Legislative Assembly that the Women’s Directorate, the Department of Education and the Yukon Teachers Association are participating on the community-based committee and will be funding the study. The Yukon Bureau of Statistics has agreed to provide assistance as requested.

Ms. Moorcroft: I rise today to respond to the statement on gender equity and education. As the Minister stated, numerous studies and reports indicate some very alarming facts about discrimination against girls and women in our society. It is also a common assumption that girls and boys are treated equally in our public schools. I believe that girls are not receiving the same quality, or even quantity, of education, as their brothers. Gender bias in our schools short-changes girls.

A well-educated workforce is essential to the country’s economic development, yet girls are systematically discouraged from courses of study essential to their future employability and economic well-being. Girls are still being steered away from the very courses required for their productive participation in the workforce.

There are fewer and fewer decently paid openings for the unskilled. By the turn of the century, more jobs will require strength in science, mathematics and technology, subjects girls are still being told are not suitable for them.

A significant exception is the Women Do Math program, which has taken place for many years in the Yukon, but I do not believe a consistent method is given to young girls in our education system.

One way of addressing this concern would be to set certification standards for teachers and administrators requiring course work on gender issues, including new research on women, bias in classroom interaction patterns and the ways in which schools can develop and implement gender-fair, multi-cultural curricula.

The Yukon Education Act does set the goal to develop an understanding of the historical and contemporary role of women and the reinforcement of the principle of gender equality and the contribution of women to society. Work must continue on improving the curricula to improve more of the lives and history of all women, of all ages and races, in all Yukon classrooms.

Our Land, Too: Women of Canada and the Northwest, 1860-1914 is one example of a beginning to this process, and this ministerial statement seems to confirm the continuation of the direction the previous government was taking.

School curricula should also deal directly with issues of power, gender politics and violence against women. Better informed girls are better equipped to make decisions about their futures. Girls and young women who have a strong sense of themselves are better able to confront violence and abuse in their lives.

Another healthy way to improve gender equity in Yukon schools is to improve the representation of women in principalships, vice-principalships and in the senior administration of the Department of Education. I trust the Minister responsible for both education and the Women’s Directorate will ensure the employment equity plan for the Department of Education will include measures to achieve this.

I would also be interested to know what proportion of primary teachers are women, who do very important work but at the low end of the pay scale compared to how many principals and administrators are women.

Perhaps the Minister could explain what he means by providing student and teacher development programs that are gender equitable. In my view, considerable progress toward achieving gender equity in the education system would be provided by a full-time women’s studies program at Yukon College. I hope the Minister will also support this initiative that many women from the community have worked many hours to prepare.

In closing, I have heard that some women have dropped out of the local “A Cappella” group because they were dissatisfied with the political direction it was taking. While I support the work toward further gender equity in education, I would like to ask the Minister what he will be doing to bring these groups back on board and restore their faith in the process.

Speaker: This brings us to the Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Yukon Party, defeated election candidates

Mr. Penikett: Yesterday, I asked the Government Leader about his failure to consult with Opposition Members about board appointments and public policy, although I understand the government does caucus with defeated Yukon Party candidates. As a matter of policy, I would like to ask the Government Leader how he squares this practice with the principles of parliamentary democracy that require the executive to listen to the elected representatives of the people.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I think we are making every effort to make the parliamentary system work. My understanding is that, in the seven and one-half years of the previous administration, they never consulted with the Opposition at all about who to appoint to the boards or committees.

Mr. Penikett: That is actually nonsense, and I can prove it.

Let me ask the Government Leader a question. Due to the fact that the government has a minority government, the majority of those attending the Yukon Party caucuses might be defeated candidates - people whose views were rejected by the voters - which raises the question about whether or not the non-elected caucus members actually vote on public policy matters at these meetings. Would the Government Leader agree that to be advised on policy and board appointments by defeated candidates rather than elected MLAs is not only somewhat undemocratic, but might also be insulting to the constituents of Opposition Members?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I do not know where the Member is getting his information. He is again making assumptions that are not true or valid.

Mr. Penikett: My information comes from people attending the meetings. I want to say that, of course, the idea of meeting with defeated candidates is a good idea; we just want to know how much power they have.

My question to the Government Leader is this: regarding the caucus of defeated candidates, do those attending have access to Cabinet documents, if they swear oaths of secrecy, or do taxpayers cover any of the expenses of those attending the meetings?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: It seems like the Member opposite has had his feelings hurt because he is no longer making all the decisions in government, and he thinks he still should be.

We meet with our extended caucus once a month to keep them informed of what government is doing.

Our elected caucus members do not have access to Cabinet documents, let alone the extended caucus.

Question re: Wolf control program

Mr. Harding: I have a question for the Minister of Renewable Resources.

A news story reported yesterday that the Minister has asked the Fish and Wildlife Management Board not to review the wolf conservation and management plan, as was suggested by the Council for Yukon Indians.

Can the Minister confirm whether or not this is the case and if it is, could he tell us why?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: That is not true, as I stated in the House several days ago. That document has been turned over to the board so they can make a decision on it at their next meeting.

Mr. Harding: Could the Minister attempt to explain what communication breakdown would have resulted in this - according to the Minister - obviously erroneous news reporting about the situation with regard to that plan?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: No, I cannot. The Member will have to ask the reporter who gave him that information; I do not know.

Mr. Harding: Can I ask the Minister if this is indeed his plan to allow the Fish and Wildlife Management Board to take a look at the wolf conservation management plan, make some recommendations and then come back to the Minister, wherein he will accept the recommendations of the board regarding that plan?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The recommendations will be put before the public, the same as the other recommendations, and if the recommendations do not interfere biologically or in some other way - which I do not think they will - then they will be accepted.

The recommendations also have to be accepted by all 14 First Nations.

Question re: Government employee layoffs

Mr. Cable: I have a question for the Government Leader.

When the Government Leader returned from his meeting with Finance Ministers in Ottawa, he was reported as saying that many of the measures that Ministers were discussing with respect to deficit reduction and cost of government were already being implemented in the Yukon.

Can the Government Leader tell the House whether or not layoffs in the public service were one of the salient measures discussed at this meeting?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: To answer the Member opposite, yes, it most certainly was. There were layoffs in the public sector in many jurisdictions. There were also rollbacks of wages - in some cases legislated. All of these issues were discussed and reported on by various Finance Ministers from various jurisdictions.

Mr. Cable: We have heard in the House that the public service will be downsized through attrition.

Does the government have a long-term, strategic goal for the size of the public service, either in absolute numbers or in relation to population? Or are we playing the downsizing by ear?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: We are certainly not playing the downsizing by ear. To say that we have a magic number at which we want to level off the civil service would not be a very responsible way to go. We are going through the exercise of realigning and adjusting the departments, eliminating  positions that are no longer required and, when the exercise is finished, we will see what size is a sufficient size for a civil service for the Yukon Territory.

Mr. Cable: In order that our public servants will be able to appreciate their job security, could the Government Leader indicate the time frame for the stabilization of the size of the public service?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I do not think people employed by the civil service have to worry about job security. We have talked about downsizing through attrition, and only layoffs as a last resort. If a position is to be eliminated, and it is filled, the last step we take is to find another position for that person.

I do not believe the civil service should have anxieties about their tenure.

Question re: Maternity/paternity/adoption leave

Ms. Moorcroft: Yesterday, the Minister responsible for Economic Development said that, by leaving a position vacant when an employee is away on maternity leave, they can determine whether or not that position can be discontinued.

My question is for the Minister responsible for the Women’s Directorate, who said I asked a silly question. Can the Minister tell the women of the Yukon what his position is on paid maternity leave, and why he does, or does not, support it?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I support the policy that is in place now. The reason I said it was a silly question was because I do not anticipate, in my wildest dreams, that if a woman went away on maternity leave she would not have her job when she came back. I suspect she would have her job with the government. The Government Leader just said that if that particular job - not the person - was deemed not to be an essential position, then an attempt would be found to find another essential position for that person.

Ms. Moorcroft: I do not understand why the Minister thinks it was a silly question for me to be legitimately concerned about workers who take parental leave having their jobs abolished while they are on leave, when another Minister of his government said in the House yesterday that that might happen. They may or may not be able to find another job for the person who returns to work.

Would the Minister tell us his position on paid paternity and adoption leave, and why he does, or does not, support it?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I do not believe there has been any change in the policy of the government from the previous government’s position. That is our policy today.

Ms. Moorcroft: Does the Minister favour a tiered system of bureaucracy, where one group of employees are entitled to such benefits as paid parental leave and others are not, or does he believe that all employees should be able to benefit from progressive policies, such as paid parental leave?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I think all policies that pertain to that should be fair to all individuals. It would be silly for me to answer the question otherwise.

Question re: Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre, rental space

Ms. Moorcroft: I have another question for the Minister responsible for the Women’s Directorate.

Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre is a volunteer organization that offers many essential services for community members. In fact, although the centre can only afford to pay one full-time salary, volunteer efforts contribute a second full-time position at the centre. Some of their programs include survivors of sexual assault counselling, referrals to other agencies, a reference library, community programs such as assertiveness training and crisis counselling, mini-mechanics and an annual women’s conference. I would like to ask the Minister what suitable location he has found, since he offered to find them space to rent at $1.00 a year when the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre funding was cut in the new budget.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I will get back to the Member on that. I am not certain if the people from the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre have met with my officials to discuss that matter. If they have, I will get back to the Member on that.

Ms. Moorcroft: I would appreciate it if the Minister could come back with some answers about who was working on it. The Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre would like to know when they can move in.

Has the Minister considered what it would cost the government to replace these services, or does he think these services are dispensable?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: No, I do not think the services are dispensable. In fact, there is $5,000 in the budget this year for the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre. Along with that, there are funds within the budget for specific projects. We have had meetings with the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre and urged them to apply for specific project funding and, if they wish, to put in for an administrative fee along with that fund. As was the policy with the previous government, the policy of this government is not to core fund. We will not core fund.

Ms. Moorcroft: I would just like to ask the Minister when he will be able to come back with an answer about the space for the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: As soon as I can sit down with my deputy. I understand she is leaving tomorrow or the next day for a conference in New Brunswick. As soon as she gets back - I believe it is next Tuesday or Wednesday - I could have an answer for the Member shortly after.

Question re: Conflict of interest, Government Leader

Mr. Harding: I have a question for the Government Leader. There have been some serious suggestions made in the local media regarding the Government Leader in an apparent conflict of interest; this is the second Cabinet Minister now, since his government has come into power, about whom these suggestions have been bandied about. I would like to give the Government Leader an opportunity to clear the record today.

I would like to ask the Government Leader if he declared a conflict of interest surrounding any discussions he or his Cabinet Ministers had concerning the granting of moose hunting permits to outfitters in the area surrounding the wolf kill zone.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Following the sale of Mr. Ostashek’s area two years ago, he has no interest in any outfitting area at all.

Mr. Harding: I am disappointed the Government Leader has not stood today to clear the record. I believe I am giving him that opportunity and I would like to ask the Government Leader once again - I think he owes it to the people to set the record straight: does the Government Leader think it is appropriate to take part in decisions, as an elected official, on issues that an immediate family member has a major economic interest in and declare no conflict of interest?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I made the decisions on the zone, and it was taken into Cabinet and the consensus was reached. All three outfitters were treated exactly the same, by biologists and by the review committee of the department. All three were treated exactly the same.

Mr. Harding: It was taken to Cabinet with the Government Leader. The Government Leader participated on a consensus basis, or unanimous basis, whichever the case may be, and he owes it to the people of the Yukon to clear the record at least. Is the Government Leader aware that the Public Government Act, which is presently sitting on the shelf, would make the failure of a Minister to declare a conflict of interest while making a decision on an issue - which an immediate family member has an economic interest in - illegal, and will he now proclaim the Public Government Act to strengthen conflict-of-interest guidelines for the future?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: There is no conflict of interest.

Question re: Land selection, Whitehorse

Ms. Joe: My question is for the Government Leader. The Government Leader has stated in this House that the problems regarding the land selections with the Kwanlin Dun Nation will be worked out at the table, and that this is the proper forum to negotiate these matters and that, without a negotiation table, there can be no progress. Is the Government Leader aware that the negotiations with Kwanlin Dun have broken down?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Our negotiators are meeting with Kwanlin Dun on an ongoing basis, so I do not know how the Member opposite could say that negotiations have broken down.

Ms. Joe: He should ask his negotiators for an update.

It has been three months since Kwanlin Dun tabled their maps with the government negotiators. The government recently returned to the table dictating what will happen and I quote, “We will show you selections which will meet your needs and aspirations”. Has the Government Leader actually seen the land selection map tabled by the Kwanlin Dun Band on February 24, and is he aware of his government’s response to them in that they do not appear to recognize the proposals put forward by the Kwanlin Dun First Nation?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Yes, I have reviewed the maps.

Ms. Joe: This past weekend the Government Leader signed, on behalf of his government, the umbrella final agreement in a very important ceremony.

Now, through the actions of his department, he is turning his back on his commitment to come to the table prepared to negotiate, not dictate. This creates a very serious situation.

Is the Government Leader aware of the tension that has been created by the government’s actions and what does he intend to do about them?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: As I said in answer to the Member’s main question, we are meeting with Kwanlin Dun on an ongoing basis. The Member has wrong information and she does not have her facts straight on this issue.

We are meeting on an ongoing basis with the Kwanlin Dun people; we are trying to resolve the situation and in fact I am meeting with them personally tomorrow. We are dealing with this issue in a very serious manner. As the Member opposite knows, it is probably going to be one of the most difficult First Nations to come to an agreement with on land selections.

Question re: Downsizing government

Mrs. Firth: My question is for the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission and for the Government Leader.

I asked the Minister of Finance and the Government Leader for his policies regarding auxiliary and term positions and I did not receive any. Yet, the Minister and the Government Leader keep standing up and talking about attrition. Yet, when I ask the Government Leader about a $70,000 intergovernmental relations officer position and why attrition did not apply, he said that it was because, “If we kept it, we must have needed it.”

Since it has been established that there are no policies in place, I would like to ask the Government Leader how Cabinet makes decisions regarding employees’ status and downsizing of government.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Here we go again around the mulberry bush.

I said when the question came up that the position was required and that is why it was being filled.

We downsized the Executive Council Office; we have got rid of eight managerial positions; we got rid of four non-managerial positions. A person decided to tender their resignation. Government can be downsized only so far in one department, so therefore the position was refilled because it was required.

Mrs. Firth: The Government Leader is spreading the downsizing of the Executive Council Office pretty thin. Yesterday, when I asked the Minister why he was picking on auxiliary and term employees, he went on to say that they were looking at management areas - middle to upper income jobs. When I went back to my office, the first thing I found on my desk was another employment opportunity here for another $100,000-a-year ADM, the second one in two months.

How does the Minister explain this obvious contradiction in policy?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: There is no contradiction in the policy. It takes a certain number of people to run government. As the Member knows, and as we have reported to this House, there were 194 managerial positions in government. I believe only around 160 of them are filled at this time. The only ones that are being filled from now on are ones that are essential, or where people have resigned and that position has to be refilled. We are not expanding the number of people in management.

Mrs. Firth: More interesting, the Department of Economic Development has two $100,000-a-year ADMs, yet they have just created another management position. It is going to go to competition very soon. How does the Minister explain this increase in management staff?

Hon. Mr. Devries: I am not aware of any position being created.

Question re: Downsizing government

Mrs. Firth: I obviously know more about the Minister’s department than he does. I want to ask another question to the same Minister I was asking questions of previously - the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission.

Yesterday, when I asked the Government Leader why he was picking on auxiliary and term employees, he complained about what a dilemma downsizing government was, and how there had to be some displacement somewhere. It is obvious it is not at the management level.

I would like to ask the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission and the Government Leader when his government is going to have some concrete policies in place regarding the downsizing of government.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: My Cabinet colleagues and I, during this excruciatingly long session of 45 days, have said time and time again what our policy was on downsizing the government. If the Member does not have it by now, I will write her another return.

Mrs. Firth: Yesterday, the Minister said that there were 3,241 employees working for his government. Yet, in the third quarter statistics, it lists 3,122. The Minister has just stood up this afternoon and said that of the managers in government, only 160 of 194 positions are filled.

In light of these tremendous contradictions in the government’s own statistics, how does the Minister explain this? How can there be 3,241 employees now, two months later, and he is downsizing government. This is completely inconsistent.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Just as I came back from lunch I happened to have it pointed out in a newspaper article that the Member for Riverdale South said that she was not very good at math. I can see examples of this now. This is the time of year when auxiliaries are being hired for the summer season. There is bound to be more people on staff now than there were in the third quarter.

Speaker: I would remind Members that the questions should seek information. The answers should be relevant to the question. We should not simply be calling each other names.

Mrs. Firth: That saves me having to call someone a name; I would never do that. I know that I am stirring up a hornet’s nest here with the Minister. That is why he is attacking me personally. I know that he disagrees with me. I can hear him shaking his head over there.

I want to ask this Government Leader when he is going to have some specific policies in place regarding downsizing of government, instead of picking on auxiliary and term employees and increasing the management positions in this government?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: This government is not increasing the managerial positions in government. There are about 30 or 35 fewer positions than there were. The effect on the auxiliaries has been very minimal at this point, and it will continue to be that way.

Question re: Curragh Inc., Asian investors

Mr. Harding: I have a question that seeks information. I am trying very hard not to be ruled out of order on possibly the last Question Period of the year. I would like to ask the Government Leader a question. I hope that it is not too excruciating. I would like to ask him if he knows whether or not Mr. Frame or any of the Koreans are coming to the Yukon next week to have discussions and exactly what will be going on.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: After 45 days in this Legislature and having to deal with questions from the Member for Faro, this one is not too difficult to answer. I am not sure when the technical people from Korea are coming. I was talking to Mr. Pelly last night and he has not had a final word yet. I have not heard from the chief executive officer of Curragh.

Mr. Harding: Could I ask the Government Leader if anything has been planned or arranged for meetings with Frame and/or the Koreans on a bilateral or trilateral basis with the government to discuss the court arrangements, the power and Grum stripping needs, or is there is pretty much a total hold on that until more discussions have been carried on?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I think that I pointed out to the Member when I came back from Korea that the people who are coming over here are not the people who signed the agreement. They are technical people who are coming to do due diligence on the company and report back to their officials in Korea.

Mr. Harding: I am incredibly worried about the future of my community and although I know that all the Members in this House, the public and the media are quite sick of this session, I am a little worried about leaving it, so I would like to ask the Government Leader a simple question today and that is this: will the Government Leader commit to briefing myself and other Opposition Members on the status of the situation regarding the mine and loan guarantee negotiations once this session ends?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I do not have a problem making that commitment. At any time that the Member would like to call me, I would be happy to update him.

Question re: Northern Accord, benefits to Yukon

Mr. Cable: I have a question for the Minister of Economic Development on the Northern Accord. Last weekend the government signed the Northern Energy Accord and I appreciate that the decision to sign has been the subject of some debate in the House, but today I want to ask the government about the application of the agreement. Given that there has not been, to my knowledge, an oil or gas exploration well drilled in the Yukon for some time, how does the government propose that we benefit from this agreement?

Hon. Mr. Devries: Beginning April 1, the Yukon government will receive royalties from the existing wells in the Kotaneelee fields and that money will be put into a trust until the policies are developed. Half of that money would be following to the First Nations upon completion of the land claims agreements. There are many benefits for us in the Northern Accord.

Mr. Cable: Has the government been involved in any discussions with the Canadian Petroleum Association about their members’ interest or lack of interest in further drilling in the Yukon?

Hon. Mr. Devries: We have not necessarily had no discussion with them, but we are aware that there is some interest been shown in the Eagle Plains area, and there is also some interest been shown for some additional drilling projects in the Kotaneelee field - it is a matter of land claims having been settled, especially at Eagle Plains.

Mr. Cable: With respect to his interest, what policy initiatives or proposals is the government considering to stimulate oil and gas exploration and production in the Yukon?

Hon. Mr. Devries: Immediately upon funding of the Northern Accord, we sent letters to various parties that were interested. As well, we will immediately be beginning policy development and attempting to second a couple of people who are very familiar with this to assist us in setting up the offices, et cetera, and administering the Northern Accord.

Question re: McLean Lake zoning

Mr. Penikett: Regarding McLean Lake zoning and the country-residential lifestyle of the residents there, I would like to ask, as the Minister responsible for the administration of the Municipal Act and a former community advisor, is the Community and Transportation Services Minister familiar with section 309.(1) of the Municipal Act, the section that requires zoning bylaws that are consistent with the official community plan designations?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I believe I am familiar with those particular sections, yes.

Mr. Penikett: The Minister has signed off an amendment to the official community plan, which changes the designation of the McLean Lake area to urban residential, the same designation as Riverdale and Porter Creek. Does the Minister acknowledge that, when he approved the change to the plan, by virtue of section 309.(1), he was putting a one-year time limit on city council to change the zoning for McLean Lake to make it consistent with the amended community plan?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Yes, I was aware of that, and I am also aware that the designation in the official community plan will allow the zoning designation of the McLean Lake residential area to become country residential.

Mr. Penikett: Is the Minister not prepared to concede, at the very least, that he was mistaken when he suggested that his signed amendment to the official community plan did not amount to rezoning McLean Lake and changing the lifestyle of the residents there - an error that is compounded by the failure to consult with area residents prior to the change he made?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: No, I will not concede to that at all. The people in the McLean Lake area have now and will continue to have their country-residential zoning designation. If that is changed, I ask the Member opposite to certainly berate me in the House, but it is my understanding that the country-residential zoning designation will not be changed for those existing residences.

Question re: Humane Society, animal shelter

Mr. Penikett: I would like to follow up on that, but I have to ask another question today, which concerns another matter. In response to my May 17 question to the Minister about the status of the Humane Society CDF application, the Minister stated quite unequivocally that the decision to postpone the processing of the application was a bureaucratic decision, not a political one. He said that they did not see the application.

Can the Minister confirm that he met with the Humane Society on April 27 in his office to discuss the application at that time?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I cannot remember the date. I did meet with Andrea Lemphers, who I believe is the chair, or at least on the executive of the Humane Society. Prior to meeting with her - and I cannot remember the date of either of these meetings - I did meet with the Mayor of the City of Whitehorse and Ms. Lemphers.

Mr. Penikett: At that meeting, the Minister reportedly indicated that the application was in order and should pass the technical review without any problems. He basically gave the society his assurances that he was in agreement with the application. Can the Minister confirm that that was the position he presented to the representatives of the Humane Society in his meeting with them?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Yes, that was essentially the gist of the conversation.

Mr. Penikett: Given that the Minister has discussed the application and apparently approved of it in general at the April 27 meeting, could he explain to me why he told the House on May 17 that he had not seen the application, when he had already discussed it with the Humane Society.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I also sit on the CDF selection committee. I had not seen the application come forward to that committee. That is what I was referring to on May 17.

Question re: Monetary policies

Mr. McDonald: I have a question for the Minister of Finance.

The Governor of the Bank of Canada has consistently criticized large-spending and large-taxing governments, and the Minister, yesterday, expressed sympathy for his views and used reductions in some departments as examples of reduced spending.

Given that the government has introduced a record-spending and record-taxing  budget, how can the Government Leader claim common cause with the Governor of the Bank of Canada?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Maybe we should draw diagrams in this House and pass them across to the Members opposite. We have stated time and time again during debate of the budget that the large amounts of money are coming from Ottawa and from other jurisdictions, resulting in a huge capital budget this year of $129 million.

We have the extended care facility that we took over from the Members opposite. We have to open it, and we had to have that planned into the budget.

The actual cost of government is going down under this administration, even in the short time we have been here.

It is only because of the devolution of other departments that it is starting to increase.

Mr. McDonald: Mr. Crowe does not care where the money is spent, but how much money is spent. This government has a record budget on the table.

They said that they would downsize government, reduce the role of government and reduce the number of employees and, in the first three months of the government’s mandate, government employment has clearly increased, even under the glare of a hiring freeze.

Can the Minister tell us how he is going to square his rhetoric with his actions when he goes east and talks to other Finance Ministers?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I was well received at the Finance Ministers conference. The Yukon was one of only two jurisdictions in Canada that came in with a balanced budget after record deficits by the previous administration.

Mr. McDonald: They do not know the Government Leader like we know the Government Leader, and the budget is not balanced.

The government talked about no tax increases and then they raised taxes. They have talked about less government spending and they have delivered bigger government spending, less dependency on the federal government and now we have more dependency on the federal government.

What possible message can the Government Leader deliver to other Finance Ministers that will square with his actions, back on home soil in the Yukon?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The message is very, very simple - there will not be the record deficits that there have been in the Yukon during the last two years - $13 million in 1991-92; $71 million in 1992-93; those types of deficits have come to an end in the Yukon.

Question re: Forestry burn at Red Ridge, sheep habitat

Ms. Moorcroft: I have a question for the Minister responsible for Renewable Resources.

Last week, there was a fire set in my riding by Fish and Wildlife to improve the quality of the sheep habitat along an area that is known as Red Ridge. Apparently, there were some poplars that were inhibiting the growth of the grass for the sheep.

When asked about it, Forestry said that the Department of Renewable Resources had prepared a plan that included informing people about the fire. Could the Minister tell this House who knew this fire was going to happen?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I talked with my deputy minister this morning, and we were unaware that the fire was there. We would also like to point out that, with the fire hazard the way it is at the present time, we could not start a fire.

Ms. Moorcroft: Perhaps the Minister then can confirm exactly who it was who set that fire. This fire got out of control. Although the slopover only burned four hectares of land, several of my constituents were worried when they saw smoke pouring off the mountain.

What kind of advance planning or contingency plan was in place for this burn project? Were the residents in the area informed?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Before a burn will be carried out there will be consultation with the people in the area. To my knowledge, the fire that started out there was not theirs. This morning they told me they could not even get a permit from forestry to burn at this time of year.

Ms. Moorcroft: That certainly contradicts the information I received from the Department of Forestry. This is a very precarious and dangerous situation. Two years ago, we had Haeckel Hill go up in smoke, and this one got out of control. What assurances can the Minister give this House that these kinds of projects would only go ahead under the most controlled circumstances?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I will give the assurance of my own word. I will also check to be absolutely sure how that fire started and who started it.

Question re: Game farming

Mr. Harding: It is surprising. There are a lot of questions today. I have another question for the Minister of Renewable Resources.

This week, I questioned the Minister regarding the proposals for the new proposed game farming regulations and spoke a little bit about the wildlife viewing aspect of the regulations. The Minister said that these regulations would allow exotic species at this time and would also allow the sale of viewing species’ offspring. Could he tell us when they plan to come in with regulations to control the viewing animals aspect of game farming?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I am not quite sure what he means by viewing animals.

Speaker: Perhaps I will allow the Member to ask the question again.

Mr. Harding: Proposals made by YTG state that game farm animals will be subject to certain regulations but viewing animals will be allowed to be kept. There is no criteria that exotic animals cannot be kept under the auspices of viewing animals, and viewing animals’ owners are being allowed to sell their offspring. Obviously, there is a problem because we are not addressing what we are trying to address with the game farming situation. Could the Minister tell us when viewing animals will be regulated?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I am presuming that he is talking about exotic animals. At the present time, the only way that we can regulate them is by putting certain conditions in the permits when they come into the area.

Mr. Harding: Perhaps the Minister should hone up a little bit on the proposals that the government has put out on game farming. Proposal number 2 clearly states that owners can keep viewing animals. They can be non-native to the Yukon and offspring can be sold. Could the Minister tell me what the difference is between that and game farming? To me they are the exact same thing.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Game farming comes in strictly under the regulation that they have to be checked by vets. They have to be inside a certain sized fence. They all have to be tagged so that each one is a specific animal. With viewing animals, at the present time, they do not need that.

Mr. Harding: That is exactly my concern. That is what I am trying to say to the Minister. Does the Minister not realize that somebody who is not very scrupulous could perform the act of game farming under the auspices of wildlife viewing, bring in animals and sell the offspring, and bring in exotics and not be regulated. My question is this: will the Minister undertake to look at that right now and come up with some plan for regulating this? We are not tackling the problems of escape, cross-breeding, the spread of disease or anything for wildlife viewing animal owners.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I am very glad to hear the Member say that. I am sure that when we bring the regulations in, he will support us solidly.

Speaker: Time for Question Period has now elapsed.

Hon. Mr. Devries: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order?

Speaker: The Minister of Economic Development, on a point of order.

Hon. Mr. Devries: I just would like to read into the record very clearly that it is not true that the Department of Economic Development has any new positions.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: On a point of order, inadvertently I neglected to table the original copy of the legislative return and I would like to do that now.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Hon. Mr. Phillips:  While I am on my feet, I would like to move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve in Committee of the Whole.

Speaker: There being no further points of order that are not points of order, the Government Leader has moved that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.

Motion agreed to

Speaker leaves the Chair

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Chair: I will now call Committee of the Whole to order.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I wish to advise the Chair that, by agreement of House Leaders, we have decided that we are really going to get down to work today and we would ask the Chair not to authorize any breaks today until we complete the budget, which we think should happen later on this afternoon.

Chair: Are you agreed?

Mr. McDonald: I would just like to remind all Members that even though we have been working for 45 days, we do not feel that at this time we require a break, because we are not tired, none of us are tired, and we do not require a break. We would like to just go straight through.

Chair: Are you agreed?

Some Hon Members: Agreed.

Chair: Members are agreed.

Bill No. 6 - First Appropriation Act, 1993-94 - continued

Public Service Commission - continued

Chair: We are on general debate of the Public Service Commission.

Ms. Moorcroft: I feel I would be remiss if I did not at this time express my personal congratulations and those of our caucus to the Public Service Commissioner on her 10-year appointment, effective next month. I have stated on the record that I believe the new commissioner is a woman of integrity and very well qualified for the position she holds. Our caucus believes there should never have been a probationary six-month appointment. Last night, the Government Leader said appointing the Public Service Commissioner for 10 years seemed the right thing to do at the time, but our caucus was always of the view that the right time for a tenured appointment was in the first instance.

In the debate on the supplementaries for the Public Service Commission, I had asked the Minister if he could table the contract listing that would show all of the contracts for secretarial, research and support work that were carried out by contractors from outside the government during the time of the hiring freeze.

I was quite concerned to note, when I went through the contracts for the Department of Community and Transportation Services, that over $10,000 was spent on contracts for various forms of secretarial research. To me that seemed inconsistent with a policy of a hiring freeze. Does the Government Leader have any response to that? Has he been able to find out how much secretarial work was performed on contract, as a dollar figure globally in the government, during the time of the hiring freeze?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The Member opposite has to forgive me because I thought her question yesterday was about casuals, not about contracts. I do not recall the term contract coming up in the debate last night. If I missed it, I will get the information back to the Member, as I do not have it here now.

Ms. Moorcroft: That is fine. Just to clarify, it was a question that I had raised during the supplementary estimates debate some time ago. I am ready at this time to move on to the line-by-line debate for this department, if none of my colleagues have questions.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Just before we move onto line-by-line debate, last night the Member opposite did not understand the meaning of the terms “arbitration” and “conciliation” because she asked me for an explanation. I would like, at this time, to give to the Member this booklet that I happened to find this morning, Canadian Labour Terms, eighth edition, 1984. It is a dictionary of words and phrases commonly used in labour relations. Perhaps in the future we will not have to waste time in debate explaining clauses that are in this book.

Ms. Moorcroft: I will thank the Government Leader most sincerely for that addition to my collection of labour publications, and I can assure the Government Leader that I do have an understanding of arbitration and conciliation and other labour terms, but I enjoy collecting reference materials. My purpose in asking the question last night was indeed to seek information and to test the knowledge of the Government Leader. I am glad that he has been able to now understand the difference between arbitration and conciliation. I would also like to say that I hope that the negotiations between the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the government proceed well and on good terms between the parties.

Chair: Is there any general debate on Finance and Administration?

On Finance and Administration

On Administration

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: This is one of the areas I propose to amend.

I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Administration on page 217 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $6,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.

Chair: Is there any debate on the amendment?

Amendment agreed to

Administration in the amount of $401,000 agreed to as amended

On Staffing

On Staffing Administration

Staffing Administration in the amount of $490,000 agreed to

On Staffing Operations

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Staffing Operations on page 218 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $2,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.

Amendment agreed to

Ms. Moorcroft: I am sorry, Mr. Chair. I was a little slow jumping to my feet, but I do have one question and I am not sure which lines it would apply to. In the Minister’s introductory remarks, he said something about the reduction being due to decentralization.

Can the Minister clarify that for me please?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Yes, there has been a 53-percent decrease in other costs attributable to the removal of decentralization initiative reductions in cost to communications, advertising, house hunting and removal. I believe that was a decentralization officer for Dawson City.

Ms. Moorcroft: I would also like to ask, since I believe it was stated when we were debating the supplementaries that there were 10 term positions in the employment equity branch, how many of the employees in the employment equity branch are on term positions?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The term positions in employment equity are the native training corps.

Staffing Operations in the amount of $82,000 agreed to as amended

Staffing in the amount of $572,000 agreed to as amended

On Employee Records and Pensions

On Administration

Administration in the amount of $496,000 agreed to

Employee Records and Pensions in the amount of $496,000 agreed to

On Labour Relations

Chair: Is there any general debate?

Ms. Moorcroft: I believe, in the introductory remarks yesterday, the Minister said that the increases here were due to the collective bargaining with the Yukon employees union and the Yukon Teachers Association. I am wondering why there is a 900 percent increase for the Yukon Teachers Association and an 82 percent increase for the Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: It is because of the higher percentage on the teachers. We went from $3,000 to $30,000.

On Administration

Administration in the amount of $377,000 agreed to

On Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada

Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada in the amount of $182,000 agreed to

On Yukon Teachers Association

Yukon Teachers Association in the amount of $30,000 agreed to

On Managerial/Confidential Exclusion

Managerial/Confidential Exclusion in the amount of $5,000 agreed to

On Long Service Awards

Long Service Awards in the amount of $39,000 agreed to

On Indemnification

Indemnification in the amount of $10,000 agreed to

Labour Relations in the amount of $643,000 agreed to

On Workers’ Compensation Fund

Ms. Moorcroft: The Minister, in introducing this branch of the Public Service Commission, explained that there is still money in this year’s budget, although the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board is now an independent agency, because there are some outstanding claims, prior to January 1, 1993.

I would like to know how many claims there are outstanding, and if the Minister knows when they will be resolved.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I will have to get the numbers for the Member opposite on the amount of outstanding claims. The problem with this is that, because we were self-insured up until December 31, 1992, we have to keep a contingency. We do not know when someone will come back to us for an old injury. We still have to face the liabilities for that, since the Workers’ Compensation Board will not accept it.

On Workers’ Compensation Fund

Workers’ Compensation Payments

Ms. Moorcroft: Are these ongoing payments to workers that will continue?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: That is a combination of the premiums that will have to be paid every year, plus the ongoing contingency we will have to keep for indemnification of workers.

Workers’ Compensation Payments in the amount of $1,507,000 agreed to

Workers’ Compensation Fund in the amount of $1,507,000 agreed to

On Compensation

Chair: Is there any general debate?

On Administration

Administration in the amount of $552,000 agreed to

On Classification Appeals

Classification Appeals in the amount of $22,000 agreed to

Compensation in the amount of $574,000 agreed to

On Corporate Services and Employment Equity

Chair: Is there any general debate?

On Administration

Administration in the amount of $373,000 agreed to

On Native Training

Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister explain the higher salary classification for the native training corps? Since this program was suspended, could he explain what is being offered now?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Routine expenditures include the following - as the Member sees, it is up to $322,000 from $266,000 last year - this is salary and benefit costs for nine term full-time staff. The increase results from salary increases and position vacancies during 1992-93, training course costs and related expenses for native trainees, as approved in the native training corps plan, and employment equity information sessions for all government departments.

Native Training in the amount of $322,000 agreed to

On Disabled Job Entry

Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister describe how they are going to implement the disabled job entry please?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The funding here is to facilitate the entry of persons with disabilities into the Yukon workplace. This project was developed in consultation with community organizations representing persons with disabilities and the vocational rehabilitation unit of Health and Social Services, who will provide the training and employment opportunities.

Ms. Moorcroft: How many new employees do you anticipate will be added to the public service under this program in the next year?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: That is pretty hard to classify right now. At the start, it would probably be short-term positions that require monitoring. We do not really know how many it will be in total after a year.

Ms. Moorcroft: I will just ask the Minister to keep me informed of the progress on this program.

Disabled Job Entry in the amount of $42,000 agreed to

On Corporate Services

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Corporate Services on page 228 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $14,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended according.

Chair: Is there any debate on the amendment?

Amendment agreed to

Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister explain something that he said yesterday about there being no cost for The Sluice Box in this program area?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I believe that there would be reduced costs for The Sluice Box. We have changed the format and made some cost-saving measures. There will still be some cost.

Ms. Moorcroft:  In a legislative return regarding The Sluice Box, the acting Government Leader said that the Public Service Commissioner makes the final decision regarding the publication content and when an employee is featured in an article the employee approves that article. Did Merv Miller approve the article that was written that, from the point of view of our caucus, contained partisan material about government finances?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I cannot answer for Merv Miller, but the article was run by him prior to publication.

Ms. Moorcroft: And is there any fee or honoraria paid to an author of an article who has published in The Sluice Box?

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: No, there is not.

Corporate Services in the amount of $24,000 agreed to

Corporate Services and Employment Equity in the amount of $751,000 agreed to as amended

On Leave Accruals

On Leave Liability

Leave Liability in the amount of $3,800,000 agreed to as amended

Leave Accruals in the amount of $3,800,000 agreed to

On Staff Development

On Administration

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Administration on page 232 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $14,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.

Amendment agreed to

Administration in the amount of $622,000 agreed to as amended

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $707,000 agreed to

Staff Development in the amount of $1,329,000 agreed to as amended

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to

Chair: We will move on to capital expenditures in the other book.

On Capital Expenditures

On Finance and Administration

Chair: Is there any general debate?

On Prior Years’ Projects (Computer Workstations)

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: We have put in a $1.00 line item to have the line there in case some emergency came up. We do not feel we will need anything for capital this year.

Ms. Moorcroft: That is the explanation I wanted to ask the Government Leader for. He has anticipated it. I have no further questions.

Prior Years’ Projects (Computer Workstations) in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

Finance and Administration agreed to

Capital Expenditures agreed to

Public Service Commission agreed to as amended

Department of Renewable Resources

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

Chair: Is there any general debate?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I have copies of my opening remarks I would like to submit to the critics.

I am pleased to outline today the highlights of the O&M estimates for the Department of Renewable Resources for the 1993-94 fiscal year. You will note that the estimate reflects an decrease of six percent in the department’s vote. This decrease has not been accomplished without some pain and belt-tightening, but I do believe it was accomplished largely by addressing those areas that have very little direct effect on services to the public.

These estimates call for the department to spend $12.7 million in the coming year. You will see that the funding priorities for the department reflect this government’s commitment to the provisions of good government, settling land claims, implementing self-government, transferring Yukon land and resources, protecting the environment and managing the wildlife, all of which are commitments outlined in our four-year plan.

To support this government’s land claim commitment, we are planning to spend almost $1.7 million for negotiating and implementing the land claim agreement in the Yukon. This includes a total of slightly more than $1 million for the implementation of the Inuvialuit final agreement, all of which is recoverable from the federal government.

There was a slight decrease in the amount earmarked for a Yukon First Nations claim. This attributed to the fact that, with the conclusion of a number of individual final claims, the emphasis in the program departments will be switched to information activities, with the bulk of the negotiations actually being carried out centrally through the ECO’s land claim office.

The YFN portion includes the provision of $270,000 of this government’s initial payment into the fish and wildlife enhancement trust fund, as well as some continued expenses of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board and the Mayo Renewable Resource Council, which will be fully addressed by federal implementation funding.

One of the major commitments of this government is the transfer of Yukon land and resources. I am sure that the Members opposite will have noticed that the line item for the program transfers unit in the policy, planning and assessment program reflects a decrease from $195,000 in the 1992-93 fiscal year to zero dollars in the 1993-94 fiscal year and are somewhat puzzled by this.

Negotiators recently signed an agreement in principle with respect to the transfer of the forestry program, and the final agreement is imminent. This will conclude the first phase of the transfer process, which is the intensive negotiation phase. We now will have roughly one year to undertake the transition work involved for the actual transfer.

The agreement in principle provides some one-time funding for this transition process. However, at the time our budgets were prepared and approved, the agreement in principle was still under negotiation, and transition funding had not been determined or agreed upon.

The transition funding amounts to slightly more than a half million dollars to be paid for by the federal government. This federal funding will have to be addressed by supplementary in the new year, once Yukon and federal Cabinet approval is achieved.

Included in this transition funding are such items as First Nations consultation; development of forestry, policy and legislation; assessment of buildings and equipment assets; organizational planning, including position description, writing and classification reviews.

We will be undertaking several important new and changing initiatives that reflect our commitment to protect the environment and manage wildlife.

Firstly, in respect to protection of the environment, the Members will note that there is a decrease of $204,000 in the line item opposite Environmental Protection. This is due to the one-time cost of establishing a recycling fund in the 1992-93 fiscal year. There is funding in this budget for the development of further regulations under the Environment Act.

If the government is going to proclaim this new legislation, then that legislation and attendant regulations have to be properly managed and enforced.

The nucleus of the staff in the environmental protection section has been largely concerned with the development of the legislation and attendant regulations, and with public education.

However, we have not had any enforcement capability. The primary responsibility for enforcement will be assigned to our field service branch and will be carried out through the services of our conservation officers.

The advent of this new legislation will add additional duties to this position, and we have provided for the establishment of two additional enforcement officer positions, one in the 1993-94 fiscal year, and one in the 1994-95 fiscal year. These positions will be environmental protection officers, who will be environment protection specialists and will be responsible for providing training, advice, guidance and assistance to the conservation officers and taking a lead role on major enforcement issues.

The major reason for the increase of $164,000 in the field service branch is to cover the additional expenses of enforcing this new legislation.

The $500,000 that the previous government had earmarked for the establishment of an environment fund under the Environment Act has, out of necessity, been reduced to $100,000. This will still provide some seed money for this fund, which will also be open for contributions from other sources, such as third-party contributions or fines that are specifically designated for use for environmental purposes.

Turning now to our commitment to the management of wildlife, the Members will note that there has been a decrease of $356,000 in the line item opposite Fish and Wildlife and will be asking how it is possible to meet this commitment while suffering such a decrease. The decrease is largely attributed to the fact that the figures reported in the 1992-93 fiscal year include approximately $515,000 for the cost involved in the first year of the Aishihik caribou recovery program, whereas our budget for 1993-93 includes only $250,000 for this program, as the first year is the most expensive year. In addition, there were a few projects in 1992-93 fiscal year, such as habitat studies, which were funded by Habitat Canada. These were one-time projects, the cost of which were recovered from outside sources.

The estimates provide for grants to both the Institute of Wildlife Resources and the Fur Institute of Canada as our contribution to research and promotion of the fur industry. We are also continuing to assist the Yukon Trappers Association through funding for trappers’ education workshops.

I hope that this pretty well covers the highlights and major changes in my department and I will welcome any questions from the Members.

Mr. Joe: I do have a few questions. I would like to talk about outfitters. What is the government’s position on people from other countries who buy outfitting areas?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are not actually too comfortable with having outside outfitters; however, we are in the position where 51 percent of the shares must be held by a Yukon outfitter under the Charter of Rights. At the present time, we do not seem to be able to stop the other 40-some percent from going to them.

We are now working with the Yukon Outfitters Association to see if there is some way that they can help us rectify this.

Mr. Joe: Another problem that I have is with the control that the government has over outfitters. Some people in my riding have been given a hard time by outfitters because they have gone into their areas and hunted. We must look after the people who were here first of all. We must make sure that there is enough game for all Yukoners. We need this for food for our families. I would like to find out from the Minister what he has in mind to make sure that there is enough game for people here and how he is going to make sure that outfitters respect the rights of Yukoners first.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The umbrella final agreement provides for the creation of a basic-needs level, if there is any shortage in the area. We are also now working with the outfitters to try to get them all onto quotas, which I think will help solve the Member’s problem. We certainly will cooperate in any way that we can in order to do that.

Mr. Harding: I thank the Minister for his opening comments. They do clarify some questions that I had. I thank him for his answers that he just gave to my colleague. I know that he has some concerns about outfitting. We have talked about them quite a bit during this session.

I have a few questions for the Minister in general debate. I do not intend to be too long. I would like to ask the Minister about what we talked about in Question Period today, and that is the wolf conservation management plan. The co-chair of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board was reported in the paper to have said that the Minister had asked for the board not to bother dealing with the plan. This runs contrary to the suggestion make by CYI. He said that that is not the case. He said that in Question Period today. I just want him to give me an explanation on that. I would also like him to give me an idea of his plan for the implementation of this wolf conservation management plan. He now tells me that it has to go through all 14 bands. That could take some time. Could he tell us the plan for that and just basically tell me if he supports the plan in principle?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We can provide the Member with the correspondence, if he would like, that we sent to the CYI. I understand from my conversations with some of the representatives of CYI that that represents what all 14 First Nations agree on, so I presume we are already over that hurdle. They are meeting on June 24 and should be able to come up with their recommendations at that time.

Mr. Harding: Yes, I would like a copy of that letter. Is it going to the board? Okay, I gather it is.

I have a question on high-quality management waters and the newly proposed waters that were mentioned in the synopsis of the fishing regulations, on which I had some dialogue with the Minister. I was wrong; the waters were mentioned in one part of it but they were not mentioned as waters having certain regulations, as of yet.

There is a lot of debate in my community as to whether or not, for example, Frenchman Lake is or is not now considered to be high-quality management waters, so could the Minister give me an explanation on that and then tell me how he plans to try to clear up the confusion as to whether or not they have been implemented?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: What happens there is that the bunch the Member and I looked at had been passed. The others are passed but they have to go through federal regulations; until they go through them, they cannot be declared high-quality waters.

Mr. Harding: Is there any idea of a ballpark figure? I told someone in a coffee shop on Sunday who had just been to Frenchman Lake and had thrown some big fish back  that I was glad they did but they did not need to have done that, and they were a little cheesed off. So, I want to know this: can I safely tell them that - I guess the answer to that is yes - and when does he expect that the federal fisheries’ approval to make them high-quality management waters would come into effect?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I hope by the middle of this summer, at the latest.

Mr. Harding: Is there any plan in place for posting or mailing this out to Yukoners so that someone does not get dinged - a little bit of discretion in the early period, or that sort of thing, to deal with this?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We will have the signs all ready to go just as soon as we get the approval.

Mr. Harding: I want to talk about a really controversial issue. I looked in the document - I forget the exact title, but it is the second one on infrastructure investment that has come out of Economic Development. I think it is dated April 16. In it, there is reference made to Kluane Park access. I would like to ask the Minister his views on that subject. I think he has stated in the House several times where he stands on that.

What I would like to ask him are his views, now that he is in government. Whether he believes it or not, some of them have changed slightly. Is he firmly committed to it? If so, how will he get the permission from the feds? Has he worked on that? What kind of consultation has he undertaken, or will he plan to undertake, to find out if the people of the Yukon really want that?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The road that the territorial government will be responsible for is actually in the game sanctuary. It just goes to the border. I can safely say that the people in that area have been lobbying for many years to get a controlled access in there on an old mining road that continues on down to what we call Pearson’s Bear Camp. The Village of Haines Junction and all the people in that area are still lobbying to try to get that.

Our responsibility now, as a territorial government, is to put the road to the boundary, which goes through the game sanctuary. It is 3.5 or four miles. For the rest, we need permission from the park. We will all ask for that to be tightly controlled access.

Mr. Harding: The Minister appears to be strongly committed to that. I am concerned about this. Perhaps I am ignorant of some past consultation on this. Can the Minister tell me what past consultation there was? The Minister seems to feel confident that the people in Haines Junction want it. I think there is also a larger public out there that may want some input into it. It is, after all, a Yukon resource. Perhaps he could tell me what past consultation there was to come up with the view that this must go ahead.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Personally, I have lobbied the government for six or seven years on this. Tourism, as well, has asked for it. The Chamber of Commerce in Haines Junction is solidly behind it. The town council is behind it, as are the business people all up and down the road.

We have gone to every meeting there has ever been to lobby our side. It is quite obvious that we have not won, but we have not given up. There is another five-year hearing to come up, I believe, in one year from now. They have done nothing on the commitments made to us in that five years. We are very doubtful that another hearing is of any use because, if they do not do what they agree to in the hearing, what is the point of it?

Mr. Harding: I bet he means the feds. So the government is not going to build any roads until they get some kind of approval from the feds, is that the correct understanding?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: No, there would not be any sense in us putting that money in, because we would be putting in a fairly nice and expensive road, and if it only goes another three miles we have not gained anything toward getting access into the park. There would not be much use in putting that road in unless it goes all of the way. Controlled access, as we saw it, would be from the boundary into the park; people would be able to drive into a parking area, inside the Kluane Sanctuary, and get on buses or vans, or whatever they have for access into that area.

It is nine miles up to Pearson Camp.

Mr. Harding: Has there been any formal proposal made by the new government to the federal government? I may be wrong, but I do not believe the previous government made any proposals; has the new government made any formal proposals to the feds on that?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The department has had conversations quite often with national Parks. The Minister of Tourism and I have written to Ottawa inviting Jean Charest out here to travel with us to see the park. Of course, he is a little busy right now, so I am not sure when he will visit.

Mr. Harding: Prime Minister, eh - Jean Charest? Another four or five years of misery - you just got me all depressed there; it hit me like a ton of bricks.

I guess that I can conclude that the new government has taken the position that they support this. I would like to express the concern that if something concrete is contemplated, it would seem like a good policy for the government to implement a formal consultative process with the general public.

I have said in the past that I may be ignorant of some of the efforts that have gone on before, but I do not know if such a proposal, as outlined by the government, has been specifically put to the people of the Yukon yet.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The original nine miles was agreed to in the other plan; that is the only concession we got. I could also point out that the Kluane Management Plan asked for access into there and that is a plan that cost around $4 million. I think that we should be looking at that plan when the time comes.

Mr. Harding: I am just warning them because this is not going to be a unanimously popular undertaking by any means. Although I have not been in this House long, I have learned a few things, and it is going to tough.

In its four-year plan, the government has talked about streamlining environmental regulations. I would like to ask the Minister what has been done to streamline environmental regulations thus far, what the plans are and what they have changed from the previous government’s environmental regulations that the Yukon has control over. If they are federal regulations, could he tell us what influence they have had over them. According to the Economic Development Minister, we really do not have a lot of say over the feds decisions regarding committees.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: There has not been much change since the former government was in power. What we have been trying to do is to work with the different government organizations and businesses so that when these regulations come in, we do not bring them in too fast and cause a lot of hardships - some of them will cost businesses some money. We have been working slowly on it, much in the same way as the former government. We are bringing them along slowly.

Mr. Joe: There appears to be some concerns about the importance of the recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Management Board. What is the government’s position about any future recommendations they may make to the government?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I think that one problem that we have is that there are two interpretations of what is going on. My advice, from my officials, tells me that they are an advisory board, which I accept and respect, and that there are certain regulations and terms of reference that we have to follow; we are doing our best to follow them.

I must also point out that any board that comes in here has to be, to some extent, responsible to the government. If they go against what the government’s internal advice is, particularly the biologists and other professionals, then we could be leading ourselves into trouble.

I think that the problem right now is that the interpretations are different and that we have not gotten together to straighten it out. I personally feel that we do not gain anything by washing our dirty laundry in the newspaper - but that is my own opinion, and no one else’s.

Mr. Harding: On this issue, I would just like to state clearly to the Minister that to me the issue is not so much the government’s ultimate responsibility. To me, the issue has been what I have witnessed living in this territory under the previous administration and the message from the present government concerning one particular issue. To me, that is the disconcerting thing about what has happened with the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board recommendations.

I can see instances where the Minister may have to give some direction. I have commented on the blue blazings that the Member gave when he was in Opposition to the actions of the previous Minister. I have closely documented and followed them. I say they are there and they are real. That has been my major concern. One thing is said in Opposition and one thing is done in government.

I am concerned about the number that the Minister has overruled, but I could see situations where there may be some direction having to be given. I have also read documents from officials whose opinions differ on the issue of whether or not the Minister should move away from the regulations, or change, alter, deny or refuse the recommendations of the board.

I read the minutes from a January 1991 meeting of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board where a presentation was given by Hugh Monaghan. He made comment that there has only been one recommendation of the board officially turned away at this point. That was the Art Webster situation and they immediately began planning for a wolf kill. This is what he said.

He also said that the Minister is expected to uphold the recommendations of the board. The Minister is not going to get an argument from me that there may be times when he disagrees with them, but I am concerned about the number, and I am frankly angered about the beating that was taken by the previous Minister. No recognition was given by the present Minister to the need or the actions of the previous Minister. Now, he is in the same boat. He is finding out that there are times when there may be situations.

I know that sometimes there will be situations where Ministers feel they must  give direction to a board. I have heard the Minister responsible for the Yukon Energy Corporation say just that same thing here in this House. I am sure that there are going to be many situations where that will occur. As far as I am concerned, I have milked that issue and made the points that I feel I have to make.

I do not have any other questions for the Minister - oh yes, I do as a result of what happened today. One is on the wildlife viewing regulations in the game farming proposals. A couple of times this week I tried - maybe Question Period is the wrong forum because we are sort of on the attack too much. I am very concerned about proposal number 2, where wildlife viewing is given pretty much a free hand. It creates a real opening. If I were an unscrupulous person, I would say why get a game farming licence and be subject to game farming regulations when I could do the same thing under the auspices of wildlife viewing. I could bring in exotics and sell their offspring and not be subject to regulations.

I would like to ask the Minister what his views are on that and if he plans to do anything in the interim to prevent exotics from being brought in and to somehow regulate wildlife viewing.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: As to the exotic animals or wildlife viewing, there are two things we can do. One is to invite the Member to sit down with the officials and get a complete briefing. The other thing I could suggest - and I am not trying to be smart about this - is that the Member could put ideas in to the board - they are still receiving them - and go that way. However, we certainly will give him a briefing on it any time he wants. It is a problem - I think I have admitted that before in here.

On the Wildlife Management Board, I would say that I meet once a month with them now, and we are trying to develop, with the CYI, terms of reference that both sides can go along with and it can be settled.

I would just like to say one more thing on what I jumped all over the other Minister about. Not so much on that, but the fact that all the people in all the meetings I went to, and almost any place the fish and game people went, were solidly agreed that wolf management had to be done. I am being criticized for what I did here, but from all the meetings I get reports back from, everybody said they wanted to go on permits, they did not want it closed right off. That is just the difference between the two of us, this one simple thing: I have accepted what the people said.

In the other case, when the Hon. Art Webster was here, what he did was to turn around and form another committee and did not actually listen to what some of the people said. Mind you, I have to be out there hearing that, too. Sometimes the people get very emotional and do not look at things the way they maybe should. On this hunting issue, they seem to have very stern beliefs on how they want things done. They had the option of two things and, in most places, they voted to go for the permit system.

Mr. Harding: I have looked through some of the notes on that. I believe that a lot of people - I know this for a fact, as they have told me - supported the wolf kill on the premise that there would not be moose hunting. That is the issue. To say that there was unanimous approval for a wolf kill in this territory, without some kind of a plan for the future, would be inaccurate. There are many people who feel as I do, that some action had to be proven and taken, but it should not be used as an ongoing management tool.

I would not consider myself to be a big environmentalist, but I am concerned about this issue. It is expensive and socially and economically damaging in the long run for the territory. I have read some literature about it from some organizations that is being handed around that does cause me some concern. Perhaps it will not affect tourism this year, but it could in the long run. If there is a way around it, we should be looking at it. I will step away from this issue on the management board. We have talked about it often enough. The Minister knows where I stand on it.

The briefing would be welcomed. We will be asking for that. I thought long and hard about submitting my opinions, but I felt that, as an elected person, my best role would be to express them in here. I let the people submit their thoughts. Perhaps I should have done it in meeting form. I felt it was up to them. My views come up in here, and other people’s come in the surveys and proposals. That is why I did not do it.

I have no further questions. I will be happy to move into line-by-line debate, unless someone else has some Renewable Resources questions.

Ms. Moorcroft: I would like to follow up on the issue that we were discussing in Question Period, which was the forest fire on Red Ridge. Can the Minister tell me if there is a plan in place for the department to carry out a burn in order to improve sheep habitat on the Red Ridge?

Hon. Mr. Brewster:  They plan on doing some experimental test plots. They are not going to be very big. They do not feel that they are big enough to go into a full consultation on them.

Ms. Moorcroft:  Would it be possible for me to have a copy of the plan the department has prepared?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: No problem.

Ms. Moorcroft: Do they have a time frame on the implementation of that plan, and do they plan to conduct any fires during the current season over the summer months?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: It would depend upon the weather and when forestry will give us a permit to do this burning.

Mr. Cable: Firstly, let me give my apologies to the Hansard staff for rising here; they had given me instructions to be brief today, so I just want that transmitted.

I have some questions about the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board. There has been what appears to be a fairly disturbing bit of acrimony between the government and the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board.

I can see, coming down the road, that the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board will be making many decisions over the years affecting various people, including outfitters.

What is the Minister’s attitude toward compensation for people who are affected by this board’s decisions?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Under the umbrella final agreement, there is compensation for the outfitters. We pay part and the federal government pays part. Right now there is also compensation revoted for trappers, if their habitat is affected by certain things such as forestry.

Mr. Cable: I do not have the agreement in front of me, but is there at the present time - to the Minister’s knowledge - provision for granting compensation in lieu of licences to the three outfitters who are affected by the decision relating to the moose around Aishihik Lake?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: There is nothing for those three outfitters, because we do not think that we can declare it as an emergency. There would be no compensation for them.

Mr. Cable: I have a couple of questions on the forestry turnover. I gathered from listening to news reports and from information that I received that there has been a very large number of grievances filed against the federal government, the employer, in relation to management practices. The suggestion that came from the Public Service Alliance representative here was that the devolution of forestry not take place until these grievances have been resolved.

What is the Minister’s posture on that?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Actually, if the turnover was given to us we could deal with some of them. We have a year in which we have to deal with the employees before it is finalized, so we would hope we could deal with those as territorial positions.

I could add that everywhere I go in the rural areas the first thing the people ask me is when we are going to get forestry transferred. Quite a few feel they would like it to be transferred to the territorial government.

Mr. Cable: I asked the Minister the other day whether a definitive decision had been made on whether to transfer the forestry personnel, once they become Yukon employees, to Watson Lake, and he answered that a definitive decision had not been made. What is the Minister’s inclination? What is the government’s inclination? Is it to move most of the forestry personnel to Watson Lake?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The government has never even gotten around to the position of really talking about it. We really have not made any decisions on it, period.

Mr. Harding: I got some legislative returns from the Minister and I am glad they are supporting and developing catch and release. I think it is a good proposal and we need to do more of it. I am glad about the high-quality management waters, because we really have to protect our fish resource in the Yukon. That is important.

In the return, there was a representation made to the Minister. It said that under the federal Environment Act, I believe, there could be enforcement of littering in camps - hunting camps and that type of thing - but my concern is that conservation officers do not have the ability to enforce that. For example, if hunters left a camp a mess and a Renewable Resources officer saw it, what could he do about it? That was my concern.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We do now that the litter regulations are in force.

Deputy Chair: Is there any further debate?

Mr. Harding: I have a legislative return on all-terrain vehicles. I think it might have been interpreted that I was taking a position totally against them. I was not, and I guess the Minister’s position is that he will evaluate each situation on an as-needed basis.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: That is the position we are taking now in some areas. There are several areas that we have closed off now, and we will close off any wildlife viewing area that they might disturb.

I should also point out that - I have a problem with this myself, but it is fact - by having ATVs running around, we put the game hunters out into different areas. Therefore, we are not keeping pressure on the areas along the road, and they have a much greater ability to bring the meat back out, than they would the other way. Therefore, we know they are saving the meat.

Mr. Harding: So, the Minister does have some concerns about the ability to access all kinds of areas - I have those same concerns. I see some people who are not very respectful - they drag flats of beer on their four wheelers, off into the bush, and leave the cans behind. I do have some problems with that aspect. It is a difficult issue to deal with. I agree that you have to evaluate it. You might have a war if you tried to ban them outright in the territory - they have some good fights over it in British Columbia.

I guess that would be the end of general debate for me.

Mr. Joe: I have one more question. What is the government doing to encourage a sport fishing, catch and release program for fish?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Right now, we are trying to educate people and do advertising. We are working with the different derbies so that they do not always take all the fish out, but release them. It is a matter of education to get them to do this. The barbless hooks is another situation that we can move into and try to get the fish released back into the water.

Mr. Harding: I have one more little question. I was talking to a friend of mine. He was a little concerned about fly-in fishing and the ability of people to access different waters. I was wondering how the Minister would feel about resource councils coming up with a recommendation to protect certain lakes from that type of access and restricting them to on-foot access?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We certainly would expect that, just as we listened to them about the high-quality lakes. We expect in the future that there will be lakes in that classification. We will react when we see which lakes they are and hear the arguments.

Deputy Chair: Is there any general debate on Administration?

On Administration

On General Management

General Management in the amount of $250,000 agreed to

On Finance and Administration

Finance and Administration in the amount of $1,228,000 agreed to

Administration in the amount of $1,478,000 agreed to

On Policy, Planning and Assessment

Mr. Harding: Can the Minister tell me where the reduction comes from in the policy, planning and assessment area?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Yes, there is a reduction of $30,000 due to the elimination of internal charges and the clerical assistance.

On Director

Director in the amount of $252,000 agreed to

On Policy Analysis

Policy Analysis in the amount of $237,000 agreed to

On Program Transfers Unit

Program Transfers Unit in the amount of nil agreed to

On Planning and Assessment

Planning and Assessment in the amount of $304,000 agreed to

On GIS/Remote Sensing

GIS/Remote Sensing in the amount of $156,000 agreed to

Policy, Planning and Assessment in the amount of $949,000 agreed to

On Resource Management

Mr. Cable: I have a few questions on the game regulations that are being reviewed, or promulgated, or whatever the status is. When does the Minister see that the game farming regulations will have been developed, approved and put in force?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The conclusion of the public input will be at the end of this week. We will then be reviewing it with the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board on June 24. It will go from there to Cabinet.

Mr. Cable: Would sometime this summer be a reasonable target date for the regulations coming into force?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are not too sure that they will even get through everything and come into force.

Mr. Cable: I gather that what is being done now - unless I have misappreciated the exercise - is the formulation of interim regulations, and at some juncture down the road, when everybody agrees on the medical evidence, there will be final regulations. Have I appreciated the situation correctly?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We would bring in regulations, but they would be subject to change. I suppose the population will agree that some changes should be made. I point out also that we are under regulations made by the former government at the present time.

Mr. Cable: I gather that the only two problems with the game farming industry, other than licensing provisions, are that on an escape there is a possibility of disease transmission or genetic pollution. Are there any other issues that are being discussed?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The main one is just a moral issue. Some people believe in it and some do not. These are the balances we have to keep to see that we can get a consensus between the two groups. Some believe that all animals should be in the wild and others believe that you can game farm. We have this situation and that is what we are trying to decipher, to see if we can come in between where both sides are satisfied.

Mr. Cable: Is the Minister saying that is the main issue?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We mentioned the other issue is the disease issue, and the technical issue of the situation. Those are also very important to resolve.

Mr. Cable: I just have a couple of questions on agriculture. What does the Minister see as the likelihood of there being a substantial agricultural industry here in the territory?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Number one, it would depend on what the Member means by substantial. The last report we put out showed a great amount of money coming back, and that is one criteria to go by. It would depend on the economy, and it depends on land and a number of things, but I can certainly say, and I think Members would agree with me, that in the last nine or 10 years, it has increased a fair amount. There is more and more, and one of the big problems is the land issue.

Mr. Cable: I just have one more question. I do not want to belabour the issue but, in the Minister’s view, what segments of the agriculture industry are most likely to lead to some substantial amount of agricultural production?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: At the present time, it is mainly hay and forage such as that, and then greenhouses and vegetables, and slowly, possibly, meat situations. This, of course, depends on whether we have an abattoir and whether we can do it economically, or whether they can ship the meat in cheaper from outside than we can grow it here.

Chair: Is there any further debate?

On Division Management

Division Management in the amount of $208,000 agreed to

On Agriculture

Agriculture in the amount of $475,000 agreed to

On Fish and Wildlife

Fish and Wildlife in the amount of $3,781,000 agreed to

On Field Services

Field Services in the amount of $2,177,000 agreed to

On Parks and Outdoor Recreation

Mr. Harding: I would like to point out that I really appreciate the legislative return that the Minister gave us, with a breakdown in the lines in the beginning so that I do not have to ask for that information now. However, I would like to know the reason for the reduction in parks and outdoor recreation of 10 percent?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: It is a decrease of $180,000, largely due to the effect the Alaska Highway celebration in 1992-93 had on the campground maintenance, together with a cutback in the length of the season in some selected campgrounds.

Parks and Outdoor Recreation in the amount of $1,591,000 agreed to

On Environmental Protection

Environmental Protection in the amount of $370,000 agreed to

Resource Management in the amount of $8,602,000 agreed to

On Land Claims

On Land Claims Administration

Land Claims Administration in the amount of $171,000 agreed to

On Yukon First Nations Comprehensive Claim

Yukon First Nations Comprehensive Claim in the amount of $450,000 agreed to

On Inuvialuit Final Agreement (IFA)

Inuvialuit Final Agreement (IFA) in the amount of $1,055,000 agreed to

Land Claims in the amount of $1,676,000 agreed to

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to

On Capital Expenditures

On Administration

On Departmental Equipment

Mr. Harding: Could the Minister tell me what departmental equipment is going to be purchased? So that we can clear the lines, can the Minister tell me what is going to be purchased under all of the other line items - Office Furniture and Equipment, Information Systems and Computer Equipment in that administration section?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: It is everything from skidoos, boats, motors and anything else that is required for work out in the field.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We can give the Member a detailed breakdown.

Mr. Chair, I can see you are in a hurry to get to Old Crow. We have been here for so long now, you are running in circles.

I would like to propose an amendment here.

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 14, Renewable Resources, by reducing the line item Departmental Equipment on page 86 in the capital estimates by $15,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.

Amendment agreed to

Departmental Equipment in the amount of $149,000 agreed to as amended

On Computer Equipment

Computer Equipment in the amount of $80,000 agreed to

On Information Systems

Hon. Mr. Brewster:  In that line item, we have money for library assistance and some more for the GIS study. Would the Member like that on paper?

Information Systems in the amount of $18,000 agreed to

On Office Accommodation and Improvements

Office Accommodation and Improvements in the amount of $20,000 agreed to

On Office Furniture and Equipment

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Brewster:  I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 14, Renewable Resources, by reducing the line item Office Furniture and Equipment on page 86 in the capital estimates by $10,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.

Amendment agreed to

Office Furniture and Equipment in the amount of $49,000 agreed to as amended

Administration in the amount of $316,000 agreed to as amended

On Policy, Planning and Assessment

Chair:  Is there any general debate?

On Resources and Land Information Systems (RLIS)

Resources and Land Information Systems in the amount of $50,000 agreed to

On State of the Environment and Economic Reports

State of the Environment and Economic Reports in the amount of $30,000 agreed to

Mr. Harding: What is the breakdown on that? Is any of it recoverable?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: At the present time, the money is not recoverable, but eventually we will get some money from the federal government to supplement it. The $30,000 is to prepare the state of the environment report, as required by the Yukon Environment Act.

Policy, Planning and Assessment in the amount of $80,000 agreed to

On Resource Management

Chair: Is there any general debate?

On Agriculture

On Infrastructure Facilities (Abattoir)

Mr. Cable: I just have a couple of questions on the abattoir. I gather that the desired property is at the forestry reserve at the corner of the Mayo Road and Takhini Hot Springs Road. Could the Minister indicate whether that property has, as yet, been secured by the Yukon territorial government for purposes of the abattoir?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Negotiations are continuing. I have my fingers crossed - it is just about ready to fall over the fence, I think and hope, but as of right now, we are not sure.

Mr. Cable: I followed the public part of the negotiations, and it seems to me that the federal government has had some unreasonable resistance to the transfer of that property. What is the reason why they are resisting the transfer so vigorously? I gather there are 300 acres or thereabouts there, and all that is required for the abattoir is a small section.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I will put it this way: I guess it is a lack of communication, and I think we have it straightened around. I hope we have.

Mr. Cable: I gather $500,000 has been allotted to the abattoir from this government. Am I correct in that figure?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: It is from the EDA.

Mr. Cable: That is totally recoverable, I assume, and hence the $1.00 item. Is that the rationale?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: The reason we have $1.00 in there is because we do not really know where we are going until we get the land. Once we get the land, we will contribute part of that, but not all of that, to the organization that is going to run the abattoir.

Mr. Cable: Right at the moment - to make sure that I am understanding what the Minister saying - there is a segment of that EDA money that we have spoken about earlier that is tentatively devoted to the abattoir. Is that correct?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: With respect to the $500,000, they had approval for it, but it was cancelled with the new budget, and they will have to go back for another approval, when and if we get the land.

Mr. Harding: I have a couple of questions on the abattoir. One, I saw a letter to the federal Minister on the land, and I understand that issue. It also said that YTG wanted to begin the construction this year. I would like to know what it is going to cost YTG. What are we going to have to pay overall that is not recoverable?

I would also like to know why a Conservative government - this boggles my mind - would want to build this abattoir. I do not understand how it would be considered infrastructure from their point of view. It does not follow along with the free market philosophy - if someone could build it within the private sector, then it would be economical. In this case, the government says they want to build it, and they have commitments to the agricultural industry to do so. How does that fit into the free market Conservative philosophy?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are not building it. They formed an association that is going to build, run and look after it. All we are doing is trying to help them with some money, and they have to raise a certain portion of that money. We are not building it at all. All I have done is help them get the land. From there on, they have to work it, not me.

Mr. Harding: So, it is not going to cost YTG a red cent?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are prepared to support it as an infrastructure feature, but it is mainly up to the farmers and Agricultural Association to carry it on from there.

Infrastructure Facilities (Abattoir) in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

On Fish and Wildlife

On Fish and Wildlife Management Planning

Mr. Harding: I do not know if this is in line, but which is the line concerning the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board and the cutback in their budget. Exactly what is the extent of that budget? I understand that last year’s budget was in the area of $390,000. What is this year’s?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: That is in O&M. It was $43,000; it was cut back. The Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board spent $190,000. We had to take that out of other areas.

Fish and Wildlife Management Planning in the amount of $60,000 agreed to

On Wildlife Viewing and Infrastructure

Wildlife Viewing and Infrastructure in the amount of $150,000 agreed to

On Video - Yukon Wildlife Identification

Video - Yukon Wildlife Identification in the amount of $8,000 agreed to

On Parks and Outdoor Recreation

On Facilities

On Dempster Highway Interpretive Centre

Dempster Highway Interpretive Centre in the amount of $30,000 agreed to

On Territorial Parks

On Coal River Springs

Coal River Springs in the amount of $12,000 agreed to

On Kusawa Lake Management Plan

Kusawa Lake Management Plan in the amount of $25,000 agreed to

On Carcross Dunes Management Plan

Carcross Dunes Management Plan in the amount of $59,000 agreed to

On Lazulite Deposits

Lazulite Deposits in the amount of $2,000 agreed to

On Park System Plan

Park System Plan in the amount of $60,000 agreed to

On Resource Assessment

Mr. Cable: Perhaps I have missed this, but could the Minister tell me where the wolf kill monies are hidden in these books? They are not immediately apparent to me, and perhaps I have just missed it.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: It was in Fish and Wildlife Administration in O&M.

Resource Assessment in the amount of $70,000 agreed to

On Campgrounds and Recreation Access

On Planning

Mr. Harding: I would like to ask the Minister - I just glanced at a clipping in the news briefing that I got at 12:30 - about privatizing campgrounds. The Minister mentioned it last week in the Legislature. Can the Minister give me a few thoughts on that, because there are a number of campgrounds on back roads - well, not back roads for the Yukon - but roads like the Campbell Highway, the Lapie Canyon. Who on earth would want to go into business there? Can the Minister tell me what he is referring to there?

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Actually, it was only a suggestion that we were looking at, and it would be for the large campgrounds. Of course, the Member is correct; we would continue to maintain the small campgrounds ourselves.

We thought that we might be able to get someone to operate and manage some of the bigger ones for us. If someone were running them, they would be able to collect fees; right now the government pays people to run back to these places in order to look after them, especially if they are not in a community.

We were only considering this suggestion; we have not done anything and I do not want people to think that we have started doing this; we have probably only had three conversations about this.

There have been no draft papers of the good and bad; we have simply considered it. I am in agreement with the Member about the small campgrounds; the government would continue to maintain them.

Mr. Harding: By way of representation, let me say to the Minister that I would urge him to proceed very cautiously on the privatization of campgrounds.

I think that there would have to be strict standards maintained and we have a real interest in making sure those campgrounds do not turn into recreational vehicle sites.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: I agree with the Member over there, and that is one of the things that we have to figure out. We have to make sure that the campgrounds are maintained at a certain standard and that they are looked after.

Planning in the amount of $65,000 agreed to

On Western Region

Western Region in the amount of $109,000 agreed to

On Northern Region

Northern Region in the amount of $121,000 agreed to

On Southern Region

Southern Region in the amount of $148,000 agreed to

On Dalton Post

Dalton Post in the amount of $8,000 agreed to

On Outdoor Recreation System Implementation

Outdoor Recreation System Implementation in the amount of $60,000 agreed to

On Heritage Rivers

On Yukon River (30 mile section)

Yukon River (30 mile section) in the amount of $20,000 agreed to

On Bonnet Plume River

Bonnet Plume River in the amount of $40,000 agreed to

On Tatshenshini River

Tatshenshini River in the amount of $23,000 agreed to

Resource Management in the amount of $1,070,000 agreed to

On Land Claims

On IFA-Herschel Island Territory Park

IFA-Herschel Island Territory Park in the amount of $109,000 agreed to

Land Claims in the amount of $109,000 agreed to

Capital Expenditures agreed to as amended

Department of Renewable Resources agreed to as amended

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Before we move on, the other day, the Leader of the Official Opposition asked where the fish fingerlings would be found. They can be found under environmental management enhancement program.

Mrs. Firth: On a point of order, for the Minister responsible for Economic Development, I just wanted to point out to that Minister the new job that is going to be created in his department. It has not been any big secret or any big confidential matter, but it seems that the position was presented, and the managers and analysts were being advised. It was to be a position that was to be a new level between deputy ministers or the assistant deputy ministers and the area managers for the north and south regions.

I gather, by the Minister standing up this afternoon and saying that, on a point of order, absolutely no new positions were going to be created in his department, that this position will not be created. I am pleased to hear that we have been able to nip a managerial position in the bud from being created, if that is the case.

Chair: There is no point of order, but the Minister can respond if he wishes to do so.

Department of Tourism

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

Chair: Is there any general debate?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I am pleased to introduce the budget for the Department of Tourism. The operation and maintenance budget totals $6.7 million, which represents a two percent, $107,000, increase over the 1992-93 forecast. This significant increase includes the funding to the Yukon Anniversaries Commission, enhanced funding for the film site promotion program, and funding for the Arts Centre Corporation, previously funded through the Department of Education.

The tabled capital budget totals $1.8 million. Our main estimates show this as being a 38-percent decrease from the 1992-93 forecast. However, if we delete the special projects, the Yukon and Carcross VRC development, a more accurate comparison of the ongoing projects shows an 18-percent decrease over the 1992-93 forecast.

Note that there are three proposed amendments that will reduce the capital budget by $31,000, and details will be provided as we debate the lines later.

The tabled budget includes a number of priority initiatives, such as were identified in the budget address. I will briefly highlight these new activities and other significant changes from the 1992-93 forecast by speaking first to the O&M for each branch, and then to the capital budget for each branch.

In administration, a line item has been added to provide the funding for the Yukon Anniversaries Commission, rather than requesting supplementary funds, which has been the procedure for the last couple of years. The contribution to the commission for 1993-94 is $285,000.

The upcoming gold rush anniversary should place the Yukon on an international stage, hence the importance of our supporting an organization to coordinate activities relating to these anniversaries.

In the heritage branch, the change is mainly due to the Yukon gold rush explorer’s passport program. Various activities, including printing and promotion for the 1993 season, will have already occurred. The 1993-94 budget has been adjusted accordingly.

The development branch has seen no significant change from 1992-93 operations.

In the marketing branch, the following three items represent the major reallocations within the marketing budget. A film site promotion program has been increased by $70,000 to $105,000, allowing the branch to be more pro-active when pursuing possible productions. Feature films, television movies and commercial productions have the potential of having a significant impact on the Yukon. There is $10,000 allotted to a pilot ambassador program, which will capitalize on the business and pleasure travel activities of Yukoners, who will become ambassadors for the Yukon as they travel outside. This program will be implemented with the assistance and cooperation of the Tourism Industry Association of the Yukon.

An assistant marketing officer will be recruited soon to enhance marketing support to the Yukon tourism operators in the travel trade and media relations programs.

Let me take a moment to acknowledge the American Bus Association which has, again, selected Discovery Days in the City of Dawson in the top 100 events to visit this year. Congratulations to the City of Dawson for their efforts toward this accomplishment.

In the arts branch, the two major items include the following: the funding to the Arts Centre Corporation has been transferred from the Department of Education to the Department of Tourism, and there has been $50,000 targeted to a marketing initiative to improve access to the arts community and its markets.

I will now move to the capital budget. In the administration branch, this new activity reflects the transfer of responsibility from Government Services to each department. It includes funding for the department for office and storage accommodation, furniture, equipment and systems.

In the heritage branch, there have been four major changes. Funding for the historic resources trust fund has been reduced to $75,000 in 1993-94, due to fiscal restraint. Our efforts to build the fund in future years will continue. Under museums assistance, we will continue to fund museums for small, capital projects. However, major museums developments, such as the Dawson Museum storage facility, has been deferred at the request of the museum, who wishes to address the need for a fire control system as a priority. Heritage branch is working with the museum to access federal funding for this fire control project.

Note the 1992-93 forecast for artifact inventory and cataloguing includes $50,000 recovered from the federal government. The 1993-94 mains are the same as the 1992-93 mains.

Within historic sites planning, the initial planning research for a Canyon City tramway will be started.

The development branch, in recognition of the need for improving economic and visitor statistical data, will begin work on the following three initiatives with the strategic planning activity: an economic impact model process will be started, in conjunction with Statistics Canada; a tourism product inventory database will be started; and the planning and design for a visitor’s exit survey will be initiated.

Under wilderness resource assessment, the branch will be researching options for wilderness tourism licensing, in addition to ongoing activities. Within the destination site, or product assessment line, the branch will be preparing a basic feasibility study for a living cultural centre, in addition to ongoing activities.

Increased funding has been allotted for the signs and interpretation activities due to the approaching gold rush anniversary. In addition to ongoing projects, the branch will be planning new interpretive sites along the Klondike Highway travel corridor relating to this historic event.

Finally, the regional and planning implementation activity will be reinstated at historic levels and will be used to implement projects recommended in the Kluane regional tourism development plan.

In the marketing branch, two significant items relate to the Yukon visitors reception centre and the production of audio-visual shows. Firstly, at the VRC, the branch will be overseeing some minimal landscaping, installing additional banners and flags, upgrading the hot water system and other miscellaneous changes, such as considering options of improvements to access from the highway and parking. Secondly, the Yukon film project has been delayed and will be replaced with a still photo shoot in 1993-94.

There are no changes to the arts branch capital budget. I will be pleased to elaborate on any of these initiatives.

Mr. Harding: I want the Minister to feel at ease. There will not be any barbed tourism pamphlet questions here for him to answer today. I am just going to ask a few simple questions.

I would like to ask him about the written questions that I sent over to him. Will he just commit to answering them. Most of my questions are contained in those. If he could give me some written answers within the next week, I would really appreciate it.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: There is no problem. I have actually answered some of the questions in my speech here now. It may not be a week, but within a couple of weeks I can get all the answers back to the Member.

Mr. Harding: I would like to ask the Minister if and when they are going to proclaim the Historic Resources Act?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Right now, that act is under review. I would suspect that we will be consulting with some of the individuals and others who were concerned about the personal property side of that act. If we can clean that up, then we will put it on the legislative calendar. I suspect that we will be dealing with the act in the near future. I cannot say exactly when, because we have not sat down and looked at that calendar yet. There were just some minor things in that particular act that had to be cleaned up, and I am hoping that we can meet with those individuals when we are out of session.

Mr. Cable: I have some general questions for the Minister. I wonder if the Minister would definitively put to rest the rumour that I have heard that the Economic Development department is going to take in the Tourism department, and the two departments are going to become one.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I cannot put it to rest forever. This government, from one time to another, changes its mind on what departments will be with which departments. If I have anything to do with it, it will be the Tourism department taking over Economic Development, not the other way around.

Mr. Cable: Is there any discussion between the Minister and his colleagues, at the present time, relating to the amalgamation of those two departments?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Not real serious discussions, but I have mentioned to the Minister of Economic Development that I am after his department somewhere down the road.

Mr. Harding: So, that is where the rumour is coming from.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: It looks like I have spooked a few people over there. It is not something that we are seriously considering but, as any government does, you look at your priorities and departments and how you can become more efficient. I cannot say that, one day, it would not happen. For this year, we are going ahead with the Tourism budget, and for the next year, I do not know. It is not something that has been a serious discussion, up until this time.

On Administration

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $915,000 agreed to

Administration in the amount of $915,000 agreed to

On Heritage

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $281,000 agreed to

On Museums

Mr. Harding: I am a little concerned about this, in light of some of the literature from the Yukon Party, during the election. What does this cut represent?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The reason for the reduction in this area is that, with funds last year, we did the promotion and publication for the passport program. So, we do not have to include that in this budget.

Museums in the amount of $279,000 agreed to

On Historic Sites

Historic Sites in the amount of $140,000 agreed to

Heritage in the amount of $700,000 agreed to

On Development

On Operations

Mr. Cable: I have a couple of quick questions for the Minister about his views on wilderness or ecotourism.

Does the Minister see that segment of the tourist business as becoming a major element of the Yukon tourist business in the near future?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I do see it as that and as opportunity for one of the faster growth markets. I think an awful lot of people want to do that and the Yukon is gearing up in that direction and that is one of the reasons that we put out the brochure that went out and we had such a good response from that advertising. The brochure was called “The Road Not Taken”. It is a brochure that the Member has questioned me about over the last few days.

I believe that there is a great future for the Yukon in that type of tourism, because we offer the pristine wilderness, the beauty of the country, the solitude and fine hospitality that people like.

I would suspect that will be a great growth market for us in the future.

Mr. Cable: Assuming that is the case - I would agree with the Minister that is probably the case - what part of this development budget is allocated to providing research, programs, planning support or technical assistance to this group?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The programs that are directed toward that group are in marketing and not in the development area.

Mr. Harding: I am also interested in more of a detailed breakdown of the initiatives on the development of the wilderness sector of the tourism industry.

Perhaps the Minister could give a brief deliberation as to what is going on in that regard in the department.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Early this spring, we initiated a meeting with all of the wilderness operators to discuss regulations, problems that they had in cross-boundary licensing and those kinds of things.

I think that they are holding several meetings and they have had a couple of meetings now and the ecotourism group has recently formed an association. We are meeting with them and others to develop regulations so that we can control that type of tourism in future.

That is where they are heading right now; they are getting more organized and developing overlapping agreements with other jurisdictions like Alaska, Northwest Territories, when you start in one province or territory and you drift into another.

Right now, we do not have a lot of regulations and the people from the other provinces or territories can come into our area, but it is more difficult for us to get into their areas. We are trying to work out reciprocal agreements where we can drift on our rivers into their part of the country and get picked up over there without any problems.

Mr. Harding: I would like to read to the Minister a statement made by a leading Yukon citizen. Perhaps he could tell me whether or not he agrees with it.

“I have got great problems with the wilderness aspect of outfitting. I figure that it takes at least 20 wilderness clients to give you the revenue of one hunting client. You are doing 20 times the damage to the environment that one hunter is doing. I can argue that with anybody. If you have 20 people in an area, then they are going to do 20 times more damage than one person is.”

Does the Minister agree with that statement?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: No, I do not agree totally with that statement and I have expressed that to that individual several times. I do not necessarily agree with that particular statement. In fact, I am going to work very hard in the future to prove that that statement is not so accurate.

Mr. Harding: We have just discovered that we have two movers and shakers in the Cabinet who feel this way, because this one was in a book called In Business For Ourselves, by Ostashek Outfitting, signed in 1991 by the now Government Leader. I believe the wilderness market is a good market for tourism. I will read the statement again:

“I have got great problems with the wilderness aspect of outfitting. I figure that it takes at least 20 wilderness clients to give you the revenue of one hunting client. You are doing 20 times the damage to the environment that one hunter is doing. I can argue that with anybody. If you have 20 people in an area, then they are going to do 20 times more damage than one person is.”

Members should read this book; it is really interesting. We have been leafing through it and have found a lot of interesting things we are going to be talking about. I am learning. I think the Member is learning, too.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Before we clear that item, I want to advise the Member, as the Minister of Education, I am going to have that book censored and we will remove some of those clauses, and I will have some serious discussions with its author.

Mr. Harding: We are going to have discussions with the author of that book as well.

Operations in the amount of $477,000 agreed to

Development in the amount of $477,000 agreed to

On Marketing

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $1,042,000 agreed to

On Public Relations

Public Relations in the amount of $145,000 agreed to

On Promotions

Mr. Cable: Just to go back on that ecotourism, what part of that promotion’s budget would be directed toward wilderness, or ecotourism?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: All the advertising is in the operations budget up above.

Mr. Cable: With the Minister’s permission, could we just flip back to that cleared item and maybe the question could be answered.

Chair: Do we have unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members: Agreed.

On Operations - revisited

Hon. Mr. Phillips: We are back in operations. Is that where we are? The program that the controversial booklet I have been questioned on repeatedly in Question Period on is the style-conscious adventure campaign. There is $531,000 of the budget in that particular campaign. It is a fairly significant campaign in the budget.

Operations in the amount of $1,042,000 agreed to

On Promotions

Promotions in the amount of $635,000 agreed to

On Information Services

Information Services in the amount of $1,678,000 agreed to

Marketing in the amount of $3,500,000 agreed to

On Arts

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $1,157,000 agreed to

Arts in the amount of $1,157,000 agreed to

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to

On Capital Expenditures

Chair: Is there any general debate?

On Administration

On General Administration Support

On Office Administration, Furniture, Equipment and Systems

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 13, Tourism, by reducing the line item Office Accommodation, Furniture, Equipment and Systems on page 94 by $5,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be changed accordingly.

Mr. Harding: Could the Minister tell us the pressing reason that the $95,000 worth of office accommodation, furniture and equipment is needed in this fiscal year, in these terribly tragic financial times?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I am sure, as the Member is aware, this item was previously the responsibility of the Department of Government Services. Now, each department has to handle it. That is why the line item is somewhat larger. In this particular item, we are looking at a photocopier for $8,000. Space has to be assigned, and the main administration building has to be renovated and have fireproof walls for storage, computer connections and working space. The estimated cost is $20,000 there. A controller is required for $12,000.

Computer upgrades and replacement is $43,000. I should tell the Member that the Department of Tourism was the last department to have a computer analysis. We were the first one to have it finally finished. Many of the computers we had in that department will be going to the heritage branch and will go on display in our local museums as antiques.

Mr. Harding: For a bunch of guys who hate computers, they sure buy a lot.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Just one point, so that the Member knows what is going on: in the recent problems we had with the concern about the effect the caribou enhancement program would have, the Department of Tourism had to borrow a computer from another branch so that we could keep up. If we had had heavy volumes, there was no way that we could have kept up with correspondence.

The Member has to remember that the Department of Tourism is a communications branch. We do get a lot of enquiries and have to respond to them. We had all kinds of people sharing computers, cards that would not fit in various computers and other problems in the past. I am sure the Member would not want people working under those conditions.

Mr. Harding: If it was only the Department of Tourism that ordered some computers, I might have been able to give some merit to that representation. Anyway, I am prepared to clear that line.

Amendment agreed to

Office Accommodation, Furniture, Equipment and Systems in the amount of $95,000 agreed to as amended

Administration in the amount of $95,000 agreed to as amended

On Heritage

On Historic Resources

On Heritage Artifact Acquisition

Heritage Artifact Acquisition in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

On Historic Resources Trust Fund

Historic Resources Trust Fund in the amount of $75,000 agreed to

On Museums

On Museums Assistance

Mr. Harding: What is the reason for the marked decrease in the Museums Assistance line?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: We do not have any interest in museums - I am just kidding. The reason for the decrease is that the Dawson storage facility was delayed for one year, because the people in Dawson felt that if we were going to spend money in Dawson they would prefer that we work with them on the Old Territorial Administration Building to put in sprinkler systems, so they delayed the Dawson storage facility for one year.

Mr. McDonald: Could the Minister provide us with a breakdown as to what the $130,000 will be spent on, please?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Small capital contribution emphasis on fire protection and security will continue with a second application being made in October of 1992 to complete the fire and security projects outlined in the MAP reports; $20,000 has been earmarked for the design and planning of a sprinkler system for the Old Territorial Administration Building and an application will be made to the federal government, Department of Communications, in October of 1993 for 50 percent of implementation in fiscal year 1994-95.

This plan will also indicate the Yukon government’s share of 50 percent of costs for implementation in 1994-95.

Mr. Penikett: I have one very general question, and I would appreciate the Minister getting back to me. I do not expect an answer this afternoon.

I originally had a chance to read the evaluation of the 1992 Alaska Highway Anniversary Commission. There were a number of issues discussed and it is a fairly thorough report.

One issue which ought to be of concern to the government, and certainly was a concern of the government of which I was part, is the question of accountability to the government for funds that are spent by the commission.

If I may express a personal view, I do not think that issue was dealt with adequately in this report.

As Minister of Tourism, I believe the Member opposite will have reason to be concerned on that score, and I would ask him to respond in a legislative return sometime in the future.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I thank the Member for that suggestion and I will do that.

Mr. McDonald: I would like to thank the Minister for his explanation on Museums Assistance; unfortunately, I did not understand what he was talking about.

Could the Minister please provide me with a list of items that added up to $130,000, at some point?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: As in other years, there are applications that come in throughout the year from the museums. At this time, we would not have a full list of projects, but as the applications come in and as they are approved, I will send the Member a list. When everything is complete, I can send him a list of the completed projects.

Mr. McDonald: I would like that. I do know much about this line, because I have had some experience in helping the Keno City Museum seek funding from time to time, so I do have an interest in this.

I would suspect that the projects would be getting close to getting firmed up at this late date, so I am sure that we will not be waiting too long for the list of items from the Minister.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I can get back to the Member on that. I want to also remind the Member that the passport program is continuing again this year and it was an extremely great benefit to Keno City.

I believe that Keno City is again one of the locales for the passport, so I hope that it will draw a lot more tourists to that area.

Museums Assistance in the amount of $130,000 agreed to

On Exhibits Assistance

Exhibits Assistance in the amount of $215,000 agreed to

On Artifact Inventory and Cataloguing

Ms. Moorcroft: I would like to ask the Minister to give the reasons for the reduction in artifact inventory and cataloguing.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Last year we received $50,000 from the federal government for this particular line item. This year we are expecting to receive somewhere in the neighbourhood of $40,000, but it is not reflected in the budget as yet because we do not know how much we will be receiving.

Ms. Moorcroft: So, the Minister is reducing the Yukon government contribution as well as getting a lower federal government contribution, or does the dollar amount contributed by the Yukon government remain the same?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: We contributed $60,000 last year and $60,000 this year.

Artifact Inventory and Cataloguing in the amount of $60,000 agreed to

On Conservation and Security

Conservation and Security in the amount of $36,000 agreed to

On Historic Sites

On Historic Sites Maintenance

Historic Sites Maintenance in the amount of $118,000 agreed to

On Historic Sites Inventory

Historic Sites Inventory in the amount of $30,000 agreed to

On Ft. Selkirk

Ft. Selkirk in the amount of $151,000 agreed to

On Herschel Island - IFA

Ms. Moorcroft: Will there be any money spent at Herschel Island this year?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Yes, there will be about $46,000 spent there this year and it is fully recoverable from the federal government.

Herschel Island - IFA in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

On Historic Sites Planning

Mr. McDonald: I wonder if the Minister could give us, either now or at some future point, some sense of the plan the department has in developing historic sites in the territory. I am particularly interested in the Montague House but I would be equally interested in any sense of the department’s priority projects.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Yes, I can get back to the Member on plans for Montague House and some of those other areas he talked about. This particular year there is going to be some preliminary work done on the development of the Canyon City project and we are looking at projects, in the near future, that tie in with the gold rush for the 1996 and 1998 celebrations. So if we start them now, they will tie in with the gold rush anniversaries.

Historic Sites Planning in the amount of $105,000 agreed to

On Archaeology

On Yukon Archaeology

Yukon Archaeology in the amount of $100,000 agreed to

On NOGAP

NOGAP in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

On Research

On Heritage Studies

Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister indicate what studies they are planning on funding under Heritage Studies?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: There are no specific studies identified yet, but I can get a list back to the Member of areas that they are looking at.

Heritage Studies in the amount of $40,000 agreed to

Heritage in the amount of $1,060,000 agreed to

On Development

On Designation, Regional and Community Planning

On Strategic Planning

Strategic Planning in the amount of $120,000 agreed to

On Wilderness Resource Assessment

Wilderness Resource Assessment in the amount of $50,000 agreed to

On Regional Tourism Plans

Regional Tourism Plans in the amount of $50,000 agreed to

On Destination, Site or Product Assessment

Destination, Site or Product Assessment in the amount of $30,000 agreed to

On Product Development

On Signs and Interpretation

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 13, Tourism, by reducing the line item Signs and Interpretation on page 96 by $5,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be changed accordingly.

Chair: Is there any debate on the amendment?

Amendment agreed to

Signs and Interpretation in the amount of $95,000 agreed to as amended

On Regional Planning Implementation

Regional Planning Implementation in the amount of $50,000 agreed to

On Fed./Terr. Contribution Agreement

Fed./Terr. Contribution Agreement in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

Development in the amount of $395,000 agreed to as amended

On Marketing

Ms. Moorcroft: I have a question for the Minister on this. I suppose it could be either applied to the Women’s Directorate or Tourism. It involves the images of women in government publications. Some of the representations of women in the past have not necessarily been particularly historically accurate. I want to know if this Minister would not support having images of women in seductive garb in Tourism brochures in the future?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I guess what the Member is talking about is the literature that we are producing now. All that literature was approved by the previous NDP government. I do not think we have approved anything new since then. All the photo shoots and photos we have are from then.

If the Member is talking about can-can girls, and those kinds of things, in the brochures, I have no problem with them. It is very much a part of Yukon history. I will take that under advisement. The intention is not to produce a magazine that creates that kind of a look. The intent is to provide a magazine to attract tourists to the Yukon. I will take that under advisement.

Ms. Moorcroft: Dancers are usually women, not girls. What I am referring to is the fact that many of the images of women are not representational of the way that women dress in the Yukon. There are often far more pictures of men than women. Women go fishing, too. Women go hiking. I think there should be a fair balance of pictures in the government booklets, particularly tourism booklets.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I will take that representation. It is the very first time that I have heard from anyone that brochures are a problem, but I will have a look at it.

On Visitor Reception Centres

On Low Frequency Radio Transmitters

Low Frequency Radio Transmitters in the amount of $25,000 agreed to

On Television, Audio-Visual and Other Equipment

Television, Audio-Visual and Other Equipment in the amount of $10,000 agreed to

On Yukon VRC Development

Amendment proposed

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 13, Tourism, by reducing the line item Yukon VRC Development on page 97 by $21,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules in the bill be changed accordingly

Mr. McDonald: Can the Minister indicate what the reduction is for?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The original budget included landscaping and canopy replacement - which was a poor design and tore all to pieces in the wind - flags, banners, exterior lighting, access redesign to the building and parking lot, hot water upgrades and map lighting. With this budget reduction, miscellaneous finished items such as exterior lighting may be deferred, since the facility is only open most of the time when there is all kinds of light. The original plan of minimal landscaping may be further reduced, and the scope reduced for the access redesign and the parking lot, which includes handicapped access, from tender-ready documents to preliminary design only.

Mr. McDonald: Is the Minister intending to have the VRC landscaped, meaning grass and that sort of thing, outside the Whitehorse location?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Yes, I would like to change the whole look of the VRC if I could, but that would be very expensive. We are looking for a new access to the VRC. Right now, you come in from behind and you cannot see it, and it is a long walk up to it. We are looking at the possibility of having the parking lot right in front of the building. I do not want to spend an awful lot of money on landscaping now and then have it all ripped up next year, if we go ahead with changing the access to the building.

This year we are going to do some minimal landscaping to spruce the building up a bit. I believe that they are going to do something in around behind where you look out over the grassy hillside toward the mountains. As far as the part in the front, we are not going to do a lot there. There are going to be some new flags and banners going up there to make it a little bit more colourful. That is about it.

Amendment agreed to

Yukon VRC Development in the amount of $149,000 agreed to as amended

On Travel Marketing Equipment, Displays and Productions

On Purchase and Maintenance of Displays

Purchase and Maintenance of Displays in the amount of $15,000 agreed to

On Production of Audio Visual Shows

Production of Audio Visual Shows in the amount of $65,000 agreed to

Marketing in the amount of $264,000 agreed to as amended

On Arts

On Visual Arts

On Visual Arts Acquisition

Visual Arts Acquisition in the amount of $5,000 agreed to

On Arts Acquisition Endowment Fund

Arts Acquisition Endowment Fund in the amount of $1.00 agreed to

Arts in the amount of $5,000 agreed to

Capital Expenditures agreed to as amended

Department of Tourism agreed to as amended

Motion to extend sitting hours

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I would like to move that the Committee of the Whole and the Assembly be empowered to continue sitting beyond 5:30 p.m., if necessary, for the purpose of completing consideration of Bill No. 6 in Committee of the Whole, permitting the House to consider motions for third reading of all the government bills on the Order Paper and, if unanimous consent is granted, dealing with Motion No. 47, which the Government Leader gave notice of earlier today.

Mr. McDonald: On behalf of the caucus, I do not think I have any objection to this motion, although I think it is a breach of protocol for him not informing the Opposition House Leader that there would be this attempt. Under normal circumstances, and given that there is the expectation that Members on this side will show the good will to move things along quickly, there should be the courtesy, normally, to inform and at least to discuss and get agreement on this question. I am sad to see the Member did not do that, but we will agree with the motion.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: In the House Leaders’ meeting this morning, we did talk about this possible option. I am in the middle of my budget. If I had the opportunity to do it, I could have slipped a note over to the Member. I apologize for that. In this particular case, we have about 10 minutes to get the motion on the Order Paper and I have to start another budget, which I did not want to interrupt when I get into it. That was the reason for doing it now. I apologize; I thought we had a bit of an understanding this morning that if we thought we were going to go over at all, we would, for a short period of time until six or six-thirty extend the hours, but if the Minister does not want to support the motion because I did not give him enough notice, then that is fine.

Mr. McDonald: I did not say anything of the sort. I did indicate to the Minister and the House Leader that we would not need to move that sort of motion, that we could do anything we wanted by unanimous consent, that we would have unanimous consent and it would not be necessary to do this. I did indicate that, if at all possible, we would try to finish by the end of the day and I am sorry that the Member has perhaps forgotten the agreement. Nevertheless, we still intend to show good will and to continue on with the discussion.

Mrs. Firth: On the same motion, I would just like to remind the government - I know we are all in a hurry to get out of here, and it has been a long session - that unanimous consent means consulting with all Members. I was not consulted either. Is it not required that we have unanimous consent to do this? Is that what the table is advising the Chair? Nevertheless, I would have appreciated being advised of it also.

Chair: There must be a majority vote in order for the motion to carry. Does the motion carry?

Motion agreed to

Women’s Directorate

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

Chair: We are on Vote 11, Women’s Directorate; is there any general debate?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The 1993-94 operation and maintenance budget represents a total of $415,000 to carry out its mandate of advancing the status of Yukon women in the social, economic, cultural, political and legal arenas.

The personnel allotment is $224,000, reflecting the three positions within the directorate, the increase in acting pay, Yukon bonus and casuals.

The next allotment of $162,000, the operation and maintenance expenditures, is in the areas of policy program development and public information.

Family violence continues to be a number one initiative for the Women’s Directorate in the area of prevention and in providing public awareness. The total for this is $47,000, of which $20,000 goes toward advertising through radio spots and newspaper ads.

Contracting services and program materials take up another $20,000 for such things as conferences, workshops and development of public awareness campaigns.

There is also $6,000 for community grants to provide public awareness workshops on family violence.

On other areas of public information, $42,000 is allotted for contract services to initiate projects in the areas of education equity, home-based businesses, women on social assistance and other recommendations that follow under a territorial-wide survey.

Public recognition of Yukon women achievements through a banquet and awards night will receive $5,000 and will be held on Persons’ Day in October, while $17,000 goes toward research initiated by the Yukon Advisory Council.

An additional $39,000 is used in purchasing program materials for the different initiatives and in advertising the various activities in the Women’s Directorate.

There are transfer payments of $23,000, of which $18,000 are grants to the different women’s groups for their activities, with an additional $5,000 for contribution agreements.

The remainder is allocated to policy and programming development, for a total of $43,000, with the Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues receiving $19,000 for travel and honoraria.

The Women’s Directorate continues its work with the FPT jurisdictions and travel to meetings, for a total of $10,500.

This concludes the breakdown of the Women’s Directorate budget and I would be pleased to answer any questions that the Members have.

Ms. Moorcroft: I noticed from some of the Minister’s correspondence that he refers to himself as the Minister responsible for the status of women. Has the Minister changed the name of the department or does he have any plans to change its name?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: No, there is no change. The previous Minister used to reply to correspondence with the same title, I believe.

Ms. Moorcroft: The mandate of the department is to support measures that promote the equal participation of women in the government. Also, they promote women on non-government decision-making bodies. I would like to ask if the Minister considers himself to be a feminist.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I do not know if I would describe myself as a feminist. I certainly believe in women’s rights. I have stood up for them and my record shows that, for the past seven years in this House, and in my public life. I would suspect that, if that is the definition of a feminist, then I am one.

Ms. Moorcroft: Could he define his interest in the issue of women’s equality and how he is generally committed to that end?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I think I demonstrated that this afternoon in the House, when I tabled the gender equality in the schools. We are looking at programs in the schools and other programs in government. I am encouraging my colleagues to think in that direction, as well. Other than that, I suppose my actions speak louder than my words. I think that I have demonstrated, in the last seven months that we have been in government, that I am concerned. I have been to many meetings with various women’s organizations and had very interesting discussions with them.

We are examining the areas of violence against women, workplace safety and security. One of the things I am initially doing is asking the group that is going to go to the various visitor reception centres to check the workplace security and put a plan together for them. I am starting with my own department in that effort, and I am encouraging the other departments to do the same. I have met with the Women in Government committee. They are a very aggressive group, and I am very interested in what they are doing. They want to make some strong moves in this area. I am working toward that, as well.

Ms. Moorcroft: What are some of the initiatives that the Women in Government group has recommended to him, and which of them will be implemented?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The major one is safety in the workplace, but I can provide the Member with the latest list of concerns that they have, and possibly give the Member an idea of the action that we are taking in some of those areas.

Ms. Moorcroft: One of the concerns that I raised in the debate in the Department of Justice was the maintenance enforcement program and the fairness to the many women who do not receive their maintenance enforcement payments from non-custodial parents.

Could the Minister tell us how he is going to work with his colleagues on improving that?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: We have a new casual who has just started with the Women’s Directorate and who is working in that area specifically. I am one who really believes that is something that we should follow up on, because it causes real undue hardships to single mothers, when people do not bother to make their regular maintenance payments.

I support any initiatives in that area to recover those payments for those individuals.

I understand that we are one of the more successful jurisdictions in recovering money in that manner, but you can always do better, and that is the reason that we have a casual working in the Women’s Directorate specifically on that project at this time.

Mr. Penikett: I am glad to hear that. I have a number of constituents who might be more impressed with the statistics if they were collecting the money that was owed to them. Obviously, if you are an individual who is not, the statistics do not impress you very much. I would like to make a comment and ask a quick question.

I would like to congratulate Dave Robertson and the Hansard office for establishing the first child care centre in the territorial government building, and ask the Minister if he, in his capacity as Minister responsible for the Women’s Directorate, is contemplating taking a leadership role in this respect for the parents who work in this building and other government properties.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: That was a concern raised by the Women in Government committee. At present, we are looking at that. Initially, they did some preliminary work and my understanding is that they did not have a lot of the response that they thought they would have. It is something that we would still investigate. It is really quite preliminary at this time.

Ms. Moorcroft: I have a related question on the issue of child care. Does the Minister support educational standards for child care workers, standards and evaluation techniques for child care facilities and the availability and accessibility of alternative child care choices?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Our party on this side has always supported choices for child care and has always supported child care. I think that if quality child care involves standards, that is fine. If the Member is telling me that we have some severe problems out there right now with standards, I am sure the Minister of Health and Social Services, who is responsible for child care, would want to know. I am not aware of major problems with standards out there that are creating unhealthy child care situations for our children.

Ms. Moorcroft: What I am looking for is the Minister’s position on the issue of improving regulations. As he just said himself, there is always room for improvement. I would like to know if the Minister would support establishing, in regulations, educational standards for child care workers?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I would like to have a look at what the Member is proposing before I commit myself to those standards. I do not hear a cry about a real problem out there. It is not something in my seven months in office as a Minister that has come to me as a strong concern. If the Member has some concerns in that area, I would be pleased to sit down with her and discuss them.

Ms. Moorcroft: I realize that child care comes under the Health and Social Services budget, however, as the Minister responsible for the Women’s Directorate, I think that the Minister should review recommendations from the child care community and the child care board, who have supported and made recommendations to improve regulations by adding educational standards for child care workers.

In Question Period today, I was asking about the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre. Their funding was cut in this budget and, as I outlined in Question Period, they do provide a number of quite valuable community services. I would like to know why the Minister has not done any follow-up work yet on the statements he made both to the media and, as well, in a letter to me in April about the important service they provide and how it might be advisable to look at helping them find a space they could lease for a dollar a year.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I will have my officials look into that and see if we can get something moving on it. I can ask them to do that very shortly and see what comes out of it.

Ms. Moorcroft: Does the Minister consider it valuable to have an arm’s-length advisory group to the Minister, such as an advisory council for women’s issues?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The Advisory Council on Women’s Issues right now is virtually dead. Everyone from the council has pretty well resigned. I do not know if there is one member left on the council. The chair has resigned and everyone else has resigned. None of the resignations were a result of actions of this government; they were internal problems within the council and some individuals resigned, not just because of the internal problems of the council, but because of the mandate of the council and what they felt the role of the council should be.

My feeling is that I should have an advisory council on women’s issues, as the Minister, and it is my intention to look at the current description of that advisory council and, very soon, in the next couple of months, appoint such an advisory council from all spectrums of women’s groups out there and receive advice as the Minister on issues that affect women.

Ms. Moorcroft: Did all of the women who left the advisory council resign or were some of them asked to resign or informed that they had resigned?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: They all resigned. I did not ask any of them to go. Some of them submitted letters of resignation and others phoned. In fact, one that submitted a letter was initially asked to reconsider. I think she is the only one who is left on the board. I believe that the chair was also asked to reconsider, but they all decided that they would rather not sit on that council.

Ms. Moorcroft: When the Minister goes about appointing a new advisory council, will he ask for representation from equality-seeking women’s groups on what they think the criteria should be for membership on the advisory council, and will he also ask the women’s groups in the community that support equality for women if they have recommendations to make?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: The current mandate of the Advisory Council on Women’s issues is pretty thorough right now. What I would do is seek nominations from all women’s groups - municipalities as well as the various organizations - such as the Yukon Status of Women Council, the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre, the Women’s Business Network and the First Nations. I would seek nominations from a cross-section of Yukon women. Many First Nations felt left out of the last advisory group, because of the way it operated. I would hope that we can do something to solve that problem and bring more First Nations into that type of an advisory group.

Ms. Moorcroft: What does the Minister see as the way to resolve what he has defined as problems? Would he see this group being a body that would take direction from the Women’s Directorate or would it be an independent, arm’s-length advisory group?

Hon. Mr. Phillips:   I see it as being an independent advisory group to the Minister, not taking direction from the Women’s Directorate, but a group that I can meet with from time to time that would advise me on issues affecting women and the direction that they feel we should move in. I would hope that they would be reporting to me as the Minister.

Ms. Moorcroft: I know that the Minister received recommendations from the advisory council before many of them resigned making recommendations for legislative change. I am wondering if the Minister responded in any way to those recommendations and if he did not, can he tell me whether he will consider those recommendations?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: We received the recommendations, and upon receiving them we asked for clarification in several areas and never received a response. In fact we never received a response at all to our enquiry for clarification.

Ms. Moorcroft: Perhaps there is a misunderstanding that the Minister could look at addressing because my understanding was that the members of the advisory council felt that they had never received any response from the Minister. I would like to ask the Minister, then, whether this group would continue to publish the newsletter and, if so, would the Minister have the ability to edit that newsletter?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: If there was a misunderstanding - relating to the Member’s previous question - then we will check into it and try to find out if they did receive our letter asking them for more information.

As far as the newsletter goes, if the new advisory group wants to produce a newsletter, that is fine. I did not edit any yet and I will not edit the next one. It is not my intention to edit their newsletters or have any control over the newsletter or the department.

I see this council more as an advisory council to the Minister and a council of women representing various sectors of rural and urban Yukon who can advise me on issues that affect women and directions that we should take to provide better services for women or to bring better equality in the Yukon. That is the area I want this advisory body to work in. I do not see a problem with that. I see it as being a pretty independent body.

Ms. Moorcroft: The issue of the needs of rural pregnant women who have to come to Whitehorse to bear children has been raised in this House a few times in the past. I would like to ask the Minister what his position is on addressing those needs. I believe he had some representation from the advisory council recently about that.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Could the Member repeat the last part of her question. I am sorry.

Ms. Moorcroft: I believe that the Minister received representation from the advisory council recently about rural pregnant women and their needs. I would like to know how he is going to address that.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I understand that the Women’s Directorate and the Department of Health and Social Services are looking at the recommendations in that report and have not come up with the final report on the direction in which to go.

Mrs. Firth: I want to just go back to the Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues. I had what was left of the advisory council approach me about the proposed amendments to the act. I reviewed them and was prepared to come forward with amendments on their behalf, because I did not see their requests as being at all onerous or unreasonable.

The problem that we have with the act is that it is still one of those acts that has not been proclaimed by the Commissioner. I would like to find out from the Minister whether that act is going to be proclaimed and, if it is, when?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: That was one of the acts that I thought, when we came into office, could quickly come back and be proclaimed. Within days of arriving in my office, the Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues knocked on my door and said that they had some problems with it. They felt that they had not been consulted, and they wanted to make some more representations. I asked them to make those representations. They have made them. As I said earlier today, we responded to their wanting more clarification on them. I understand that they may not have received that correspondence, or somehow there is a problem in communication here that we have to get sorted out.

I was concerned about their saying that they were not consulted, so I wanted to see what changes they wanted to make. When I get the report, and when we finally get together and find out exactly what changes they want to make, then we will have a look at it. Like all the other acts, it is sitting there under review until I get more clarification from that particular group. I also have some concerns over some of their recommended changes, and that is why I asked for clarification.

Mrs. Firth: I guess it is a bit too late to sort it out, because there is nothing left of the council. They have all resigned, except for one member.

The Minister will never know what the concerns of the council really were, because there is no one left to discuss it with.

I discussed the council’s concerns, and I also reviewed their proposed amendments. I did not have any problems with those amendments, so I do not know what the Minister’s concerns were with respect to the specific amendments.

I did go to the effort of having some amendments drafted that were consistent with the council’s recommendations.

I do not think it was that much of a communication problem. The council indicated to me that they did not feel they had a lot of input into the drafting of the legislation and so they wanted to propose some amendments, and that was all that they were looking for.

Since the act was sitting in the Commissioner’s office unproclaimed, the whole thing was kind of up in the air.

I would like to know if the Minister is going to bring the act forward as it is and request that the Commissioner proclaim it, so at least we have something to work from, and when a new council is appointed, they may agree with the act, or they may want to agree with the changes that the previous council had proposed.

I want to know where we go from here or do we just sit here?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Currently, that act sits with all of the other acts in that same state in the Commissioner’s office.

I suspect they will be brought back to Cabinet for some direction in the near future. I would hope that once I put together my advisory council on women’s issues that they may want to have a look at the act and make recommendations to me.

If we can get a response from the one individual who is left on the existing advisory board, we will try to clarify the communication problem. If we can get a response, we will have a look at that as well.

Right now, I am not prepared to move on the act. I would like to possibly bring this back in the fall or spring session, depending upon when we can get this all sorted out.

Mrs. Firth: The new council will have nothing to look at except an act that is sitting there unproclaimed. All the Minister has to do is get the Commissioner to proclaim the act; it was passed in this House by all Members. I do not recall the act being controversial or causing any controversial debate.

All the Minister has to do is get the Commissioner to proclaim the act and then give the act to the new council and let them deal with it.

I do not think that is an unreasonable recommendation. We can at least then proceed with the amendments that were proposed by the council, give them to the new council and see if they want to propose those amendments - otherwise they have no act at all.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I thank the Member for that representation. I can tell the Member, though, that I will not be bringing the act back in this particular sitting, but I will look at the advice the Member has given us, and we will see what we can do with it.

Mrs. Firth: I will follow up with the Minister in communication, as I have been already. He is obviously going to have a new council and has to give the new council something to work with, and it was an act that was passed by the House, so we may as well use that as a basis to work from.

Yes, Mr. Chair, it was passed by the House; it just has to be proclaimed.

As an objective observer, regarding what has happened with the advisory council, the Women’s Directorate and the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre, I detected some kind of division between the Women’s Directorate and the advisory council. I am not sure what the cause of it was; I can only make and draw my own conclusions.

These conclusions are just my personal feelings and observations, and it is simply advice to the Minister. My concern is that the Women’s Directorate has become more focused in a bureaucratic sense. I am not criticizing the individuals in the Women’s Directorate, I am not criticizing their performance, and I am not criticizing their objectives. I am simply talking about what can happen after time with a government department. I think the Women’s Directorate has become fairly bureaucratic in the sense that they have become a government department that has to abide by government rules, and so on.

Therefore, it became a competition as to who had the Minister’s ear - the Women’s Directorate or the advisory council. Maybe some of the reasons for all the council members resigning was because they felt they did not have the Minister’s ear, and that the Minister was listening to the directorate instead of the advisory council. That is my personal observation, based simply on people I have talked to and how I have watched this develop over the last few years, and so on.

My advice to the Minister would be that he has to make a decision himself as to who is going to be his advisor and where he is going to get his advice from regarding women’s issues. I see the advisory council providing that kind of advice, as other advisory bodies provide advice to Ministers, and I see them giving the Minister his political advice. So, I am recommending to him that he very strongly consider that, when he appoints his new council, whatever legislation is placed and whatever amendments are made, they be made in the context that the Minister has to listen to the advice of the council.

I can see the Women’s Directorate doing educational things and providing him with advice in a government sense, but politically I would have some concerns about the Minister taking too much advice from the directorate itself, which is a government agency.

I have also observed that the women I talk to feel somewhat alienated from the Women’s Directorate, that this has become a government agency and does not necessarily represent their views, that it is like all the other government departments. That is not necessarily because the people in the Women’s Directorate have been bad and have not been doing their jobs well, it is just a symptom of the public’s relationship with government.

I would like to ask the Minister how he anticipates dealing with this. Is he even aware of it? If he was not, he is now. What direction is he going to be giving to the Women’s Directorate - his government agency - and how is he going to rebuild the relationship between the new advisory council and the Women’s Directorate? Who is he going to seek advice and counsel from regarding women’s issues?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I probably could not disagree more with the analysis given by the Member for Riverdale South. She is way off base. My reading of the situation is that the Women’s Directorate was performing a function where it was trying to deal with the concerns and issues of all women in the Yukon - First Nations women, businesswomen and other women. The Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues had become a very focused group. They were not addressing the issues that a lot of the First Nations women and others felt were concerns.

That will possibly be borne true when we release our survey, which is just completed. When it is finalized, I would be happy to share it with the Member opposite. The Member will see that some of the issues that the advisory council was working on were not the main issues that Yukon women are concerned about. I think the group became very focused. If the Women’s Directorate did not agree with them, they were criticized as becoming too much government and too much bureaucracy.

There are a lot of groups out there right now that are finding the Women’s Directorate very easy to work with. The First Nations groups are finding them much easier to work with, and we are trying to work some things out with the Women’s Business Network and other groups out there, and expand the circle of women’s interests.

I know there was a concern, but I do not share the analysis of the Member for Riverdale South.

As far as receiving advice from groups is concerned, I would hope that, as the Member said, the Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues would be my political advisor on issues out there respecting women. Then, the government would give direction to the Women’s Directorate to carry out these various programs. It would not be the Women’s Directorate telling the government what we had to do. I would hope that the advisory council, the Women in Government group, the Yukon Status of Women Council, the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre and all these various groups would provide some advice for the direction that we would go on women’s issues in the Yukon.

Mrs. Firth: I am concerned when I hear the Minister become so defensive about the government department. It leads me to believe that some of the conclusions that I have drawn may have some substance.

I appreciate the point that he makes about the advisory council, and that perhaps it did not represent all women, and that the advisory council should have representation on it, which is mandated, in order to represent all women, and it did not. That does not mean that it did not represent women’s interests. I was talking to women who were involved in delivering counselling services in the community and looking at changes to support payments. They are constituents of mine. I was hearing this at the door.

Their interpretation of the Women’s Directorate was that it was another government agency. That is the point that I am trying to make. Because it was interpreted that way, there became a competitive aspect as to who had the Minister’s ear. From the Minister’s comments this afternoon, it sounds to me like the directorate very strongly had his ear, but the advisory council did not because the Minister did not feel that they represented all women’s issues - those are the conclusions that he has drawn.

I am just indicating to the Minister that he has got to keep an open mind about this because the Women’s Directorate does not necessarily represent all women’s points of view. It is staffed by government employees who have been government employees for a long time, who are making wages that are well beyond some of the total budgets that some of the women’s groups in the community are working with.

Those factors are taken into account. The whole budget for the Women’s Directorate is a considerable amount of money. The $150,000 in the budget for public education in the Women’s Directorate - the advisory council was not receiving anywhere near that amount of money to assist them in their endeavours.

I am simply asking the Minister to try to keep an open mind about it and not to be too government-agency oriented with this, and be cognizant of the fact that there are some fences to mend. I will be very interested in seeing what the survey says. I have seen a copy of the questions that were asked on the survey. I had a lot of women call me about it when they received the call regarding the survey. A lot of them expressed a lot of concerns about it. They did not like it; they did not think that some of the questions were appropriate.

We cannot put all of our faith in surveys. I prefer to put more faith in my political judgment and into talking to my constituents and women who are working on the front lines with women who are in trouble and need help.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I do not have the mistrust for the bureaucracy that the Member for Riverdale South has. I have a great deal of faith in the people we hire in the Government of Yukon.

I can tell the Member that, in the past few weeks, with some of the programs that we have been running, for instance violence against women, a great many women throughout the territory and the government have been calling the Women’s Directorate for advice and help, and reporting specific cases. They have also been talking to them about specific cases. I think that the branch is performing a very useful function.

It might also interest the Member to know that one of the major roles for the Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues in the past was to give advice to the Minister. In the previous administration and in our administration, that never happened.

There was never a time when they gave advice to the Minister. The advice was, “We need more money for our budget”. They carried out programs and these programs were useful, but one of their major functions was to be an advisory committee to the Minister, and there was very little advice given to the Minister.

II take the Member’s representations very seriously, that one side may not be all right or all wrong, and I will look into that situation.

I would be more than happy to sit down, on a private basis, with the Member to discuss some of her concerns in that area.

Mrs. Firth: I just wish the Member opposite would listen to himself sometimes. I am not standing up here explaining or saying that I distrust the government.

The Member sounds just like the previous government did - every time you raise a question about government, they stand up and accuse you of having a distrust of government. That is not my concern.

The general public’s attitude toward government is what I am talking about. I am reflecting what my constituents tell me. Surely, the Minister is still politically in touch enough to recognize that the general attitude out there among the Yukon population and the Canadian public is that they generally question government. Those are the concerns that I am bringing forward to the Minister.

Maybe the Minister should get this new council appointed right away, because I think he needs their advice.

Ms. Joe: I am not the critic, but I felt that I had to clear up some information that has been bandied around here in regard to the Minister and the statements he has made. I know that he does seek this information from the people who work in the directorate, and that the information he gets is what he tells us in the House.

I am very pleased to see that the Member for Riverdale South finally has a great interest in what is happening in the Women’s Directorate, because that was not the case before.

The legislation that was passed in this House, in the last session, was a result of much lobbying from the Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues - that is a fact. The legislation that was introduced in this House was a result of many years of lobbying by me and my Cabinet Ministers to introduce legislation that would give legal status to the advisory council, and that is exactly what it did.

The Minister said that they did not have any input in it and that they had not seen the legislation. The fact is that the legislation was introduced. It was developed and put together as a result of what the advisory committee had been lobbying me on for years.

They had seen a copy of the legislation, prior to it being introduced in the House. I want to make that very clear, because I have been sitting here listening to all sorts of allegations going back and forth from all sides of the House.

I am only here to set the record straight, to say exactly what took place. All that has to happen to the legislation is that it has to be proclaimed. Once it is proclaimed, it will give legal status to that council. That is all we were asking for. All the Minister has to do is go to the Commissioner and say that we would like to have it proclaimed; then, the advisory council would be legal.

There has been much criticism in regard to what has happened in the Women’s Directorate in the past. Not to defend the government, but they are a government agency. That is exactly what they are, and they have a mandate.

For the record, other jurisdictions in Canada have spoken very strongly about the progress of the Women’s Directorate in the Yukon and the many things that they have become involved in - that is a fact.

There are many things that they have done, and I would like to, just for this short period of time, defend what is happening in the Women’s Directorate, because I was responsible for it myself for a number of years.

There is some dissension among women’s groups, and there are some women’s groups that oppose what is happening in the Women’s Directorate. There are other women, who are not part of organizations, who depend on what is happening and depend on the support that they get from that agency. That has been good.

I have made those statements, and I will not say any more. I would like to ask the Minister if he will seriously consider asking that the act be proclaimed to give legal status to the advisory council, because that is exactly what it did.

There is nothing that would stop that from happening, if there are further amendments to be made to it. I am not sure who came to them. They were satisfied with the act as it was, before it was introduced in the House, and I wonder whether he would give serious consideration to asking that the act be proclaimed.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I can tell the Member that I will give serious consideration to getting that act in place. I would, though, like to have the new Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues look at it, at least. The Member was right - evidently, the first Yukon Advisory Council on Women’s Issues had looked at it, and the second one is the one that complained they had not seen it at all. I strongly support that, and thank the Member for Whitehorse South Centre for her comments on the Women’s Directorate and the many positive things the Women’s Directorate has done for women in the territory, and how well they are respected throughout this country at the various meetings they attend where they show people what we actually do. I thank the Member for her comments.

Ms. Moorcroft: During the debate on the supplementaries, we were discussing the survey the Minister referred to just a few moments ago, and I would like to ask him if he has any idea when he expects those results might be available.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I understand that, in about three to four weeks, we should be able to release the results of the focus testing.

On Policy and Program Development

Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister explain why, in his mind, the amount spent on salaries is significantly more than the amount spent on programming?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: We have three employees and casuals in that area, and the amount spent on those two areas is no different from the previous government, other than the bonuses, salary increases and so on that are included in that area.

Ms. Moorcroft: The Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre has certainly made representation to me, and it appears to other Members of this House, that they do provide a very valuable service to the community, yet they only receive $5,000, which is a significant decrease from the previous year. I wonder if the Minister would entertain representation from the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre to look at increasing this allocation, at the very least providing funds to help bring the salaries of the people who work on the front line at the centre more in line with some of those in the directorate.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: What I have suggested to the centre is that, if they have other specific projects they want to deliver or provide, if they put an administration charge in along with their submission for that project, we would consider that. That way, they could augment the salaries for the people working on these projects and working full-time at the centre.

Ms. Moorcroft: I understand the Minister also suggested that he would endeavour to find them some space that they could lease for one dollar a year. I hope that will be successful, as we have not seen any action on that yet.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I mentioned earlier to the Member that I would have the department look into that. As I mentioned earlier, the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre has already approached us. They have a small program on community family violence. There is a grant that is up for consideration. I believe they built some administration costs into that particular program.

Policy and Program Development in the amount of $268,000 agreed to

On Public Information

Ms. Moorcroft: The Minister has indicated, in the information on page 275, that the grants total $24,000 to various women’s groups. I note that the amount for the Advisory Council on Women’s issues has significantly decreased from $22,000 last year to $5,000 this year. I am not sure how much of a role they are going to play once the Minister re-establishes that council. Could the Minister explain what some of the other projects are that will be undertaken with this $100,000 for public information?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Just to answer the first question on why the difference in the allocated dollars - this year, $17,000 is going to be done through contract dollars, as opposed to an outright grant. Evidently, Finance told us that was not a legal way to do it, and we had to do it through a contract. They are getting the same amount of money, but $5,000 is a grant and $22,000 is a contract.

Public Information in the amount of $100,000 agreed to

On Family Violence

Family Violence in the amount of $47,000 agreed to

Public Information in the amount of $147,000 agreed to

Operation and Maintenance expenditures agreed to

On Capital Expenditures

On Policy and Program Development

On Computer Workstations

Ms. Moorcroft: Can the Minister tell me what these computer workstations are for? Are they replacements or additions?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: No, it is a computer work station and office equipment for the casual position.

Ms. Moorcroft: How many computer workstations will there be in the department when this one is purchased?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Four, three for the employees and one for the casual.

Computer Workstations in the amount of $9,000 agreed to

On Office Furniture and Equipment

Office Furniture and Equipment in the amount of $3,000 agreed to

Policy and Program Development in the amount of $12,000 agreed to

Capital Expenditures agreed to

Women’s Directorate agreed to

Yukon Development Corporation

Chair: We are on Vote 18, Yukon Development Corporation. Is there any general debate?

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

On Gross Advances

Gross Advances in the amount of one dollar agreed to

On Less Internal Recovery

Less Internal Recovery in the amount of one dollar agreed to

Yukon Development Corporation agreed to

Yukon Housing Corporation

Chair: Is there general debate on Yukon Housing Corporation, vote 18?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: You have before you the main estimates for the Yukon Housing Corporation. The O&M budget for the corporation is estimated at $13,034,000. This represents a 24-percent increase over last year’s forecast. The capital expenditures are estimated at $17,201,000, a reduction of eight percent over last year’s estimates.

The increase in the O&M budget is a direct result of having more housing units under subsidy. When the current estimates were prepared, the corporation anticipated that the budget allocation from the federal government was sufficient to construct 51 new units.

In addition, the extended care project will be coming under subsidy during the current fiscal year.

The reduction in the capital budget is due to the completion of the construction of the extended care facility. The construction of this project crossed over three fiscal years.

Last year’s capital expenditure for the corporation included $5,220,000 for this project.

With the exception of a slight decrease in the funding for the staff housing program, we are proposing to increase the activity for all other programs over last year’s level.

The federal Finance Minister recently announced the federal withdrawal from the funding of several housing programs.

Effective January 4, 1994, CMHC will continue to fund the housing programs directed to First Nations living on reserves or lands set aside. In addition, they will honour their financial commitment to the existing portfolios; however, funding for new commitments under other programs, including the non-profit housing program, the rent supplement program, the urban native housing program, the rural and native housing program and the residential rehabilitation assistance program will no longer be available.

For the Yukon, this means in 1994 there will be no new commitments for the social housing program. It also means that the federal cost-sharing of the home repair program will no longer be available.

The Yukon cannot afford to unilaterally finance the operating costs of new social housing units. Our government is prepared to maintain its level of funding to the home-repair program.

The withdrawal of the federal funding and the current economic situation dictates that innovative and appropriate new ways to respond to housing needs must be identified.

Our government is committed to meeting its responsibility to help Yukoners solve their housing problems. In this time of restraint, it is important to continue looking for effectiveness in the delivery of these programs.

We must forge new partnerships with the housing industry to find creative approaches to maintain a responsible level of housing assistance with diminishing resources.

We must find Yukon solutions to the Yukon’s housing problems. In this light, I will be inviting all key players in the housing field to a conference in the fall of 1993. The objective of this conference will be to strike a new direction for housing programs in the Yukon. The preparation for this conference is well underway, and I will be providing more information about this conference over the next few weeks.

I am now prepared to answer any questions from the Members on the 1993-94 estimates for the Yukon Housing Corporation.

Ms. Moorcroft: The Minister has just explained that because of the federal government removing funding for social housing, the government will not be able to provide funds for many of the programs that were previously available.

I would like to ask the Minister what he is applying that money to?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Actually, for 1993-94, there are still 15 units under the social housing program. We will get into it in line-by-line, but I believe it is approximately $1,670,000, which will be applied to social housing units.

Ms. Moorcroft: It was my understanding that part of the Yukon Party platform was that they were going to ensure there is an adequate supply of social housing to meet community needs. Can the Minister give us his definition of social housing and explain how he agrees with the need to provide it?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: The federal government has cut this program. In fact, I have to make a trip to Toronto with other housing Ministers from across Canada next Tuesday; I believe the meeting is on Thursday, and we will be discussing the whole concept of the cuts.

For my own opinion - I think the Member opposite was asking for my feelings on social housing - we do have, in our society, three groups of people who take advantage of social housing. There are the working poor - people generally in the service industry who just do not make enough money to carry a mortgage. There are the elderly, and there are the people with disabilities or who, for whatever reason, are on social assistance. I would like to see us get out of social housing as much as we can. However, there is going to be a continuing need for social housing, and we have to respond to that need, and we will continue to do so.

Ms. Moorcroft: Certainly, it is of great concern to hear the Minister say that he would like to see us get out of social housing if we could. Perhaps if there were a fundamental reorganization of our society, social housing might not be needed. I believe that there will continue to be both the working poor and the unemployed and people who cannot find or afford adequate housing for the foreseeable future. That is a great concern to me.

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

On Administration

Administration in the amount of $3,270,000 agreed to

On Program Costs

Amendment Proposed

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I move

THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No.6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 18, Yukon Housing Corporation, by reducing the line item Program Costs on page 280 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $100,000; and

THAT the clauses and schedules of this bill be amended accordingly.

Chair: Is there any debate on the amendment?

Amendment agreed to

Program costs in the amount of $9,664,000 agreed to as amended

Operations and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to

On Capital Expenditures

On Non-Profit Housing

On Construction/Acquisition

Construction/Acquisition in the amount of $1,677,000 agreed to

On Renovation and Rehabilitation Existing Stock

Mr. McDonald: In terms of non-profit housing generally, can the Minister indicate what the priorities are for the coming year. Where do they plan to make their expenditures, in what communities and what waiting lists are they responding to?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: The total waiting list for the Yukon territory - and this is of May 31 - is 175. The majority of those - 141 of them - are in the City of Whitehorse. Watson Lake has 11, Teslin has three, Haines Junction has one, Dawson City has 12, and Carmacks, seven.

In Whitehorse, a variety of clients make up that list of 141. There are about 30 senior citizens on the list. We hope that the Gateway housing project - and I do not want to be too optimistic here - will likely go ahead. That will provide 39 units, I believe. That should alleviate the situation of the seniors in Whitehorse.

Mr. McDonald: Can the Minister tell us how many units are being provided by CMHC? Could he also provide a legislative return that will give us an indication of what the waiting lists and the construction plans are for each community?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Yes, I think it would be better if we did provide all that information for the Member opposite in a legislative return. We could provide some fairly comprehensive information.

I have, for example, information on Watson Lake in front of me that states how much social housing there is, the staff housing, and so on. We would be quite happy to provide that for the Members.

Mr. McDonald: I thank the Minister for that. Can the Minister indicate to us what the situation is in Whitehorse with respect to available housing, such as one bedroom units for singles? Can he tell us what he knows about that?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I do not believe we have that kind of information with us. I would like a bit of clarification on that. Are we talking about social housing units or about general housing stock, including commercial and so on in Whitehorse? Can the Member clarify that?

Mr. McDonald: I am referring specifically to social housing, yes.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: The number of social housing units in Whitehorse is approximately 335; there are zero vacancies, and we have 141 on the waiting list, but that will be information that will be provided as part of the package.

Mr. Cable: I have just a brief follow up on the previous Member’s question on Gateway housing. Assuming the legal problems are resolved in the near future, when would the Minister expect the housing project to be completed?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: If, as the Member opposite has noted, the legalities are all resolved and it goes ahead, the Gateway housing project would likely be available for occupancy by probably late fall.

Renovation and Rehabilitation Existing Stock in the amount of $457,000 agreed to

On Proposal Development Funding

Ms. Moorcroft: I note that there is a cut to the proposal development by 62 percent in the funding, which I believe must be due to the cuts the Minister was referring to earlier in the federal programming. Is this going to affect the number of units built or acquired in the next season?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: The money that was in for 1992-93, the $145,000, is actually what will affect this year’s housing program. The $55,000 will actually affect next year’s housing program. The feds will be picking up that budget, and they have cut back on the number of units. The reason it was sort of reduced is because of the federal government cutting back.

Ms. Moorcroft: I know that people are feeling the crunch now. When will the public begin to notice the further reduction of non-profit housing units?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: That is hard to say because, after this year, there will be no new social housing units through the federal government, and that is why it is very important that we have a conference of all the stakeholders in housing, because we are going to have to come up with other methods of looking after the problem.

Ms. Moorcroft: Is the Minister saying that there will be no new social housing then, without the federal government contributing, or is the Minister willing to consider the option of using the money they currently spend on a reduced number of social housing units?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: When we do the 1994-95 budget, we will have to look at our current housing stock. We will have to look at the number of people on the waiting list, and I will have to discuss this seriously with my colleagues. It is a little bit early to determine what the actual situation will be like at this time. I expect that we will have a better idea in the fall, when we start talking capital budget.

Depending upon funding availability, yes, I would certainly be willing to take that forward to my Cabinet colleagues.

Proposal Development Funding in the amount of $55,000 agreed to

On Prior Years’ Projects (Extended Care Facility)

Prior Years’ Projects (Extended Care Facility) in the amount of nil agreed to

Non-Profit Housing in the amount of $2,189,000 agreed to

On Home Improvement

Mr. McDonald: Can the Minister indicate, given that this is a fairly significant increase - there must be some rationale for that - how much of this is recoverable funds and the rationale for the size of the expenditure?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: This is a relatively new program, and it has become extremely popular. In that respect, we are expecting approximately 200 loans this fiscal year.

There is a certain amount recovered from the federal government on the $5,015,000. There is approximately $1 million recoverable from the federal government and approximately $3,860,000 will be recovered from the recipients of the program. It is a loan program; however, there are some subsidies that apply to certain individuals.

Mr. McDonald: Could the Minister indicate where the $1 million recovery from the federal government is shown in the budget book?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: The recoveries are shown on page 115, and it would be under the home improvement, $3,860,000.

Mr. McDonald: I understand what the Minister is saying now.

Ms. Moorcroft: I would like to ask the Minister if he could prepare a legislative return for me with some detailed information about the home improvement program, the shared equity program, the home ownership program, the owner-build program, the self-help program, the extended mortgage guarantee home repair program and rental suite program.

I know that we are all endeavouring to conclude this debate expeditiously, so I will not ask the Minister to stand and run through all of those now, but to bring me back that information.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I will be quite happy to provide the Member with that information. I would like to point out to the Member opposite that it has taken me seven months to start to learn this information and she is going to get it all in one “swell foop”, which will give her a bit of an advantage over me; I received it in bits and pieces.

Yes, we will certainly provide that information for all of the Members opposite.

Mr. Harding: On the issue of home improvement, there were a number of requests made by me to the government about people on the rent-to-purchase option in Faro and their ability to be eligible for programs for home improvement.

I made representations to the government and I have not had a response on that. I was wondering what the Minister’s response was. There are a number of issues that I would like answered. I have talked to Faro Real Estate and I have talked to government officials, and I believe there is a way through this so that people could be eligible for home improvement.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: We will give the Member a written response. I did not realize that he had written a letter.

Essentially, the situation in Faro is that the title to the property remains with Faro Real Estate, even though these people are paying for the property. I do not quite understand the deal. We can approve home improvement loans only to the registered property owner. We will be giving a more detailed explanation, but that is it in a nutshell.

Mr. Harding: I know the reason for no, and I hope that the legislative return does not give me a reason, no. What I want to know is how we can find a way to do it, whether it is through the sponsorship of Faro Real Estate to the rent-to-purchase person, or through a change in the regulations outling the programs. Maybe that it what is needed. I will just make the representation to the Minister to look at ways to find a possible solution. I know the reason why they cannot do it now.

Home Improvement in the amount of $5,015,000 agreed to

On Home Ownership

Mr. Harding: On that issue of rent to purchase, I had a conversation with the Minister by phone regarding rent-to-purchase units in Faro and home ownership opportunities. He said that he was going to take it to Cabinet but there are a lot of people worried in Faro that if Faro Real Estate for some reason did not survive, they would lose all the equity they put into the home thus far. The Minister said that it would not be much of a problem for the government, if they took over, to try to offer the same kind of deal to Faroites who want to continue to buy their own homes. Could he tell us what was decided in Cabinet?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: It has not gone to Cabinet, mainly because Faro Real Estate still has control over the housing stock in Faro. There have been discussions between the Yukon Housing Corporation and me about it. If worse comes to worse in Faro, it will certainly be one of the things that will be looked at very carefully.

Mr. Harding: I would like the Minister to consider that a formal representation then that that was taken care of on that basis for those people on that rent-to-purchase option.

Home Ownership in the amount of $6,567,000 agreed to

On Staff Housing

Ms. Moorcroft: I am wondering if the Minister supports the program objective to ensure the availability of adequate and suitable accommodation to employees of the Government of the Yukon located in Yukon communities outside Whitehorse. Most Yukon communities have a shortage of adequate accommodation.

I note that these expenditures are fully recoverable. I would like to know why there is a construction and acquisition of staff housing cut of 19 percent. I would also like to know where the communities are that will have construction of new units in the coming year.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: We have asked the various departments of government to identify their needs in the various communities in the territory. That information is coming forward.

It is kind of interesting that each one of the staff housing units actually requires a net subsidy of $610 a month. This includes taxes, debt servicing and maintenance. When that is added up along with the recoveries from rent, we end up with a direct subsidy of $610.

Ms. Moorcroft: I am not clear about whether or not the Minister answered the question about whether or not he supports the program objectives, so I will put that to him again.

I would also like to know, since they have asked all the departments to submit requests, if there is staff housing for Yukon College staff in the rural community campuses?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I will answer the second part of the question first. Yukon College is ineligible for staff housing. If we have vacant units in a community, we do make them available.

My own feelings about staff housing is that I wish we could do away with it. Unfortunately, it is one of those things that is needed if we want to get teachers and others in the communities and there is not a sufficient market for privately owned housing. We have to provide staff housing in some communities. My own feeling is that I would like to be able to come up with some innovative way to get out of it altogether.

Construction/Acquisition in the amount of $1,100,000 agreed to

On Renovation and Rehabilitation Existing Stock

Renovation and Rehabilitation Existing Stock in the amount of $200,000 agreed to

Staff Housing in the amount of $1,300,000 agreed to

On Joint Venture

Ms. Moorcroft: I have to ask the Minister the reason for the 173 percent increase.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: The joint venture was initially for two units that were going to be built in Watson Lake, and it was actually in response to a need to provide housing for the workers at the Sa Dena Hes mine. Those proposals have been dropped by the proponents of them. We anticipate there may be another such proposal coming from Teslin, but it is certainly not for sure. We do not have definitive projects for this money at this time.

Ms. Moorcroft: The Minister has said that he would not mind seeing the government get out of staff housing and that he has reservations about supporting social housing, but there is a significant increase here on a program that increases housing by providing assistance through partnership with the private sector. What form of subsidy is there for the private sector in this joint venture program?

Hon. Mr. Fisher: There is no absolute direct subsidy in this program. Maybe it is a bit of a subsidy, because the interest rate is somewhat better. If someone is able to come up with a certain number of dollars, we will help put the whole project together as regards financing, working with the banks and so on. In communities, we think it helps to stabilize the housing situation in a community such as Watson Lake or Teslin or so on, if a private individual is interested and willing to invest his money in a project. In that respect, we will help him put it together.

Joint Venture in the amount of $1,500,000 agreed to

On Rental Suites

Rental Suites in the amount of $600,000 agreed to

On Central Services

Central Services in the amount of $30,000 agreed to

Capital Expenditures agreed to

Yukon Housing Corporation agreed to

Yukon Liquor Corporation

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

On Gross Advances

Gross Advances in the amount of $700,000 agreed to

On Internal Recovery

Internal Recovery in the amount of an underexpenditure of $700,000 agreed to

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to

Liquor Corporation agreed to

On Schedule A

Schedule A agreed to as amended

On Schedule B

Schedule B agreed to as amended

On Schedule C

Schedule C agreed to

On Clause 1

Clause 1 agreed to as amended

On Clause 2

Clause 2 agreed to as amended

On Clause 3

Clause 3 agreed to

On Title

Title agreed to

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Chair, I move that you report Bill No. 6 out of Committee, with amendment.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I move that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.

Motion agreed to

The Speaker resumes the Chair

Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

May the House have a report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole?

Mr. Abel: The Committee of the Whole passed the following motion at 4:45 p.m.:

THAT Committee of the Whole and the Assembly be empowered to continue sitting beyond 5:30 p.m., if necessary, for the purpose of completing consideration of Bill No. 6 in Committee of the Whole and permitting the House to consider motions for third reading of all the government bills on the Order Paper, and, if unanimous consent is granted, dealing with Motion No. 47, which the Government Leader gave notice of earlier today.

Further, the Committee of the Whole has considered Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, and directed me to report it with amendment.

Speaker: You have heard the report of the Chair of Committee of the Whole. Are you agreed?

Some Hon. Members: Agreed.

Speaker: I declare the report carried.

GOVERNMENT BILLS

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I would request the unanimous consent of the House to waive Standing Order 59(2), in order to proceed with the third reading of Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, which was reported out of Committee earlier today, with amendment.

Speaker: Is there unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members: Agreed.

Speaker: There is unanimous consent

Bill No.6: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No.6, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Ostashek.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move

THAT Bill No.6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be now read a third time and do pass

Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader that Bill No.6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be now read a third time and do pass.

Some Hon. Members: Division.

Division

Chair: Division has been called. Mr. Clerk, would you please poll the House.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Devries: Agree.

Mr. Abel: Agree.

Mr. Penikett: Disagree.

Mr. McDonald: Disagree.

Ms. Joe: Disagree.

Ms. Moorcroft: Disagree.

Mr. Harding: Disagree.

Mr. Cable: Disagree.

Mrs. Firth: Disagree.

Clerk: The results are seven yea, seven nay.

Speaker: There is a tie vote on the motion for third reading of this bill. The Standing Orders of the Yukon Legislative Assembly state at 4(2): “In the event of a tie vote, the Speaker shall cast the deciding vote and any reasons stated shall be entered in the Votes and Proceedings.”

Further, the Legislative Assembly Act states at section 29: “When the number of votes cast for and against a motion are equal, the Speaker shall give the casting vote.”

Neither our Standing Orders, nor the Legislative Assembly Act provide direction to the Speaker on the use of the casting vote. Rather, they specify only that the Speaker must vote in the event of a tie.

Parliamentary authorities on the precedence of this Assembly provide some assistance as to how the Speaker should exercise this responsibility. Annotation 310(1) of Beauchesne’s 6th edition states: “When a tie-breaking or casting vote is necessary, the Speaker is entitled to vote like any other Member, according to conscience, without assigning a reason; but in order to avoid the least suggestion of partiality, it is usual when practicable, to vote in such manner as not to make the decision of the House final, and to give reasons which are entered in the Journals. The Speaker votes in such a manner as to leave the House another opportunity of deciding the question.”

A useful document in this respect is a procedural paper, entitled “The Casting Vote of the Chair” prepared by the Table Research Branch of the House of Commons.

In the introduction of this procedural paper, the following general statement is made: “Since the exercise of this responsibility( i.e., the use of the casting vote) could involve the Chair implicitly in partisan debate and thus weaken confidence in the Chair’s impartiality, certain conventions have developed to guide Speakers and Chairmen in the exercise of the casting vote.”

The paper quotes John George Bourinot, a former Clerk of the House of Commons of Canada, who wrote, in his book Parliamentary Procedure and Practice in the Dominion of Canada, that “it will be found that the general principle which guides a speaker or chairman of committee of the whole on such occasions is to vote, when practicable, in such a manner as not to make the decision of the house final.”

The procedural paper also reviews the experience of the Speakers of the British House of Commons in the use of the casting vote. The paper states:

“From an analysis of the instances in which the casting vote of the Chair has been exercised at Westminster, the following principles emerge:

“(1) The Chair should always vote for further discussion.

“(2) Where no further discussion is possible, important decisions should not be taken except by a majority.

“(3) Cognate to (2) above, where legislation is concerned, the bill should be left in its existing form.

“Simply put, the Chair should always vote for the status quo.”

The principle that the Chair should always vote for further discussion and not make the decision of the House final was cited by me during this session when casting the deciding vote on the motions for second reading of Bill No. 20, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, and of Bill No. 4, Second Appropriation Act, 1992-93. It was also cited when I cast the deciding vote for third reading and passage of Bill No. 20, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act. At that time, I made it clear that the vote to pass Bill No. 20 was cast for the purpose of allowing the House to fully debate and vote on the complete budget, which has, as its central component, Bill No. 6, First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, which we are now dealing with.

In the procedural paper quoted, not a single reference is made to an occasion on which a Speaker has been required to cast the deciding vote in a situation like the one I am faced with today. The question now before the House is clearly one on which the fate of the government hinges. It is a matter of confidence, and if the motion does not carry, the government will fall.

The principle that the Speaker should always vote for further discussion cannot be relied upon as this is the final vote on this budget; it either passes or fails.

The second principle is that, where no further discussion is possible, important decisions should not be taken except by a majority. The dilemma that I face if I rely on that principle is that the deciding vote, by necessity, creates a majority for one side or the other. If I vote in favour of the motion, it passes the budget - a most important decision. On the other hand, if I vote against the budget, my vote will cause an election - again, a most important decision.

An argument can be made that it is the responsibility of the House and not the Speaker to support a government. This idea is explained by John Stewart, in his book, The Canadian House of Commons. Mr. Stewart states:

“Obviously, when we say that one function of the House is to support a government, we are not saying that the House never should defeat a government. Ordinarily, if the government is in a minority position it will be defeated just as soon as the third party decides that, all things considered, including the public reaction, its own partisan commitments require it to bring the government down, and not before.

“But the Members always have an obligation to act primarily as good Members of the House, that is, to put the maintenance of the constitutional system ahead of personal and party interests. This obligation is honoured every day in diverse ways - by consultation over the order of business, by waiving the rules when to do so is desirable ... et cetera. The obligation becomes most obvious and important when it has been demonstrated - two general elections in close proximity suffice - that no party can obtain a majority. In that situation, I suggest, all Members are under an obligation to moderate their party loyalties, whether based on religion, race, region, class, or tradition, or all these mixed, to permit Responsible Government to work. Compromises by both the government and the opposition will be required. The government will have to accept minor defeats in the House without resigning, and without calling an election. The opposition will have to meet the government half way.”

The point that must be made is that the House, including both the government and the Opposition, should not come to rely on the vote of the Speaker. That would do a disservice to both the House and the Speaker. This House, too, should support the principle of an impartial Speaker. If it insists on making the Speaker part of the decision-making process, it risks doing harm to the position.

In considering how to vote on Bill No. 6, I have taken careful account of the fact that the House has not been able to achieve a majority either supporting or opposing the bill and of the effect that this deciding vote will have upon the position of the Speaker.

I would point out the obvious - excluding Porter Creek South, representatives of half of the electoral districts of the Yukon support this budget, and representatives of the other half do not.

In our system, the Speaker is also a representative of the constituents who elected him or her. My situation as Speaker is somewhat unique in that I was elected in Porter Creek South as an Independent. I say that so it is clear that this decision has not been influenced in any way by loyalty or allegiance to a political party.

I will also say for the record that I have not entered into any prior arrangements or agreements with either the government side to support this budget or with the Opposition side to defeat it.

In the role of a constituency representative, and, as the possibility of a tie vote existed, due to the makeup of this House, I attempted to contact all my constituents to obtain their opinion. I canvassed the constituents in Porter Creek South to determine their views on the budget, the performance of the government, and the desirability of a general election.

I apologize to those we never got hold of and to those who wanted to speak to me personally, but whom I was unable to call back.

Many of my constituents do not like this budget. They are especially upset about the tax increases that were not only unwelcome but also unexpected.

I do not hesitate to state clearly on the record that I do not like this budget.

The clear majority of my constituents, at the same time, believe that the government deserves more time to prove whether or not it can provide good government, and that majority of my constituents do not want to see a general election at this time.

That is the larger issue to be considered - whether or not the government should be defeated, sending Yukoners back to the polls.

We are presently seven months into the mandate of a new government, which has ended the seven-year reign of the previous government.

Although I have not conducted a survey of the entire Yukon, I believe the response received from the constituents of Porter Creek South to be representative of the view of the majority of Yukoners.

In reaching a decision, I felt it necessary to make a general assessment of the “mood” of the elected representatives as well as the electorate. As Speaker, I first and foremost must be concerned with the activities that take place within this Chamber. Although debate on some measures has been quite extensive, every bill introduced by the government has, at this point, been passed or reached the third reading stage. Those debates have not been so obstructive as to cause the government to be unable to get its legislative program through the House, nor have unceasing demands been made for the government to go to the people.

I must conclude that by carrying on business the Members are reflecting the mood expressed by their constituents and that the desire of this House is to allow this government to remain in office for the time being.

In conclusion, I return to the simple fact that the Speaker is entitled to vote like any other Member, according to conscience.

In reaching a decision on how to cast the deciding vote, I have considered my duty to this House as Speaker, my duty to my constituents as their representative and my duty to all Yukoners as an elected Member of this Legislative Assembly.

I do not sense a strong feeling that Yukoners are ready for and want an election. For that reason and those previously mentioned, I vote for the motion and declare that Bill No. 6 has passed this House.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 6 agreed to

Bill No. 24: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 24, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Fisher.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I move that Bill No. 24, entitled An Act to Amend the Municipal Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Community and Transportation Services that Bill No. 24, entitled An Act to Amend the Municipal Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 24 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 24 has passed this House.

Bill No. 92: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 92, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Fisher.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: I move that Bill No. 92, entitled An Act to Amend the Assessment and Taxation Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Community and Transportation Services that Bill No. 92, entitled An Act to Amend the Assessment and Taxation Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 92 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 92 has passed this House.

Bill No. 76: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 76, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Phelps.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: I move that Bill No. 76, entitled An Act to Amend the Judicature Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Justice that Bill No. 76, entitled An Act to Amend the Judicature Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 76 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 76 has passed this House.

Bill No. 4: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 4, standing the name of the Hon. Mr. Ostashek.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move that Bill No. 4, entitled Second Appropriation Act, 1992-93, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 4, entitled Second Appropriation Act, 1992-93, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?

Some Hon. Member: Division.

Division

Speaker: Division has been called. Mr. Clerk, would you kindly poll the House.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Devries: Agreed.

Mr. Abel: Agreed.

Mr. Penikett: Disagreed.

Mr. McDonald: Disagreed.

Ms. Joe: Disagreed.

Ms. Moorcroft: Disagreed.

Mr. Harding: Disagreed.

Mr. Cable: Agreed.

Mrs. Firth: Disagreed.

Clerk: Mr. Speaker, the results are eight yea, six nay.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 4 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 4 has passed this House.

Bill No. 5: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 5, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Ostashek.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move that Bill No. 5, entitled Fourth Appropriation Act, 1991-92, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 5, entitled Fourth Appropriation Act, 1991-92, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 5 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 5 has passed this House.

Bill No. 56: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 56, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Ostashek.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move that Bill No. 56, entitled Public Sector Compensation Restraint Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 56, entitled Public Sector Compensation Restraint Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 56 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 56 has passed this House.

Bill No. 89: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 89, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Ostashek.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move that Bill No. 89, entitled An Act to Amend the Fuel Oil Tax Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 89, entitled An Act to Amend the Fuel Oil Tax Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?

Some Hon. Member: Division.

Division

Speaker: Division has been called.

Division

Speaker: Division has been called. Mr. Clerk, would you kindly poll the House.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Brewster: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Fisher: Agree.

Hon. Mr. Devries: Agree.

Mr. Abel: Agree.

Mr. Penikett: Disagree.

Mr. McDonald: Disagree.

Ms. Joe: Disagree.

Ms. Moorcroft: Disagree.

Mr. Harding: Disagree.

Mr. Cable: Disagree.

Mrs. Firth: Disagree.

Clerk: Mr. Speaker, the results are seven yea, seven nay.

Speaker: There is a tie vote on the motion for third reading of this bill.

As Speaker, I am required to cast the deciding vote. For the reasons outlined in my casting vote on Bill No. 6, I vote for the motion and declare that Bill No. 89 has passed this House.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 89 agreed to

Bill No. 29: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 29, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Ostashek.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move that Bill No. 29, entitled An Act to Amend the Tobacco Tax Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 29, entitled An Act to Amend the Tobacco Tax Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Some Hon. Members: Agree.

Some Hon. Members: Disagree.

Speaker: I believe the ayes have it. I declare the motion carried.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 29 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 29 has passed this House.

Bill No. 37: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 37, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Phelps.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: I move that Bill No. 37, entitled An Act to Repeal the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Justice that Bill No. 37, entitled An Act to Repeal the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Some Hon. Members: Agree.

Some Hon. Members: Disagree.

Speaker: I believe the ayes have it. I declare the motion carried.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 37 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 37 has passed this House.

Bill No. 71: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 71, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Phelps.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: I move that Bill No. 71, entitled An Act to Amend the Jury Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker:   It has been moved by the Minister of Justice that Bill No. 71, entitled An Act to Amend the Jury Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 71 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 71 has passed this House.

Bill No. 62: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 62, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Phelps.

Hon. Mr. Phelps: I move that Bill No. 62, entitled An Act to Amend the Yukon Development Corporation Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister responsible for the Yukon Development Corporation that Bill No. 62, entitled An Act to Amend the Yukon Development Corporation Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Some Hon. Members: Agree.

Some Hon. Members: Disagree.

Speaker: I believe the ayes have it. I declare the motion carried.

Motion for third reading of Bill No. 62 agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 62 has passed this House.

May I have your further pleasure?

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I would request unanimous consent of the House to waive Standing Order 27(1), in order to proceed with debate on Motion No. 47, of which the Government Leader gave notice of earlier today.

Speaker: Is there unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members: Agreed.

Speaker: There is unanimous consent.

Motion No. 47

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Pursuant to Section 8 of the Northern Inland Waters Act, the Commissioner-in-Council nominates three persons to serve on the Yukon Water Board. The term of two members has expired. Today, I am proposing to have one of those vacancies -

Speaker: Order please. I would ask the Government Leader to first move the motion. I will read it.

It has been moved by the Hon. Government Leader

THAT the Yukon Legislative Assembly, pursuant to Section 8 of the Northern Inland Waters Act, nominate Jean Gordon to the Yukon Territory Water Board.

Hon. Mr. Ostashek: We are moving that we have this one vacancy filled at this time. Jean Gordon sat on the board for about six years now. I believe that she is a very good person on that board.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: May I have your further pleasure?

I would like to inform the House that we are now prepared to receive the Commissioner in his capacity as Lieutenant-Governor to give assent to certain bills that have passed this House.

Mr. Commissioner enters the Chamber announced by the Sergeant-At-Arms

ASSENT TO BILLS

Commissioner: Please be seated.

Speaker: Mr. Commissioner, the Assembly has, at its present session, passed certain bills to which, in the name of and on behalf of the Assembly, I respectfully request your assent.

Clerk: First Appropriation Act, 1993-94; An Act to Amend the Municipal Act; An Act to Amend the Assessment and Taxation Act; An Act to Amend the Judicature Act; Second Appropriation Act, 1992-93; Fourth Appropriation Act, 1991-92; Public Sector Compensation Restraint Act; An Act to Amend the Fuel Oil Tax Act; An Act to Amend the Tobacco Tax Act; An Act to Repeal the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act; An Act to Amend the Jury Act; An Act to Amend the Yukon Development Corporation Act.

Commissioner: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Speaker, Members of this Assembly, I hereby assent to the bills as enumerated by the Clerk, and I take this opportunity to wish you all a very happy, productive and peaceful summer.

Commissioner leaves the Chamber

Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I move

THAT the House at its rising do stand adjourned until it appears to the satisfaction of the Speaker, after consultation with the Government Leader, that the public interest requires that the House shall meet;

THAT the Speaker shall give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time; and

THAT, if the Speaker is unable to act owing to illness or other causes, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Government House Leader

THAT the House at its rising do stand adjourned until it appears to the satisfaction of the Speaker, after consultation with the Government Leader, that the public interest requires that the House shall meet;

THAT the Speaker give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time; and

THAT, if the Speaker is unable to act owing to illness or other causes, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. Phillips: I move that the House do now adjourn.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Government House Leader that the House do now adjourn.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: This House now stands adjourned.

The House adjourned at 7:03 p.m.

The following Sessional Paper was tabled June 3, 1993:

93-1-68

Health and Social Services Annual Report for the year ended March 31, 1991 (Phelps)

The following Legislative Returns were tabled June 3, 1993:

93-1-120

Hydro proposals: process of handling future proposals (Ostashek)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 959

93-1-121

Travel by public servants: bookings by department for the fiscal years 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 (Ostashek)

Written Question No. 8, dated April 6, 1993, by Mr. McDonald

93-1-122

Public Service Commission: response to questions raised June 2, 1993, during debate of main estimates, 1993-94 (Ostashek)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 1196-1197

93-1-123

Standardized and 9-1-1 Emergency Telephone Numbers: advertising costs for standardized emergency numbers and estimated costs for public education and awareness campaign of the use of 9-1-1 (Fisher)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 781

93-1-124

McLean Lake area squatter status: applicants received country residential zoning; low density residential zoning permits country residential zoning (Fisher)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 921-922

93-1-125

$10 million from federal government: agreement under review, program details to be announced once agreement is signed (Fisher)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 962

93-1-126

Open and secure custody new service initiatives: Probations Services - Options Programs, Adolescent Sex Offender Treatment Program; Residential Services - Northern Network of Services Treatment Centre, Klondike Group Home, Receiving Home; Programming Unit (Phelps)

Oral, Hansard, p. 794

93-1-127

Vocational Rehabilitation Services (VRS): scope of service being reviewed (Phelps)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1032

93-1-128

Open and secure custody facilities: First Nation Cultural Programming Committee, young offender participation in activities, family visitations (Phelps)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1115

93-1-129

Department of Health and Social Services: responses to questions on Macaulay Lodge and Continuing Care/Rehabilitation Facility (CCRF) raised during debate of main estimates, 1993-94, on May 31, 1993 (Phelps)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1127-1128

93-1-130

Health and Social Services involvement in National Access Awareness Week (NAAW) (Phelps)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1151

93-1-131

Department of Justice: responses to questions on uncollected wages raised during debate of main estimates, 1993-94, on June 2, 1993 (Phelps)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 1184

93-1-132

Aboriginal Justice Coordinator position in Teslin: new position to develop and initiate programs for the Teslin Community Correctional Facility (Phelps)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 1185

93-1-133

Electronic Home Monitoring Program: 25 applications received, 14 approved, 6 under consideration (Phelps)

Discussion, Hansard, p. 1188

93-1-134

Yukon Government Administration Building: identified barrier free (handicapped) access issues and possible solutions (Devries)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1165

93-1-135

Teen Parent Program: number of participants, feasibility study on the expansion of existing building to be completed by the end of summer (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1138

93-1-136

School busing contract budget increase (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1145

93-1-137

Department of Education: responses to questions on the French Language Program raised on May 31, 1993, during debate on the main estimates, 1993-94 (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1145

93-1-138

Native language instruction in Yukon schools (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1145

93-1-139

Department of Education: reasons for the Facilities Manager position being transferred to Finance and Administration (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1159

93-1-140

Faro teachers: transfer approval and re-assignment to other Yukon schools (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1074

93-1-141

First Nations curriculum development and aboriginal language education: projects currently underway and initiatives for 1993-94 (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1138

93-1-142

Education Appeal Tribunal members (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1139

93-1-143

Department of Education, program support and development: explanation of budget (Phillips)

Oral, Hansard, p. 1145