Whitehorse, Yukon

Speaker:   I will now call the House to order.

We will proceed at this time with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

Speaker:   We will proceed at this time with the Order Paper.

Tributes.

TRIBUTES

Mr. Roberts:   Mr. Speaker, I have the distinct pleasure to take this opportunity to pay tribute to a very unique Yukon pioneer, Father Jean-Marie Mouchet, who at the tender age of 85 still cross-country skis, bikes and rollerblades.

I would like the House to rise with me to welcome Father Mouchet, who is sitting in the gallery along with Yvonne Harris and her husband Paul, at this time. Please welcome them to the gallery.

Applause

Mr. Roberts:   Along with Joyce Hayden, Yvonne Harris and the individuals from the Friends of Yukon History, a book was put together on the history of Father Mouchet in two major communities here in the Yukon.

Father was inducted into the Yukon Hall of Fame in 1980. He received the Commissioner’s Award in 1981, the Award Chevalier de l’Ordre National du Mérite from the French government, and he received the Order of Canada from the Governor General in 1993 for his outstanding contributions to the north.

Yesterday, a book written by Father Mouchet and edited, as I’ve just mentioned, was launched in Whitehorse. The title of the book is Men and Women of the Tundra. This book is about the exploits and activities of this very unique individual in the communities of Telegraph Creek and his 25 years in Old Crow. This book is about the individual lives of members in these communities and the mission that Father presented to them.

MLAs in this very Legislature and past Legislatures know very well of the work the Father has developed in training them to perform at their maximum potential — Lorraine Peter from Old Crow, Scott Kent, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, Norma Kassi, a past MLA, just to name a few. There have been many others.

Father Mouchet was the main founder of the TEST program that has flourished in the north for the past 35 years and has developed hundreds of northerners in their physical fitness. All who came in contact with the Father, from 1947 when he first arrived in Telegraph Creek to the present, always learned something about their physical, emotional, intellectual and spiritual potential.

In my family’s 34-year contact with this man, I have never heard of him converting them to his religion. What he did convert them to was their physical and emotional potential.

Father Mouchet was one of the main founders of cross-country skiing in the Yukon, and it was his dedication and training that developed many of our top Canadian cross-country skiers, and athletes like Martha Benjamin, Shirley and Glenna Frost, the famous Olympic Firth twins from Northwest Territories, Sean Sheardown from Whitehorse and many more, too numerous to mention, were all products of Father’s training programs.

Father Mouchet has the uncanny ability to plant seeds of commitment into the people he comes into contact with, so as to challenge each of us to discover who we are and what we can do. Father’s ability to inspire adults and youth to seek dedication and commitment in their lives is legendary.

Father Mouchet is "a man ahead of his times" and has been instrumental in the establishment of the great cross-country skiing that we have here in the Yukon. It has been his vision and guidance that put the Yukon on the Canadian cross-country ski map.

Today, at 85, Father continues to try to re-establish a health and fitness program in Old Crow to help bring back hope, fitness and health to many of our small communities.

Father Mouchet will always be remembered as a true Yukon Sourdough who spoke to people through their abilities and commitment. A true hero of the north and a legend in his own right — thank you, Father, for all you have done for Yukoners and northerners.

Applause

Mrs. Peter:   I, too, rise today to pay tribute to a person who played an important role in my community. Father Mouchet came to Old Crow in 1954 and spent more than 25 years with us and still maintains that relationship today. Father Mouchet strongly believed that, in developing strong bodies, people improved their mental and physical health and are better able to contribute to a healthy society. Many of the ski champions from the past programs that Father encouraged in our community are key resources in our First Nation government today.

I would like to congratulate Father Mouchet on his book, Men and Women of the Tundra. In this book he provides a wonderful snapshot of the people and activities of Old Crow. We remember the time that he spent in our community and appreciate the many things he did for Old Crow over the years.

Mahsi'cho to Father Mouchet.

In recognition of World No Tobacco Day

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:   I rise today to recognize World No Tobacco Day, which takes place worldwide May 31. World No Tobacco Day was created by the World Health Organization in 1988 as a way to draw global attention to the tobacco epidemic and the preventable diseases and premature deaths that it causes.

This yearly event is used to inform the public on the dangers of using tobacco and encourages smokers to quit. It raises the awareness of the business practices of tobacco companies and shows people around the world what they can do to claim their right to health and healthy living, and how to protect future generations from this horrible addiction.

This year’s theme for World No Tobacco Day is "Tobacco-free sports, play it clean" and is a response to a worldwide appeal to clean up sports of all forms of tobacco — tobacco consumption and exposure to second-hand smoke, tobacco advertising, promotion and marketing.

Tobacco-free events are being organized all over the world and included the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, the Paralympic Games and, closer to home, the Arctic Winter Games in Greenland and Iqaluit. These were also tobacco-free games, with dire consequences for any athlete found smoking.

In the Yukon, we are using World No Tobacco Day to launch our new tobacco call-it-quits Web page. This is a prelude to a full-blown campaign this fall that will be aimed at getting Yukoners to quit smoking.

We are also releasing the winners from our youth tobacco contest this year. Four young artists will have their work hanging in public places, warning against the danger of smoking. These posters look at smoking from a youth’s point of view and give us clear insight into what is important for them. The poster contest winners for this year are Burton Noksana, Katrina Couch, Noria Deacon and Meagan Crawford. We are also receiving some help in getting Yukoners to butt out from the Mayor and Council of Dawson City.

While it is important to recognize World No Tobacco Day, it is also important to recognize here, in this very public forum, the courageous steps being taken to ban public smoking in Dawson’s public buildings. The mayor and councillors are to be credited with starting the dialogue about the very real need to pay attention to public smoking. They are leading the way.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In recognition of Ken MacGillivray

Mr. McLarnon:   This is a personal tribute. I would like to pay tribute, since it is his last day working while we are in the House, to Mr. Ken MacGillivray, who is the press secretary for the Liberal Party. He will be leaving before we have a chance to see his handiwork at the next session. Ken said something along the way when we were together that no matter what happens it has been interesting and fun. I hope in his new life in Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, where he is moving to that he has those memories that it was interesting and fun. We wish him good luck, and the Yukon has definitely lost a good person.

Good luck, Ken.

Speaker:   Are there any further tributes?

Introduction of visitors?

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Fairclough:   I would like to draw members’ attention to members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1574, who are currently involved in job action with Northwestel who are hear today in the gallery. Also please welcome the members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada who have been very supportive of their brothers and sisters in the IBEW. Please join me in welcoming them here today.

Applause

Mr. Roberts:   I would like the House to join me in welcoming some visitors to the gallery: Elizabeth Eso, one of my constituents, and her brother Joe and Barb Eso from Kelowna; also Father Jack from Sacred Heart Cathedral, who is sitting right behind them and Mike Heine, who is filming and actually comes from Windsor, or via that way. We welcome you to the House. Will you join me in welcoming them?

Applause

Mr. McLarnon:   I would like the House to help me welcome some very special people to me. They are my goddaughter Clair Mooney and her father and mother Jamie and Susan Mooney, who have come all the way up from Arkansas to see the Yukon. Jamie is from here and is currently an archaeologist in Arkansas and is looking for work here, so hopefully we will give him some reason to dig soon. And finally we have K.C. the new addition to the Mooney family. Let's welcome them home to the Yukon and we will welcome them home sooner or later as residents.

Thank you.

Applause

Speaker:   Is there any further introduction of visitors?

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Ms. Tucker:   Pursuant to subsection 5(h) of the Education Act, I have for tabling the 2000-01 public schools branch annual report.

Hon. Ms. Buckway:   Mr. Speaker, I have a legislative return in response to an oral question from the Member for Klondike regarding outstanding property taxes owed the territorial government by mining companies, asked on Thursday, April 11, 2002.

I also have a legislative return in response to an oral question from the Member for Klondike regarding outstanding taxes on Elsa mine properties, asked on Thursday, April 11, 2002.

Hon. Mr. Kent:   Mr. Speaker, I have a number of legislative returns for tabling. The first one is in response to a question raised by the MLA for Kluane on Thursday, May 16. The second one is in response to a question raised by the MLA for Kluane on April 30, regarding energy policy. The third one is in response to a question raised by the MLA for Kluane on May 16 regarding the cost of contract staff in the pipeline unit. The fourth one is in response to an oral question raised by the Member for Whitehorse Centre on May 16 in regard to the Dempster Lite pipeline cost estimates. Finally, Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Infrastructure, I have a legislative return in response to a question raised by the Member for Klondike on May 13 regarding the Dawson Airport contract.

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   Mr. Speaker, I have a legislative return in response to questions asked in general debate by the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes and the Member for Vuntut Gwitchin in regard to departmental policy on release of inmates from Whitehorse Correctional Centre on completion of sentencing.

Speaker:   Are there any further returns or documents for tabling?

Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

Mr. Jenkins:   I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) Bill No. 58, Act to Amend the Economic Development Act, should be amended to recreate the Department of Economic Development;

(2) Bill No. 57, Government Organisation Act, and Bill No. 71, Corporate Governance Act, should be amended to ensure that government corporations remain responsible to the boards appointed to oversee their operations; and

THAT, to meet these goals, this House urges the Yukon Liberal government to introduce amendments to Bill No. 58, Bill No. 57 and Bill No. 71.

Mr. Fentie:   I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) the proper management and development of the natural resources of southeast Yukon holds the potential to kick-start the present moribund Yukon economy; and

(2) the proper management of the natural resources of southeast Yukon cannot take place until governments conclude a fair and equitable settlement with the Kaska First Nation; and

THAT this House urges the Government of Canada and the Government of Yukon to settle the remaining outstanding issues involved in the Kaska First Nation’s claims and ensure that the Kaska First Nation becomes a full partner in the economic development of southeast Yukon.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon Liberal government has followed through on its commitment to achieve devolution, and some of the many benefits of devolution are

(1) that the actions and decisions of virtually all programs connected with the Yukon’s natural resource base will be vested with the Yukon government;

(2) that it will be possible for Yukoners to participate in making effective changes to natural resource legislation, regulations and policies;

(3) that Yukon, having control over Yukon lands and resources, will be more responsive to Yukon needs and priorities than the present federal system and will result in significant social and economic benefits over the long term;

(4) that the Yukon government will be able to integrate decision making over land use activities;

(5) that the Yukon government will be able to more effectively serve Yukon people and meet their economic development and environmental objectives;

(6) that the devolution agreement ensures that Canada is responsible for the remediation and cleanup of contaminated sites on public and settlement lands that are a result of actions undertaken while the lands were under federal administration and control; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for succeeding in achieving a devolution agreement for Yukoners.

Hon. Ms. Buckway:   I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon Liberal government is continuing to fulfill its commitment to developing the Yukon’s infrastructure by

(1) working with the City of Whitehorse and the Canada Winter Games Bid Committee on successfully lobbying the federal government to secure $30 million in funding for the Games, in addition to the Yukon government’s $19-million capital contribution to this project;

(2) securing almost $5 million under the Canada-Yukon infrastructure agreement to help fund nine infrastructure projects related to water, sewer or solid waste management in the communities of Haines Junction, Faro, Mayo, Dawson City, Carmacks, Carcross, Burwash Landing and Whitehorse;

(3) increasing the highways maintenance budget by more than 300 percent in the past two years;

(4) signing an agreement with the federal government that will put $8.8 million into improving Yukon highways over the next four years;

(5) following through on its commitment to replace the Grey Mountain School;

(6) funding $3.1 million in improvements to the Watson Lake Secondary School, the Eliza Van Bibber School in Pelly Crossing, and Golden Horn Elementary in Mount Lorne;

(7) doubling the funding to the rural roads program;

(8) funding the $17-million reconstruction of the Whitehorse correctional facility; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for continuing to develop the Yukon’s infrastructure.

Thank you.

Hon. Ms. Tucker:   Mr. Speaker, I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon Liberal government is working hard on its commitment to maintain quality health care of Yukoners;

THAT this House recognizes that the Liberal government has delivered on this commitment in the following areas by

(1) providing stable funding to the Child Development Centre;

(2) eliminating the waiting lists for beds in the Whitehorse extended care facilities;

(3) establishing and providing funding for the alcohol and drug secretariat;

(4) increasing health care funding by $14 million over the past two years;

(5) providing funding for a CAT scan at the Whitehorse General Hospital; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon government for continuing to work hard on maintaining the quality health care of Yukoners.

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

THAT this House recognizes that the Yukon Liberal government is continuing to work hard on its commitment to restoring Yukoners’ confidence in government; and

THAT this House recognizes that the Yukon Liberal government is following through on this commitment by the following:

(1) moving the capital budget to the fall, at the request of contractors, so they can better prepare for their construction season;

(2) through renewal, introducing accountability legislation and performance measures for all government departments;

(3) reviewing a number of important pieces of legislation, including the Education Act, the Liquor Act, the Electoral Boundaries Act and the Wildlife Act;

(4) providing increased legal aid funding;

(5) reinstating the community Cabinet tours which, in the past two years, have taken place in Carcross, Ross River, Faro, Haines Junction, Teslin and Dawson;

(6) placing a higher focus on alcohol and drug services for Yukoners; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for continuing to listen to Yukoners and for following through on its commitment to restore confidence in government.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon Liberal government is continuing to work hard on its commitment to rebuilt the Yukon economy; and

THAT this House recognizes steps that the Yukon Liberal government has taken in this regard, including

(1) since taking office, the Liberal government has reduced territorial income tax by 12 percent. These tax cuts have put $4.6 million back into the pockets of Yukoners;

(2) at the request of the contracting community, moved the annual capital budget to the fall;

(3) contributed $363,000 to Welcome Alaska advertising campaign to attract our neighbours, and contributed $250,000 to a Gateway Cities marketing campaign, targeted at Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver;

(4) extended the Yukon mining incentives program; and

(5) committed $19 million toward the 2007 Canada Winter Games in Whitehorse;

AND THAT these efforts are beginning to bear fruit in a number of areas, including

(1) the unemployment rate in the Yukon in April of 2002 was 8.9 percent — the lowest April rate in more than a decade;

(2) retail sales in March 2002 were up 11.3 percent from March 2001, and the Yukon’s gross domestic product increased by 2.1 percent in 2001; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for listening to Yukoners and doing what they said they would do by continuing to build the Yukon economy.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) the Yukon Liberal government is working hard in its commitment to settle outstanding land claims; and

(2) these efforts have resulted in the settlement and ratification of one land claim, with the Ta’an Kwäch’än Council, and the signing of four negotiators’ memoranda of understanding in the past two months with the following First Nations: Carcross-Tagish, Kluane, White River and Kwanlin Dun; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government, federal and First Nation governments, and all members of the three negotiating teams for their hard work; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for following through on its commitment to settle outstanding land claims.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:   Mr. Speaker, I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon Liberal government is fulfilling its commitment to address the territory’s serious drug and alcohol addictions problem by

(1) reviewing the Yukon Liquor Act;

(2) moving forward with the implementation of its strategy on alcohol and drug addictions;

(3) the creation of the new alcohol and drug secretariat; and

(4) adopting an alcohol and drug treatment model that includes youth treatment, an FAS/FAE counsellor, a mental health addictions counsellor, a cultural gender-specific counsellor, medical detox, a halfway/transition house, three rural outreach counsellors, an FAS/FAE prevention consultant, school-based training of professionals, residential inpatient treatment, wilderness programs, after-care, that when fully implemented will effectively double this government’s spending on alcohol and drug treatment; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for continuing to follow through on its commitment to address the issue of alcohol and drug addictions in the Yukon Territory.

Speaker:   Are there any further notices of motion?

Is there a ministerial statement?

This then brings us to Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Mrs. Peter:   I have a question today for the Premier.

On November 7, 2000, the Yukon government renewed an intergovernmental relations accord with the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation. This accord was first put in place by the previous NDP government but it’s the current Premier’s signature that is on the document signed November 2000.

Can the Premier tell us why her government has not been living up to the terms of that agreement?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, I’m surprised that the member opposite is taking this tack with her question. She witnessed the agreement and, to the best of my knowledge, we certainly have been living up to it and I have had no indication otherwise in several discussions with Chief Joe Linklater. If there has certainly been an issue that has arisen, then I am certain that the member opposite would follow her normal practice, which is to approach me with the issue and to make certain that it is resolved. If there is something that is untoward that I’m unaware of, I’ll be happy to work to resolve it.

Mrs. Peter:   Mr. Speaker, the news release on that day the accord was signed quoted the Premier as saying that our government is flexible, and we look forward to moving ahead with the Yukon First Nations intergovernmental working arrangement in the interests of all Yukoners. Can the Premier explain why, 18 months later, there has been almost no progress on most of the seven priority items that are listed for the 2000-01 fiscal year, after saying that they would do what they said they would do.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, the member and I are having a difference of opinion. We believe that we have lived up to the agreement. I know, for instance, that the Minister of Education has met on several occasions with Chief Joe Linklater on a number of issues, and the Minister of Environment and the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources have also engaged in meetings, as I have done. The chief and I have spoken on a number of occasions, including the promotion — as this government has continued to do in supporting the member opposite’s efforts — with respect to ANWR. We have worked very hard on all of the issues that have been brought to us by Chief Joe Linklater. We’ve had a very good relationship, and I fully expect that that will continue.

Question re:   Protected areas strategy

Mr. Fairclough:   I have a question for the Minister of Environment about the Yukon protected areas strategy. According to the Yukon protected areas strategy bulletin on third party interests, special management areas established under First Nations final agreements are not affected by YPAS. The area southeast of Stewart Crossing, which used to be the McArthur Game Sanctuary, is now known as Ddhaw Ghro habitat protection area. It’s a special management area set aside under the Selkirk First Nation final agreement and the Na Cho Nyäk Dun final agreement, and it’s not a protected area under the protected areas strategy.

Can the minister explain why he authorized using the YPAS process to conduct mineral assessments in that area?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   The fact is that we didn’t do the assessments under the YPAS process. We’re doing the assessments in consultation with the First Nation on Ddhaw Ghro to assist them in evaluating the mineral values, forestry values and other values that are contained within this special management area.

Mr. Fairclough:   The minister is saying things that are contrary to the facts. There’s a clear breach of protocol here, Mr. Speaker. The mineral assessments were conducted under the YPAS process and the results were made public. The information can be taken right off the government Web site. In there, it states that the assessments were done at the request of YPAS.

So, all of this took place, Mr. Speaker, without involving the steering committee on the special management area, as required under the First Nation final agreement. So, will the minister acknowledge this mistake and give his assurance that the requirements under the UFA, which is the law of the land, will be fully respected in the future?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I disagree with the member opposite’s assertions with respect to the assessments that were done on this area. The assessments were done in full consultation with the First Nations, and we’re assisting them in determining the values within this special management area.

Question re:  Protected areas strategy, moratorium on

Mr. Jenkins:   I have a question today for the Premier. While this government is going to be spending $565 million in capital and O&M, and even more with the announcement of a further $30 million for the 2007 Canada Winter Games, these expenditures are not going to address the fundamental problem of what is wrong with the Yukon’s economy. The problem with the Yukon economy is the lack of investor confidence. Investment in mining, forestry, oil and gas has been virtually devastated by the policies of Liberal governments here in the Yukon and in Ottawa.

Will the Premier give an undertaking that she will now reverse the policies her government has imposed that are crippling investor confidence in the territory, and would she use that special relationship she is purported to have with Ottawa to get Ottawa to do the same for the Yukon?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Let’s talk about the economy. Let’s talk about investor confidence. In terms of the economy, in April 2002, just last month, there were 700 more Yukoners working — going to work, receiving a paycheque, spending it locally. Let’s talk about investor confidence. The fact is that investor confidence is based upon land certainty, our infrastructure and settlement of land claims. This government has delivered on all three of those.

Mr. Jenkins:   What the minister is failing to recognize is that, of the Yukoners going back to work and working, 1,300 Yukoners live here in the Yukon but are working outside of the territory. What I am asking the Premier to do is put a hold on the protected areas strategy that her Minister of Environment has announced but in fact is not doing. There is a slowdown; no, there is no such thing, Mr. Speaker. I am asking the minister to take the $2.9 million being devoted to creating more protected areas and utilizing that money for forestry management planning to help the Yukon forest industry gain long-term access to timber and restore the investor confidence in at least that industry.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   What the member opposite is failing to recognize is the fact that there are 700 more Yukoners working. That is 700 more Yukoners with families and friends who are contributing to our community, who are shopping locally, who camp in our campgrounds, who buy their gas, their vehicles, their groceries locally. That money, in turn, generates more work for Yukoners. What the member opposite is also failing to recognize is the fact that this government has stood time and time and time again and explained to the member opposite that the Minister of Environment and the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources held a joint news conference and explained the slowdown in the Yukon protected areas strategy. The member opposite is simply failing to recognize or perhaps it is just hearing other voices.

Mr. Jenkins:   What the minister is failing to recognize is that her government policies are helping to create jobs in Fort Nelson, Northwest Territories and the Cantung mine, up in Inuvik and the Beaufort Sea and over in Alaska, because that is where Yukoners are going to work. Now let’s look at the placer miner industry in my area. It is under siege by the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Yukon Conservation Society. With the price of gold increasing, there are a lot more placer miners that would be ready to go to work if there were a practical cost-effective regulatory regime in place. Will the Premier commit to funding the Yukon Placer Committee to the same level as she funds the protected areas strategy and if not, why not?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, this government was the first government ever that recognized the Klondike Placer Miners Association to the same level that the Yukon Chamber of Mines was recognized and provided funding. We were the first government that did that. And not only that, but I fail to understand how the member opposite, who is out campaigning hither, thither and yon, is suggesting that workers in Cantung and the 24 more workers who are going to work there and the contractors who reopened the mine aren’t Yukoners. They sure think they are, and we know which way they’d be voting in the next election. It would be for the people who support Yukoners, which is what we do.

Question re:  Highway works contracting

Mr. McRobb:   My question is for the Minister of Infrastructure.

The previous minister seated beside him insisted that her department had no plans to privatize road works normally done by the department’s highways maintenance branch. However, recently there was some patchwork done on the Alaska Highway near MacRae. That work was done by a private company, Mr. Speaker.

Can the minister explain why that work was contracted out instead of being done by the government’s own employees who, by the way, have the expertise required to do this work?

Hon. Mr. Kent:   Mr. Speaker, with respect to that specific project that took place, I’d be happy to look into that for the member opposite, but I can assure him that we do have no plans to privatize the transportation maintenance division of the Department of Infrastructure.

Mr. McRobb:   Well, I think we should look into it, Mr. Speaker, but I can understand the minister’s reluctance to discuss it here. This is the same company that got the BST contract last year, in excess of $700,000, that resulted in a very unsatisfactory job near Marsh Lake on the Alaska Highway. This is also the same company that is well-known for its generosity to the Liberal Party. The government’s own contract registry Web site doesn’t show this contract. Well, surprise, surprise — this is curious, although perhaps the Web site hasn’t been renewed yet.

Let’s focus on the government’s change in policy, Mr. Speaker. Just how far does this minister intend to slide down the slippery slope of privatization by contracting out work traditionally done by government employees?

Hon. Mr. Kent:   I’m very disappointed in the Member for Kluane casting aspersions upon a Yukon contractor who employs Yukoners. I find that extremely disappointing. The company he is referring to has a long-standing commitment to the Yukon, the Yukon communities, to community events and community projects, and I do find that very, very disturbing and disappointing that he would cast aspersions upon a private sector company.

As I mentioned in my previous answer, we have absolutely no plans to privatize the transportation maintenance branch of the Department of Infrastructure.

Again, the Member for Kluane should be very ashamed of himself for casting those aspersions upon a private sector company here in the Yukon Territory.

Question re:  Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board, briefings by

Mr. McLarnon:   My question is to the minister responsible for the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board. On Tuesday, this government tabled a report indicating that there were no leaks of confidential information from any board member of the WCB to myself. The Hughes report further showed that there was actually no confidential information to leak. It was all in the public domain. This is exactly as I explained it to the House in April. At that time, I asked the government to save the taxpayers the expense of the investigation and offered the source of my briefings. The request was ignored, and all the statements regarding my source proved to be accurate when the investigation was complete.

My question to the minister: how much was the bill for this public inquisition?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:   The member opposite, once again, thinks it’s all about him.

To be absolutely clear, there were a number of very serious allegations being made about the integrity of the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board — very serious allegations.

I have for filing a letter from James Brohman, who is the vice-chair of the workers’ task force, outlining some of those concerns. I’ll give that to the Clerk.

Now, those concerns were also brought forward in a public forum by the New Democratic Party. Those are very serious allegations, and as the Conflicts Commissioner pointed out, they are worthy of investigation and they were investigated. That is my job. It did a very good job of clearing the air and bringing back the integrity of the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board, which had been put into question by the comments from the Member for Whitehorse Centre.

Mr. McLarnon:   Mr. Speaker, our goal here is to ensure that this government does not adopt the face of McCarthyism. The underlying reason was to discredit or remove political dissent. The Liberals have made no secret of their need for retribution against the three members on this side of the House who pointed out the leadership faults in this government. Examples include improper removal of files and e-mails from our computers. They also include the communication advisory inviting party members to disrupt our recent town hall meetings. They also include calling names in the paper from the Liberal executive. Now, attacking our colleagues using public money is obvious and reprehensible. My question to the minister is this: it is obvious to Judge Hughes that all the information surrounding this issue was already in the public domain. Senior bureaucrats in Justice and WCB would have known this fact, as well. Did the minister or her staff determine whether there was even any confidential information to leak before she demanded that $15,000 to $20,000 be spent on this political mud fight?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:   Now, Mr. Speaker, let’s go back to the member’s question. First of all, we’re not aware yet of what the actual cost of the inquiry is going to be. It will be billed to the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board, not the government.

The member opposite is making some rather serious allegations about retribution for the fact that they have decided that they want to walk across the floor. Mr. Speaker, it is of little or no interest to this side of the House what the member does or doesn’t do.

Now, to be absolutely clear, my job as the minister responsible for the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board is to maintain the integrity of that board. It makes some very large financial decisions about a very large financial reserve that is to be set aside for injured workers and to ensure that that money is there. So the integrity of the board has to remain paramount. There were some serious allegations made, both by the workers task force and by the New Democratic Party. Those were investigated. Those allegations were worthy of investigation, as pointed out again and again by Mr. Hughes, the former Conflicts Commissioner of the Yukon Territory.

Mr. McLarnon:   Just to point out that the judge has to say it was worthwhile to get his $15,000 to $20,000 paycheque, because that is why we see it there.

Our job is to keep this government accountable. We must also be accountable for our actions. While I felt I had sufficient conversations to justify my statements in the House, Mr. Hughes thought differently. I will not only accept his advice, but I will be accountable for my words. The minister will not explain the real reason that she launched the investigations. She should resign for this. She used ratepayers’ money against volunteers for political purposes. For this she should resign. Since this Liberal government can ill afford another resignation from this minister in this session, I offer her another option. Will she be accountable and join me in an offer to personally help pay back the expenses for this unnecessary investigation to WCB to ensure that ratepayers are not assessed further rates for this political mudslinging and ensure that the workers can get their money and don’t have to pay for the minister’s political mudslinging?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:   I won’t be joining the member opposite in any way. The member opposite is inferring that there will be an increase in assessments due to this inquiry. There will be no increase in assessments. I can assure the member opposite of that very fact. I can also assure the member opposite, again, that there was a letter that I received. Very serious allegations were made within that letter from James Brohman, who is the vice-chair of the workers task force, calling into question the integrity of the board. For that reason, plus the request from the New Democratic Party, I asked the president of the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board to conduct an inquiry. He did through Mr. Hughes — a very, very, up till now, worthy judge and certainly above reproach — and that judge came back with findings that cleared the board members and, also in that report, was the comment that these allegations were so serious that they are worthy of investigation.

Question re:  Economic action plan

Mr. Fentie:   I have a question for the Premier today.

Today, this House is going to vote on the biggest budget ever in this territory, some $565 million, and yet Yukoners continue to witness their economy sliding backwards. Under this Liberal government, our territory’s dependence is increasing on the good graces of the southern taxpayer. The Yukon’s private sector contribution to our economy is in dramatic decline.

Will the Premier, because of her policies creating this very desperate situation, now come to her senses and adopt policies that will reverse that trend, even at this late date, at this eleventh hour? Will she do so?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, only the member opposite from Watson Lake, who is becoming infamous for his moves from left to right, from left to right and right to left, would consider calling the Canada Winter Games — a wonderful achievement for the Yukon, a $30-million investment in this territory — only the Member for Watson Lake would find fault with that. Only that member would do that.

It’s an investment in the territory. It’s tremendous infrastructure, which all Yukoners, especially young Yukoners, are going to benefit from. It just astounds me how the member opposite could say that that is not a good investment in the territory. Most Yukoners I have spoken with in the last 24 hours certainly think it is.

Mr. Fentie:   The Premier is getting a little ahead of herself. That’s not what I’m talking about at all. I didn’t even mention the Canada Winter Games. I’m talking about the ever-decreasing private sector contribution to our economy. That’s what this side of the House is talking about.

Let’s look at the facts. Under this Liberal government, today the contribution to our economy — which is cash flow; the economic engine needs cash flow to operate — under this Liberal government, the private sector now contributes only 19 percent. That’s a drop from 52 percent in the mid-1990s. The federal government’s contribution to the cash flow of our economic engine has increased from 48 percent to 81 percent. We are now almost at total dependence on the federal government to maintain an economy in this territory —

Speaker:   Question please.

Mr. Fentie:   When is this Liberal government and this Premier going to adopt policies that will help recreate a private sector economy in this territory, which is, by the way, the only way to have a long-term beneficial economy?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Let’s talk about the settlement of land claims. Let’s talk about achieving devolution. Let’s talk about the Government of Canada making an investment of $30 million into this territory for an event that the Yukon will be very proud to host — the Canada Winter Games in 2007. Those are exciting investments in infrastructure.

In case the member opposite hasn’t noticed, it’s the private sector that is building this infrastructure. It’s the private sector at work. It’s the private sector at work on the pool in Whitehorse; it’s the private sector at work all the way up the north highway to Beaver Creek; it’s the private sector at work. That’s a result of this government’s work, in terms of capital, the choice of capital projects, as well as moving the capital budget to the fall. That’s the work of this government — putting 700 more Yukoners to work this year in April than there were last year.

Mr. Fentie:   Well, the results of the so-called hard work this Premier and her government have undertaken have dropped our private sector to a mere 19 percent of economic generator dollars in this territory.

Furthermore, now that the Premier has brought up the Canada Winter Games, surely she must understand that after the Games are over and we have enjoyed those very positive activities, it’ll be the tax base in this territory that must pay for the operation and maintenance of those facilities and, with an ever-decreasing tax base, the burden will rely on, again, our one benefactor — the federal government.

This government has to come to its senses and act now. It has to develop and put in place policies that will develop our private sector. That’s a real economy. When is this government going to do so? Here and now is the time to act.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   This side of the House believes in Yukoners. We believe in the Yukoners who are working at Cantung. We believe in the Yukoners working with True North Gems. We believe in the Yukoners who are going to work this summer in Elsa. We believe in the Yukoners who are going to chipseal the Alaska Highway, who are straightening out some of those bends, who are doing the Champagne revision. We believe in the Yukoners who have worked hard to ensure that for the very first time north of 60, Yukoners will host the Canada Winter Games — 500 person years of employment. The additional events that the Yukon will host from now until 2007 — the major event, the test events we’ll do, the untold visitors who will come here in the next seven years with these sporting events and then with the Games themselves, and the endless media coverage of our home, of Yukoners. Mr. Speaker, we are proud to work with Yukoners.

Question re:   Campground maintenance

Mr. Keenan:   Today I have a question for the Minister of Environment. It has to do with the need for maintained campground services in the Ross River area; namely, Dragon Lake and Lapie Lakes.

Now, I must point out that this is something that the community has been asking for for the past two years. What the community is asking for is relatively modest. They just want some outhouses and some garbage cans there for the protection of the environment and a service to the tourists.

My most recent letter to this minister, dated April 23, has not yet been answered. I’d like to ask this minister, why is that so?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I would agree with the member opposite that it is shameful that he hasn’t had a response to a letter he sent to me in April. I will most definitely be looking into it.

With respect to the question he is asking, we discussed this same issue yesterday during budget debate in the Department of Business, Tourism and Culture. I have assured him that we are looking at implementing new campground situations as a result of my meetings with the folks from Ross River.

Mr. Keenan:   Well, Mr. Speaker, this Liberal government has a funny way of showing action. The minister stood on his feet for 10 minutes yesterday, giving needless rhetoric, just fighting for the camera. I think we just have a bunch of hams; that’s what we have. Meanwhile, Ross River wishes to partake in the only industry left in the Yukon Territory, and that’s the tourism industry. The entrepreneurs and the business people are mighty tired of seeing tourists going by to the next available campground, which gives them no benefit. Also, Mr. Speaker, it creates a health hazard. If people can’t do their business in an outhouse, they’re going to do it in the woods. Mr. Speaker, that is not right. It creates nothing but a health hazard, and the Liberal minister and the Liberal Premier might think it’s mighty funny and can chuckle over there, but I find it —

Speaker:   Question please.

Mr. Keenan:   For the sake, Mr. Speaker, of maximizing business potential in that area and for the sake of public health, which the ministers on that side seem to think is mighty funny, when will this request be funded?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Well, we do take the disposal of human waste very seriously. And I know that the Minister of Community Services is very aware of that situation, as well.

I did acknowledge to the member, to the House, to the gallery that the return or the non-answer of a letter from April 8 is inexcusable, Mr. Speaker, and I will immediately look into that fact. I did explain to him yesterday, as well, although he is alluding to the fact that I didn’t give him the answer — I gave him the answer that, as a result of campground tours last year, I am well aware of where there are gaps, especially along the Campbell Highway, where we could be putting new campgrounds. And I talked to the folks in Ross River and will be responding appropriately to their request.

Mr. Keenan:   I guess seeing will be believing. I would like to put this into context. Maybe I should put it into context for the Premier. Maybe the Premier should go out on an excellent family vacation this summer and see first-hand just what is going on in the community of Ross River. As the Finance minister, maybe she should be up there and talking to folks. Ross River is asking for safety repair to the Pelly footbridge. It is the footbridge that is featured predominantly in the vacation guide. They have received nothing. Their requests have been denied. They have asked for a town beautification project and they have asked for recreation facilities and again those requests are denied. They have asked for money to improve rural roads over the past two years while — right next door, 40 miles away — the Town of Faro has received $124,000 —

Speaker:   Question please.

Mr. Keenan:   Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Village of Ross River has received nada — nothing. Would the Premier go to Ross River and find a way to ensure that its community priorities are funded by this government immediately?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   I have indicated on the floor of this House before and publicly that I certainly will be travelling throughout the territory as I have done in the past years that I have been here and will continue to do so. In my capacity as Finance minister and Premier I will be visiting every Yukon community and discussing a number of things, including the capital budget next year. Again, for the interest of members opposite, those discussions will begin June 6 in Dawson City.

Speaker:   The time for Question Period has now elapsed. We will now proceed with Orders of the Day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.

Speaker:   It has been moved by the government House leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.

Motion agreed to

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Chair:   Good afternoon everyone. I will now call Committee of the Whole to order. The Committee of the Whole will recess until 2:15 p.m.

Recess

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

We will continue with general debate on the Department of Business, Tourism and Culture as part of Bill No. 9, Second Appropriation Act, 2002-03.

Bill No. 9 — Second Appropriation Act, 2002-03 — continued

Chair:   Is there any further general debate? Mr. Eftoda, you have the floor.

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Just to clarify a number of outstanding issues from yesterday, there was a question with respect to access into the territory by additional airlines to Air North and Air Canada. Effective just a few days ago, Era started flying into Whitehorse from Anchorage and will continue its flights four days a week and will be flying right through to September 11. The other airline that is flying directly from Europe to Whitehorse, Condor Airlines, will continue to offer twice-weekly air charter service from Frankfurt, effective May 23 through September 26.

They will be flying into Whitehorse on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

The other great news for the territory, of course, is that Air North will be flying from the gateway cities of Calgary and Edmonton, and this was in a direct response that I had heard at the Tourism Industry Association meeting in April up in Dawson. We will be continuing this market initiative in the gateway cities of Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver, encouraging residents within those gateway cities and surrounding areas — the Province of B.C. and the Province of Alberta — to most definitely come up and enjoy Yukon hospitality.

I was very excited to announce the fact that the gateways program will be contributed to by YTG — $250,000. The gateway cities marketing program will provide more marketing dollars targeted at familiar markets closer to home. As I expressed yesterday, the fact of the matter is that, after September 11, there is some hesitancy, especially here in North America, to travel any great distances further away from home.

Of course, the challenge for all the territories north of 60 is to encourage people to come to our territories, that this is a safe environment for tourists to come and enjoy themselves, without fear or apprehension, and that there is availability for them to return home on short notice, should that be required.

Of course, we’re all hoping the situation of September will never occur again in North America. There are no guarantees, but we feel this is a safe place to come and enjoy themselves.

Another thing that we initiated within the department is the call centre. Everyone may be aware of the fact that the call centre was originally located down in Vancouver. I know that if I am making a 1-800 call to a tourism destination, I automatically assume that that call centre is located within the jurisdiction to which I am making the call, but it was pretty hard for people to look out their office window in Vancouver and give the weather for Yukon. So just earlier this year, we relocated the call centre here to the territory, and it gives us an opportunity to not only respond directly to inquiries that come from all over the world but to respond immediately to information that tourists may want and give information directly about Yukon by Yukoners.

As a matter of fact, when the call centre opened, it created four new jobs in the territory. It will be accumulating a vast amount of data that we will be following up on as the initiative of the call centre has been expanded whereby we can follow up to people who call, sending information packages, tourism magazines. That kind of activity and action can occur from the call centre.

So we’re quite excited about the call centre. Even from day one we were getting calls almost immediately, and I know that since that time there have been countless calls wanting information directly about Yukon.

The Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes asked yesterday, during debate on the budget, about the particulars of Dragon Lake on the North Canol Road and Lapie Lakes on the South Canol Road. I indicated to him in Question Period today, Mr. Chair, that I am concerned about the fact that he did not receive a response to his letter dated April 23. I have, since Question Period, secured a copy of that letter and I assure the member opposite that he will be getting a response to that letter.

I also have a request from the Ross River roundtable directly to Premier Duncan, and they have indicated similar requests as the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes. I would ask the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes if he could provide clarification on what exactly the request is, because the round table is asking for something slightly different. Maybe this is an effort that I can discuss with my colleague, the Minister of Community Services, and we could combine our efforts to respond to the information more efficiently than has occurred, by letter to both the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes and the Ross River round table. Before we move on, I would like to also again indicate that we are quite excited about our Welcome Alaska campaign. We are now marketing directly in Juneau, Skagway, Haines and Fairbanks and look forward to the benefits of this program. The nice thing about this program is that it is going to extend beyond the spring and summer and into the fall encouraging Alaskans to come and shop after the tourist season and take advantage because sometimes we are fortunate to have an extended fall period.

But the actual figure for the Welcome Alaska campaign is $343,000. Again, that was in response to what we had heard from industry to address the needs and concerns and wishes in assisting and doing all that we can to encourage tourism here in Yukon this year.

Mr. Keenan:   The minister asked a direct request of myself, so I’ll just be very brief on this one. Before I get on to answering the minister’s question, I’d like to explain what I mean with the Asian connection. I certainly appreciate that Era Aviation will be coming to the territory again from Anchorage. Kudos to the minister and to the department for being able to continue to secure that New Democratic initiative. I very much appreciate that they're still following the leadership of the New Democratic Party. What I really mean, though, is a charter, a charter from Japan or from Asia of some sort. There is the opportunity and also the ability for a direct charter to come, either with a primary stop in Whitehorse or with a secondary stop in Whitehorse. I’m really not sure which it could be. That’s really not up to a politician; that’s up to the market to depict.

So they could come from a starting point in Asia, land in Anchorage with a secondary landing here in the territory, or they could come non-stop to Whitehorse and then, with lower fuel capacity, move on to Anchorage. That’s the type of initiative that I’m asking the minister to please investigate with Governor Knowles. I know that Governor Knowles is very willing to partner with the territorial government, and at one point in time, I believe, Governor Knowles had put $1 million on the table to an airline that would come and provide that. I’m not asking the government for $1 million; I’m just asking for a partnership or, in effect, talk. We know that the Asian market is a very lucrative market, especially in the winter months.

We can definitely capitalize on that.

The letter that the minister has received from the Ross River round table being slightly different from my request — as the minister has known, the minister had a campground tour two budget cycles ago. When I realized the minister has hit the campgrounds he has — this is new stuff that I’m talking about. This is on the South Canol and the North Canol highways. I have personally been to both of those sites within the last year. The sites need at least a seed of a maintenance package, if I could, which, of course, should include a couple of gender specific outhouses and should also include maybe just a fire pit, because there is a fire pit around where people can stop and do that. I’m not asking for a lot of money for this. The garbage pickup could be done by the Infrastructure department — by Minister Kent’s department — because I know Minister Kent’s department is looking to partner with the Village of Teslin and the Teslin Tlingit Council in picking up garbage to a viewpoint. So I know that there is opportunity to do it. That is specifically what I’m desirous of. If that could happen in a micro way, during this season, it would do much to alleviate the problem pressures there.

If the minister were willing to do that, I’m sure that the community would be able and willing to share one of the most exciting fly fishing spots in the territory. People travel from Montana and Minnesota to this particular spot because I have met them, stopped with them and encouraged them, not even as the Minister of Tourism, but just as a Yukoner welcoming them here.

So that is exactly what I mean and I hope that will suffice for the minister.

Chair's statement

Chair:   Order please. Just a reminder that we are to use the names of the ministers as their portfolios or their ridings, rather than refer to them by name.

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   As a matter of fact, regarding the suggestion of working cooperatively, creating efficiencies, after my campground tour last summer, I did approach the Minister of Community Services — Community and Transportation Services at that time — and asked if there were possibilities where we could share responsibilities like garbage removal, wood collection, that type of activity. I will again initiate those discussions upon the suggestion from the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes for doing just that. And I will be looking at areas on the North and South Canol roads as per the recommendation again.

Mr. Jenkins:   I just have a few questions of the minister. Probably some of them I’d appreciate a legislative return on because it would be easier than attempting to answer them on the floor of the House, Mr. Chair.

The last surviving industry in the Yukon, other than government, is our visitor industry, Mr. Chair. Since the events of 9/11, it is more important that that industry and the overseeing government body have as much profile and as much ability to get out there and do the job that has to be done as they possibly can be given.

Now, there must have been a considerable amount of discussion ensuing when the Liberal government was rearranging the chairs in the government offices, as to the advantages of having the Department of Tourism as a stand-alone department, vis-à-vis a department of — well, we all know what it’s referred to in the public domain — but I have been told I can’t refer to it as such in this Legislature, because it would be inappropriate, Mr. Chair.

I won’t go there, but I would very much encourage the minister to impress upon the Premier the advantages — and they are many — of having a stand-alone Department of Tourism. There must be some sort of documentation to justify amalgamating it within the bowels of government and not giving it the profile it should have.

I want to know what those advantages were, because I certainly can’t see them. A legislative return would satisfy that, because we could probably spend the whole afternoon in debate, and we don’t have that time, Mr. Chair. Would the minister be agreeable to that approach?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I understand what the member is asking for, and I’m hoping the answer I do provide will provide an accurate response without getting into reams of paper. I do hear the member, and I’m somewhat surprised, because the member has often stood in the House and talked about business, the economy and industry. I believe the department’s new structure under renewal will be very efficient and very accommodating to business, tourism and culture. I think the resources, the expertise within the department, are certainly going to be addressing the needs of the respective communities.

I also believe, Mr. Chair, that the Tourism Industry Association, which has a very long membership list, as well as the Yukon Convention Bureau, are doing an incredible job outside of government, within the private sector, of mitigating the impacts of September 11.

I understand the concerns and issues as I heard time and again at the AGM for TIAY up in Dawson. Their concerns were that the existing profile of tourism in the territory be maintained, and I assured them, as well as the previous assurances they received from the Premier, that that is definitely going to happen. We believe that the efficiencies that have been created under the new Department of Business, Tourism and Culture, the experience of the people within the respective branches and the structures within those branches requiring lateral discussions up and down the chains of responsibilities within the branch, are certainly going to benefit business, tourism and culture. I am a little surprised at the member opposite wanting to revert to old government departments. If we did that now, it would only increase government, so I am a little surprised at the member’s suggestions that maybe we go that way. We have a wonderful working relationship with the Tourism Industry Association. They are a very strong and they are a very vocal association. I am in constant contact with the executive director here as I am with the president of the association. We are always looking at innovative and new ways. And like I mentioned earlier, there is the gateway initiative in response to the accommodation industry within Yukon as well as the Welcome Alaska campaign. We are hopeful and quite optimistic that these two initiatives are going to mitigate some of that September 11 consequence.

Mr. Jenkins:   Well, the minister missed the whole gist of my question. What I want to know is what the advantages are of having the Department of Tourism incorporated into a body of a number of other service delivery agencies, vis-à-vis a stand-alone department. Because I see many, many advantages to having a stand-alone Department of Tourism, and morale, for one, is where you can start. I see three departments in government that no longer exist, but which should exist and should exist on a stand-alone basis, Mr. Chair, and that is Department of Highways, Department of Tourism, and Department of Economic Development.

The Department of Economic Development is flushed down the toilet, along with anything occurring here in the Yukon, Mr. Chair, and the Department of Tourism could be much more of a leader than what it currently is. I agree with the minister that the Tourism Industry Association of Yukon is doing a good job, along with the respective chambers of commerce and the various other agencies. That’s not in dispute here. What I want is the government to do its job. All he has promised to do is listen, but if there is some documentation there to justify the amalgamation of the Department of Tourism into a major — if the minister could convey that information in a written text, I would very much appreciate it, because the minister can wrap this around for the rest of the afternoon and we’d get nowhere, but I haven’t seen one iota of strength in the minister’s argument or one iota of increased production, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, one of the other areas that will improve the Yukon as a destination is the addition of attractions. I would encourage the Minister of Tourism to do whatever he can with his government to address the issue of the game farm. That is a world-class attraction. That could be an attraction in the Whitehorse area way above what it currently is, Mr. Chair.

Now, I’m not asking the minister to get into any dialogue as to whether it should be a private sector initiative or what it should be, but all the steps the minister is taking in his other portfolio are virtually an impediment to the game farm coming to be recognized as a world-class attraction and benefiting our visitor industry here in the Yukon.

The second one is the White Pass railroad. Now, there is an initiative underway to extend and operate it from Carcross right into Whitehorse. I would encourage the minister to get on board. If the minister wants to see the benefits of a railroad running through a scenic area, I would encourage him to either start in Fairbanks or Anchorage and take the train through Denali.

Holland America has cars — beautiful cars; Princess has beautiful cars — dome cars that run through that area.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Jenkins:   There is a highway through there, but what we’re looking at is the railroad.

The extension of the White Pass railroad into Whitehorse could be another world-class attraction. In fact, the White Pass railroad, since it was revamped just a few short years ago, is one of the fastest growing and most profitable attractions in the north. It’s virtually all existing in Alaska, and it’s a shame, because it was basically built to service the Yukon, and it could do so again.

There are a couple of other areas that the minister could have some input into for attractions. The Whitehorse trolley, by extending that from the Robert Service campground, all the way through, probably sharing the same line as White Pass, all the way down around the government building, right down to Wal-Mart or to this wonderful service centre where the low tender has the land and where the liquor store is going to be, so at least the people of the capital city of Whitehorse can grab the trolley and go down and get their box of beer and not be forced into paying a 30-percent up-charge to buy it downtown.

These are attractions the minister should be devoting some attention to and encouraging their development and assisting with their development. These are areas that are being ignored, and it appears this government is giving nothing but impediments in the way of the game farm.

We look at the Transportation Museum and Beringia, and we look at our museum network around the Yukon, and we look at the reduction of money flowing to our museums — that is a shame, Mr. Chair. It’s a shame that this government would reduce funding to museums.

I spent some time looking at the report, and I would encourage the minister to look at the report on the museums, because it is a very telling document. Yes, there’s a lot of infighting; yes, there are a lot of problems but, by and large, you’re dealing with a group of very professional people, very focused individuals who want to see their museum and their respective areas developed. They can only do so with the assistance of government.

Then we look at air access, Mr. Chair, and we look at this feeble attempt by this Yukon Liberal government at providing some protection for Air North, and we look at the way that they’re going to encourage and address the issue of competition. All we have to do is look at the airfares today that Air Canada is putting in place — $348 round trip, Whitehorse to Vancouver. This is about $50 less than Air North.

That’s where it’s at. Air Canada’s deficit is equal to the gross domestic product of the Yukon. Their deficit of $1 billion is what the total economy of the Yukon is here a year.

So, we are talking about a firm that has very deep pockets, and to go toe to toe with anything that may occur in the Yukon or any carrier that’s starting up fresh here, it’s going to be extremely difficult unless the government has some way of back-stopping and going to the competition bureau and saying, "Hey, look, this is not fair; this is not realistic." I’m sure the minister’s officials have advised the minister of what the add-on fares are if you were to board Air Canada in, say, Frankfurt, fly to Vancouver and come up to Whitehorse. Last year, the least expensive add-on fare Vancouver-Whitehorse return was $265. The minister might want to check what it is currently on the days that Air North flies, because it’s zero, but you can only obtain that information if you start in Europe. You can’t do it in reverse, starting in Whitehorse and ending up in Whitehorse. How fair is that?

If you want to look at the other add-on fares, start looking at flights originating out of the Lower 48, start looking at flights originating out of the Orient and start looking at what the add-on fares are from Vancouver-Whitehorse return, or for that matter, Vancouver-Anchorage return.

As sure as has happened before, Mr. Chair, we’ll probably see another carrier have to curtail a lot of its activities to remain profitable, and Air Canada will have won the day.

The other thing the minister should try and ascertain is what the least expensive fare was any time this last winter when Air Canada was the sole carrier Whitehorse-Vancouver return, and see how many days you could have used your points.

There is an inequality in the marketplace and in the service that is being provided.

There is the issue of the rubber-tire traffic in the Yukon, which has been the mainstay of our visitor industry. That originates primarily out of the U.S. I submit that the minister isn’t doing enough in this area to encourage this rubber-tire traffic to come to the Yukon, and I would encourage the minister to do more. Fly/drive is very important and that area appears to be holding its own originating in Europe. But the minister might want to find out the statistics from Condor as to how many planing and deplaning passengers there are in Whitehorse vis-à-vis Alaska. These are all areas that I will leave with the minister. We could go on for a great length of time. The minister, at the TIAY convention, said he was going to listen. I encourage him to listen and then do something, not just sit there and say his government is all-knowledgeable and all-understanding of the situation. Because at the end of the day, our visitor industry is the last industry and it is struggling. I am sure that at the end of this summer, it will have not had a very stellar year and that affects all of us.

Yes, there are some burps and some areas on the calendar where we are going to be operating full in the hospitality industry. But when you are attempting to amortize an operation on basically 100 days of business, we need everything going for us that we possibly can. We certainly do not have that under this minister and buried department of whatever it is currently. I encourage the minister to plead with his colleagues, make it a stand-alone department, give it the profile necessary to move ahead.

Take the area of transportation under consideration, take the area of attractions under consideration, because much can be done by a government to encourage and to see a lot of these areas come to fruition and to benefit, not just the Yukon, but to be used as a tool of economic development in our visitor industry.

Now, the minister, at the end of the day, must do something. What he does will determine his success. Mr. Chair, I’ll leave that with the minister. I’m not looking for a response at this time. I’m sure he can go on and say nothing for a great length of time, but it will be of no benefit.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. We just heard a whole lot of nothing for the last five minutes, so the fact of the matter is that it is somewhat sad when there isn’t a recognition of what Yukoners are attempting to do collectively in the territory to encourage travel, especially this year. It has to be awfully demoralizing when the voice of doom-and-gloom rhetoric from the other side continually doesn’t recognize the efforts. If they’re not going to recognize the efforts of government, at least recognize the efforts of the good people who work within the department, at least recognize the good efforts by the Tourism Industry Association and the Convention Bureau.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has just denounced any of the efforts that these individuals are making in welcoming people to the territory and encouraging people to come to the territory. If he doesn’t want to recognize the efforts of the government, that’s fine, but at least give credit where it’s due and recognize the skills and abilities of people who work their hearts and souls out, especially this year — the tourism industry, the hoteliers association — trying to get tourists up here this year.

I think it’s shameful that that kind of rhetoric continually is offered by that particular member across the floor of the House.

We have, as a matter of fact, this past week, Mr. Speaker, met with the Consulate General of Japan. The Premier met with the Consulate General, who is very knowledgeable and looks forward to opportunities for tourism, trade and access in the territory. So we are working on issues. We have encouraged Condor to maintain their two flights here, and now the member wants to take off for Switzerland. So I wish him well on that aspect.

He talks about the efforts with respect to White Pass, and I know my colleague, the Member of Infrastructure, and I are looking at options and opportunities there.

The trolley — we’re all aware of the trolley situation, so I won’t be discussing that.

He suggested that there has been a reduction to museums O&M, and that’s not the case. As a matter of fact, in Dawson, Mr. Chair, we have provided an additional $11,000 to enhance the gift shop operation with the goal of increasing income revenue for the museum.

The museum strategy, again, will provide guidance to the government as to how to deal specifically on a museum-by-museum basis, as well as First Nation cultural heritage centres and other interpretation centres.

So, we’re looking forward and don’t want to prejudge what Yukoners directly have to say. I value all opinions. I value all input that I hear when listening to Yukoners and, believe it or not, that also includes the Member for Klondike.

Business, Tourism and Culture is doing an incredible job, I think, in the restructuring and the renewal, and they are coming together solidly and collectively, and working long, hard hours in the marketing branch and in the other branches, Mr. Chair.

We’re actively working directly with Air North to promote their new air service to Vancouver and Alberta, by providing market research, connecting Air North with the travel trade, facilitating partnerships with stakeholders and regular bimonthly meetings to develop marketing strategies, plans and activities directly with Air North. The department’s contribution in 2002-03 will include the provisions of human resource, research and connections to the travel trade, as well as — I’m sorry that the Member for Klondike feels that $250,000 on gateway promotion is just not enough. It really is unfortunate that there is a lack of recognition of the efforts of department people alone. Again, I’ll cut out the equation of the government, because it doesn’t matter what this government does, the member opposite is the voice of doom and gloom. He feels there is no positive aspect to the exercises that we conduct.

It does get, as I’ve expressed — and the Chair himself knows that I have wondered about how to work a little more collaboratively and collectively in this House in listening to ideas and suggestions from members opposite in their questions during Question Period and in their questions during debate, and how we can achieve what everybody ultimately wants — a better life for Yukoners, a more comfortable life, more work and activities, which my colleagues from Energy, Mines and Resources and Community Services have indicated that we do have people working in the territory and doing a great job.

So, we will continue to pursue those activities. It’s rather disappointing that the members opposite are refusing to recognize, in a very positive way — and they should be proud of the efforts that have gone on by, yes, the previous government, by this government, by the city, by the federal government, in collectively coming to the realization that we have the capability to host a major event like the Canada Winter Games — a huge event — and have put money behind the desires to have that. $30 million is going to be spent directly in the territory over the next five years, as it is just five years away when we will be hosting the Games.

The Games are going to be an incredible feature for the territory; it’s going to put the territory on the map, not only in the athletic world, but as a destination. I think this is an endorsement that the territory has skills and abilities, that the territory has a wonderful population of Yukoners with open arms wanting to put on and host such an activity.

So, I am disappointed in the tone of questioning from the Member for Klondike, but then I won’t give up hoping that, someday, that negativity promoted by the Member for Klondike may change and turn around.

Mr. McRobb:   I think that outburst was uncalled for, frankly. I heard what the Member for Klondike had to say, and a lot of it was constructive, like extending the railway into Whitehorse, which is a good, constructive idea. I didn’t hear the Member for Klondike attack people in the department; I heard him propose a challenge to this Liberal government, the political level, the people across the way, to get out and do something to promote the territory rather than trying to ride the coattails of federal politicians and hardworking volunteers in the territory who have worked to bring the Canada Winter Games to town in 2007.

I have a few questions. I want to begin with the area of conventions. We do know that the Yukon Convention Bureau does a lot of terrific work for the territory. The last time I met with people from the bureau, I was told they were successful in the last 14 bids — I believe it was at that time, which is very remarkable, considering the Yukon is competing with very large jurisdictions like Alberta, British Columbia and so on, to host conventions. I really think the people in the Convention Bureau deserve a lot of credit for the success they are bringing to the territory in succeeding with these conventions.

I would like to ask the minister about what I believe is known as the convention opportunities fund. Can he give us an update on the status of that fund and how much money is in the budget for this coming fiscal year?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I am pleased that the member opposite recognizes the good and positive efforts of the Yukon Convention Bureau. As the member may or may not know, we do provide the Convention Bureau with $200,000 in support to promote conventions here in the territory. With respect to the specific fund that the member is asking about, I will have to get back to him with details.

Mr. McRobb:   This is rather unsatisfactory. This was a question more than a month ago to the minister in Question Period. Obviously the minister didn’t find it important enough to request information in this area, and that is rather disturbing, because a fund to promote conventions in the territory by private individuals, and so on, as I believe this program was doing, is something that is important.

At the time, Mr. Chair, it was alleged the Liberal government cancelled funding for this program, so for the minister to stand up now, more than a month later, and say he still doesn’t know what’s going on really raises some red flags.

I want to ask the minister what his government is doing to specifically promote conventions in the area of Haines Junction. As we know, this community really invested heavily along the lines of conventions in the town. Its major community infrastructure under the previous CAP program was to build the convention centre in the community, and it’s rather unfortunate, Mr. Chair, to look back on the past few years and see how unutilized this building is. Its potential is great. It could be hosting many, many more conventions.

I’d like to ask the minister what he is doing to specifically help fill up this building, to help promote conventions for this region.

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   As I just mentioned in the previous answer, we do provide the Yukon Convention Bureau $200,000 to promote Yukon as a destination for conventions in the territory, and in their promotional material all locations in the territory capable of hosting conventions are included in there.

So, the Convention Bureau, I think, does an admirable job in seeking, and their success rate this year in going after conventions is that they have sought conventions and have scored eight conventions for the territory this year.

I believe that all locations capable of holding conventions are contained in the materials.

Mr. McRobb:   Mr. Chair, it’s obvious the government isn’t doing anything specific to help promote conventions in the Kluane region for Haines Junction and is leaving it all to the Yukon Convention Bureau.

I’d like to follow up on the previously mentioned fund. Mr. Chair, the "convention opportunities fund", I believe it’s called. Can the minister undertake to provide us with a list of successful applications for the past year or two in this program or to bodies who were funded under this program, however it might work? Can he undertake to get back to us with that information?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Yes, Mr. Chair.

Mr. McRobb:   I want to ask the minister about cultural centres, something I asked the previous Tourism minister about, specifically with regard to Haines Junction. Can the minister give us an update on what’s happening there?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Mr. Speaker, I am assuming that the Member for Kluane wants an answer specifically relevant to his jurisdiction. The heritage branch, along with an exhibit consultant, has been working with the First Nation and the museum society to move this joint project forward. The First Nation and community members have been consulted on various design concepts and options. A design concept has been adopted by the First Nation and will include a First Nation cultural exhibit area, a reception/common area, a theatre, a multi-purpose area, a classroom area and access to outdoor interpretation and demonstrations. These areas will be connected to the existing museum.

Mr. McRobb:   I’m just trying to figure out where the museum is in Haines Junction. As far as I know, there isn’t one. There is one being built and it has been in progress for several years now. Perhaps the minister is referring to the convention centre. Just a simple nod would do. Is that what he meant?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   No, it’s not connected to the convention centre. It’s the Kluane Museum of Natural History expansion. That’s exactly what we’re talking about here.

Mr. McRobb:   The minister is a little further up the road in Burwash Landing. My question was specifically to Haines Junction. I will be getting to Burwash Landing, but Haines Junction is on the road first. Can the minister give us an update on that?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I don’t believe anything specifically with a cultural centre is occurring in Haines Junction at this time.

Mr. McRobb:   Can the minister undertake to get back to me with more detail on the one in Burwash Landing, such as cost estimates, possible contributions from the Yukon government, and so on. Unless he has the figures at hand, can he undertake to get back — a simple nod to that?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   The department will contribute $50,000 from the Yukon museum assistance program to the Kluane Museum of Natural History. This contribution will cover the cost of architectural plans for the expansion, including the First Nation cultural centre and necessary upgrades to the museum.

Mr. McRobb:   Right, Mr. Chair, I did understand that there was a study in progress. Are there any plans in Beaver Creek? I know this is also a priority of the White River First Nation. Can the minister give us an update on that?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   The only update that I can provide the member is that, with respect to Beaver Creek, there is nothing planned at this time.

Mr. McRobb:   I would like to ask the minister about scenic viewpoints. I know this is something also dealt with in the Department of Environment. Is the Department of Tourism planning the development of any in the territory? And just to get the minister on the same wavelength, one possible example is in the area of Duke Meadows. That would be a very strategic location to offer visitors a very interesting viewpoint because that area is one of the only areas in southern Yukon that was formally part of the Beringia. Can the minister indicate if the department is doing anything along these lines?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   The department is working in cooperation with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment determines the sites for wildlife viewing primarily and some of the wildlife-viewing sites are quite large, and the Department of Business, Tourism and Culture does provide signage as well. So there is a cooperative effort between the two departments.

Mr. McRobb:   Can the minister undertake to provide us with material outlining the priority list of any such viewpoints that are being considered?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Yes, I will provide a list.

Mr. McRobb:   I would like to ask the minister about the museum strategy and follow up the Barkley report recommendations. One of those recommendations was to ensure quicker advance of operating funds to our museums earlier in the year so they may meet payroll and start-up costs. I understand that that is not happening in a lot of situations. Can the minister give us a date by which museums should be receiving this early cheque each year?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   The fact is that the museum strategy is out for public review, and I don’t want to presuppose what the public opinion will be on that strategy.

I look forward to a response from both the Heritage Resources Board as well as the YHMA on the strategy, and I am very sure that it will be very useful when we do get the information back and really have a good, hard look at how they’re feeling with respect to the museums in the territory — the existing conditions and recommendations for improvement in some of these. As well, staffing, I believe, is part of the study.

The member is also asking — and I know that I have heard this request from both the Heritage Resources Board and the board of the association with respect to getting cheques out to museums at a quicker pace, and we have done that. As a matter of fact, I presented a cheque to the Heritage Resources Board a considerable period of time earlier than has been the past practice.

Mr. McRobb:   Mr. Chair, as the minister just indicated, it has been past practice, and that’s why I’m asking for a date. In regard to the Golden Circle campaign, this is one of the bright spots that people in my riding are looking at to help increase the rubber-tire traffic in the region.

I know we’re running short of time, Mr. Chair, so I’d like to ask the minister if he would undertake to get back to me with some material that includes all advertising material associated with this campaign, along with any statistics the minister might have about the prognosis for the success of this program for this summer, and anything like that, Mr. Chair, would be welcome. Can the minister undertake to do that?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I gather a sense of urgency with the member opposite expediting debate on this budget, and I will get back to the member in writing.

Mr. McRobb:   Just one more question, and that is regarding the Marine Liability Act. I would assume by now that the minister is up to speed on this matter. I would like him to provide us with a brief explanation of where this is at and answer two specific questions. Who is going to insure small-time operators, since I understand AON Insurance, Reed Stenhouse Insurance, has pulled out of the market; and with the elimination of liability waivers, what does the government plan to do to fill that gap?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I’m very aware of the marine liability situation. As a matter of fact, that was one of the significant issues that Yukon brought up at the tourism ministers conference in Halifax, and we have also sent written material to the Minister of Transportation about the concern as it relates to industry, especially wilderness tourism industry in Yukon. We’re also hearing from the Tourism Industry Association.

We are working. We’re very concerned, as is industry.

Deputy Chair:   Any further debate?

Mr. McLarnon:   I’ll start right now by saying my express hope when I walked in today, as it is our last day, was to keep this a rhetoric-free zone.

First, I watched a nine-minute piece of rhetoric launched at the Member for Kluane, so that is going to cost the minister nine more questions on this today.

Now for keeping the minister accountable, and making sure that we understand today, when anybody attacks the policies of the government on this side, no one on this side is attacking the employees of the government. We are here to ask the reasons why we spend money, what has been done, and all policies of every government have other sides to critique. Let me give an example.

The critique we’re going to have right now will start with a very basic question. Why was the Alaskan marketing campaign one and a half months late?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   One of the major reasons I am concerned with is the fact that we do have limited financial resources within the government, and we wanted to be very strategic. The original request by the Tourism Industry Association back in the fall of last year was for $1.5 million. We did not have $1.5 million discretionary dollars to spend. We approached the industry and asked specifically where they thought we should be marketing to address the needs and concerns that the industry had.

It did take a little longer than I wished it had, I would agree, but in polling the industry within the territory, I heard from operators in Dawson that they felt closer to home — mainly Alaska — would be a good market to focus in on. So we initiated the $343,000 Welcome Alaska campaign. I do wish it could have started earlier, but it didn’t.

As a result of additional concerns that I heard at the TIAY annual general meeting, as well as seeking out the personal opinions of hotel operators, there was an additional concern we should be taking advantage of the additional air access to Alberta. So we managed to find another $250,000 for the gateways program in support of the new access from Alberta, and also taking advantage of the initiative for the gateway from Vancouver.

Mr. McLarnon:   Thanks. I guess that’s the reason people have questions about them. They may be very good motives. We just want to know, because there certainly has been a lot of flops, lots of programs that haven’t delivered one tourist.

Now, I guess the question I have is, have we come around, and can the minister ask what measurement criteria we’re going to have for both of these to find out if they actually work?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   That is a very good question. I want to state another qualifier to the Welcome Alaska program. We had originally designed the program strategic to Juneau, Skagway, Haines and Fairbanks, and there was test marketing done in those four areas. Although we’re going to continue the campaign in Fairbanks, as well, it won’t be to the extent that it will be in Haines, Skagway and Juneau, because those are also port areas that we could take advantage of, hopefully gathering some cruise ship — so there was a delay because we had to restructure the focus just a little bit. So that was another reason.

There is proficiency within the department, people who do have skills and abilities in actually quantifying the results that we do get from our campaigns, and we also have those results from our gateway cities, as well. I would be more than willing to provide the member with the details of how that is determined.

Mr. McLarnon:   Thanks, and that could be sent by legislative return, because it’s important when we’re spending over $550,000, in this case, on new marketing initiatives, that we understand the basic fact that people usually make travel decisions six months to a year in advance.

So we need to measure these ones because, within a small period of time like we have, we are counting on impulse-buy. Unfortunately, impulse-buy is the lowest form of return. So what we may see here — and unfortunately there have been programs like this, and I’ll use the example of a winter tourism marketing program where we launched ads into Toronto for winter tourism, and they produced one lead. The program was $400,000 and the response was $4,000.

The reality is we could spend an awful lot of money and not produce results. That is why the call — even last year, when the tourism industry called for the $1.5 million injection into the industry, it was doubtful that it would actually draw more visitors here on a really sustained basis. This is why we are looking at it and saying, while we understand this is a response to an industry request, we do have questions as to whether it is effective, because piecemeal programs often produce exactly that: piecemeal results.

We applaud the government for trying, and we want to know if it worked. All of this information is useful for next time if we have to do another program in an emergency, and there are often tons of emergencies.

Currently, unfortunately we are still saddled with the fact that we are being affected by September 11, and we will be seeing numbers dropping down to the point where there are going to be companies going bankrupt this year. Companies have already called me, and it is going to be a tough year, through no fault of the government and I certainly don’t blame them. At the same time, there is a call for assistance possibly out on the road to do special marketing for areas that may not be covered. At the same time, this is coming with a change in the government sign policy.

Is there any possibility, or can we just have the assurance, that no changes to the government’s sign policy will happen or will occur to cause businesses to take down their signs this summer while the people are still trying to survive September 11?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   I will confer with the Minister of Infrastructure and get that information back over to the member by way of legislative return.

Mr. McLarnon:   We’re not going to go very much into the marketing side. Fortunately, a lot of the marketing decisions are better left in the hands of professionals. We know that there hasn’t been a large amount of marketing measurements because of the lack of a strong marketing research component in the department, and we understand that that’s going to be improved. Unfortunately, we have only been able to depend on visitor border crossings for a lot of our raw statistics, and we have introduced a number of factors at a constant level to show how those border crossings can be skewed or not reflect the true value of tourism in the Yukon Territory.

The exit survey is very good. Unfortunately, it’s expensive. Every five years, we get it, and that’s what we work on. So I won’t go into it, because the statistics can be measured. I will be asking for the measurement criteria on these two new programs, but there are other areas of this department that I am interested in, and the first one is heritage. We’ll go straight to heritage.

This government, and especially the Premier — and I was in attendance when this happened — made a promise to the heritage community at Hellaby Hall during the election that they would raise the level of heritage funding to pre-NDP government levels, which would be approximately $6 million over the span of the Yukon territorial government’s term. What we have seen is a reduction in heritage spending. We are seeing it going farther behind.

How does the government, in the next two years, possibly expect to keep that commitment, because the heritage community is definitely asking, where is the commitment, where is the money. Just to remind, again, all members across the way, they keep some promises — like in Grey Mountain School — but equivalent promises in costs, like heritage funding, have not been kept. So, when we hear that the government is keeping their promises, we know they’re cherry-picking. They’re keeping some, not all, and the heritage community is very concerned.

So, I’m going to ask the minister: what is the long-range plan to keep that promise?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   After the renewal, I did ask the department to do a detailed review of both operation and maintenance on heritage funding levels as well as capital funding. As I’m sure the member is aware, capital is primarily based on project-specific activities, so it can go up and down. It was a real credit to the folks in the department in digging out this information for me.

There does appear to be a period — I believe the member was asking since 1995-96 — where there was a certain level. Quite frankly, the numbers are indicating that at least since 1999 — and I could provide this information. As a matter of fact, I do have graphs here that I could provide the member with, as well as at any time provide a detailed briefing on this specifically — how they arrived at these numbers — because it is quite an exercise to say this is for heritage, this is for culture, and try to keep it specific to what the member is asking for.

So I do have these graphs that I will send over to the member, as well as offer to provide a detailed briefing.

Really, there is an indication that we haven’t reduced spending to heritage, and as a matter of fact, spending from 1999-2000 to 2000-01 jumped up and then jumped up in 2001-02 and remained relatively the same in 2002-03. So I could provide these graphs as well as an offer to sit down and detail how these numbers were arrived at.

Mr. McLarnon:  Unfortunately that doesn’t answer the question about the $4-million additional that was supposed to be placed into it over and above, when we talk about heritage funding when it was promised at the peak until today. The reality is every museum — if we have not reduced heritage funding, we’ve certainly reduced it at the grassroots level where it meets people, because every museum’s funding has been down since 1995. Every heritage organization’s funding has been down since 1995. So if all this government has done is increased the amount of money in bureaucracy to deliver heritage programming to the grassroots, that’s not excusable. We’re talking about money to the heritage community, not within the department. We know the department has grown, so that will not reflect — and it has — the department has grown since 1995; there are more people in it. So the reflection of whether there is money being spent on heritage has to then take out the money spent on the government, because on the ground that doesn’t reflect. I’ll see the charts; I’ll happily look at the charts and I’ll certainly get the charts to every person in the heritage community if the person will provide it because we know there will be arguments on the ground. The reality does not reflect the numbers.

So the problem is that the government, sooner or later, is going to be on the hook for very large heritage bills if they don’t start taking care of their obligations now.

My next question is based on chapter 13 of the umbrella final agreement, the catch-up and keep-up clause. Currently adding up the heritage costs that could be incurred from buildings not even built yet and buildings already built, the heritage branch could be larger than the marketing branch and the cultural branch put together for the amount of money we are on the hook for in the umbrella final agreement. Has the government assessed those costs?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   We are very aware of those costs and we are very aware of chapter 19.

The previous Minister of Tourism and myself, as Minister of Business, Tourism and Culture, are very aware and cognizant of that fact and are making every effort — as the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes had indicated — to take advantage of additional dollars available from the federal government to address these needs and concerns. We feel that they are obligated under the umbrella final agreement as well. There is that approach that we are taking.

I have been advised that, with respect to the previous question — I hope it isn’t a dispute between members, but the Premier never said that within our mandate there would be $4 million additional to heritage at Hellaby Hall. There was no commitment whatsoever made, but we are certainly aware, as a result of the museum strategy, as a result of chapter 19, as a result of the Heritage Resources Board and the YHMA — we are aware that there is a crying need to address both heritage and cultural resources in the communities. I am eagerly awaiting the museums report and I am meeting more frequently with the Heritage Resources Board as well as the YHMA.

Mr. McLarnon:   There won’t be a dispute between members. In fact, all the minister has to do is go over to the YHMA, where they have the transcripts of it. And the question asked actually indicated that there was an expectation of $4 million, in which the answer was given. The Premier may not have said it, but the question indicated it. So if the minister ever wants to see the transcripts of the Hellaby Hall conference to find out what happened, I suggest he read them.

Now, the problem is that the heritage community voted for this government expecting attention, expecting the resources, expecting museums and facilities of heritage resource value to be protected and to be funded better. They now are firmly saying that they aren’t.

We have the museum strategy, which I believe is just another way, because many of the things in the strategy, in fact, are fixed with money, but it’s just another way to delay, again, this report — this money commitment. Because what we see in there — a lot of the things in the museum strategy — like burnout of volunteers, are related to trying to get money. They’re related to filling out endless grants. They’re related to sitting in board meetings, going through the minutes to fill out money and applications. It’s no wonder we have burnout. They are always working on their next funding proposal.

That’s the problem with project-driven proposals, too. It’s very easily identified — when we looked at the Project Yukon. It is that project-driven proposals only lead to more projects to continue the money coming in. So what you do is have proposal writers for people trying to meet O&M costs coming up with a proposal that might allow them to do a capital project that will fill in some of their O&M costs. So we’ve got people ranging all over the place. Why? Because there’s no consistent form of money.

This year, the question I’ll have to sort of prove the point — I’ll go on to the next one. The point of the matter is that often there was more money being spent on marketing the museums than actually running the museums by this government. So the point of the matter is this: can I ask the government how much money we spent on marketing museums this year? And this would be through the Yukon time publications. How much of this was heritage branch funding that was separate and had gone into our Yukon publications?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   Again, that would be something that we’d have to spend a little time digging out all the specific things. It’s all within the marketing funding.

In response to the concerns that the member brought up about the types of forms, the endless, repetitious, project-specific forms that volunteers have to fill out, I have heard this time and again from the YHMA as well as from the Heritage Resources Board. I have sat down with department officials to look at how we could create efficiencies there, how we can involve these people so that we can cut back on the amount of paper that we are expecting from them. So that is underway as well.

I know there has been some disagreement on just what degree of information we need if we are giving money to a museum, the degree of information that is required and the assurances that money will be allocated as per the project. We are working out those details and I know that the heritage resources branch is certainly aware of that as well.

Mr. McLarnon:  The context of the question I was asking, though, is, if the minister actually wants to find out what’s wrong with heritage, the minister should go and find out how much money was spent on marketing museums rather than keeping the museums going. This summer is going to be a crucial one. Museums have an operating grant that they know they will not be able to get by on because visitor traffic will be so low. Unfortunately, museums are not like government. Their pockets are not deep, so they will cut services, which means that we cut product to the Yukon Territory, to the visitors, which means it’s a less satisfying visit.

The whole idea is we shouldn’t be promoting attractions that can’t even afford to run without government assistance. The numbers haven’t gone up. I confirm again that even though we did see September 11, even though the government has admitted that numbers will be down this year, even though the government knows that a certain percentage of income for museums comes from attendance, has any movement been taken to increase the projected shortfall in attendance numbers?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:   The projections for visitations this year are all over. It really — you get different numbers from different sectors that you ask.

We know, for instance, that the ship travel this year, especially on the Inside Passage — because the ships have offered such incredible rates for sailings this year, we know that the additional disposable income that people using the ships isn’t there. They will probably stay right on the boats. But our efforts nonetheless are to encourage them to at least make a day or two trip to Whitehorse or to some of our communities. Our air traffic — when I was in Rendezvous, even talking to the wholesalers, the wholesaler from Germany was very upbeat and felt that his numbers from Germany are going to remain relatively the same. Yet, when I talk with the wholesaler from Switzerland — because they suffered an event in one of their local parliaments there where a gunman went in and shot a few of their local politicians. That had a profound effect. That had never happened in Switzerland before. They are also celebrating a centenary of some sort in Switzerland, so the Swiss wholesaler said that there probably will be a decline in numbers.

Britain felt that they weren’t quite sure how many would be travelling this way. It’s very, very hard to say exactly — you talk to the hoteliers and they say that their numbers are down 30 percent. Somebody else’s numbers are 10 percent. So, it’s very, very hard to realize the true impact on our tourism industry here this year.

Mr. McLarnon:   Well, have department officials not already said that we expect a 20 to 30 percent drop? Can’t we use those numbers?

The reason I’m asking is that we know it’s going to be down. Everybody in the industry knows it’s going to be down. People are ordering less inventory; people are hiring fewer staff; they’re being cautious. The problem is that the museums don’t have that ability. They have to deliver the services or close.

Since September 11, all projections have shown that it was going to be a cut year, but we didn’t see any increase to museum funding to cover that difference. We did hear of some gift shops, but again, gift shops are dependent on traffic. So we’re going to be sitting in a situation where museums are going to experience deficits this year. Some of them can’t experience deficits — their non-profit rules don’t allow them to, so they either cut staff or close.

The minister has a chance to be proactive here. Will the minister at least sit down with YHMA, find out what the projections really are, then find a way to keep a small pool of money there to get them through what we have gone through. The idea of this summer for the entire industry is to survive. That’s all we want to do. The problem is, museums don’t have the ability to make that adjustment in the same way private industry does.

It’s a final suggestion, and I’ll drop it after this, and hopefully the minister will take it to heart. Will the minister please look at ensuring the museums we have survive this year? I’ll leave it at that.

Mr. Chair, I am finished. I believe there will be some movement on the lines if you give me a chance to take the Chair.

Deputy Chair:   Is there any further debate?

Mr. Keenan:   Pursuant to Standing Order 14.3, I request the unanimous consent of the Committee to deem all lines and title of Vote 54, Department of Business, Tourism and Culture, cleared or carried as required.

Unanimous consent re deeming lines read and agreed to

Chair:   Mr. Keenan has requested unanimous consent to deem all lines and title in Vote 54 cleared or carried as required. Is there unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members:  Agreed.

Chair:   There is unanimous consent. All lines and title in Vote 54 are therefore cleared or carried as required.

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures for the Department of Business, Tourism and Culture in the amount of $14,401,000 agreed to

Chair:   We will proceed to the bill.

On Clause 1

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   I move that you report Bill No. 9, entitled Second Appropriation Act, 2002-03, out of Committee without amendment.

Chair:   It has been moved by the hon. Ms. Duncan that the Second Appropriation Act, 2002-03, be reported out of Committee without amendment.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   We will now proceed to Bill No. 65, entitled Act to Amend the Dental Profession Act.

Bill No. 65 — Act to Amend the Dental Profession Act

Chair:  Is there any general debate?

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   Mr. Chair, based on an agreement among House leaders and pursuant to Standing Order 14.3, I request the unanimous consent of the Committee to deem all clauses and the title of Bill No. 65 read and carried.

Unanimous consent re deeming clauses and title read and agreed to

Chair:   Mr. McLachlan has requested unanimous consent to deem all clauses and title of Bill No. 65 read and carried. Is there unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members:  Agreed.

Chair:   There is unanimous consent. The clauses and title of Bill No. 65 are read and carried.

Clauses 1 to 5 and title deemed to have been read and agreed to

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:   Mr. Chair, I move that you report Bill No. 65, Act to Amend the Dental Profession Act, out of Committee without amendment.

Chair:   It has been moved by Mrs. Edelman that Bill No. 65, Act to Amend the Dental Profession Act, be reported out of Committee without amendment.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   Bill No. 62, Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act.

Bill No. 62 — Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act

Chair:   I will now call forward Bill No. 62, Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act. Is there any general debate?

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   Mr. Chair, based on an agreement among House leaders and pursuant to Standing Order 14.3, I request the unanimous consent of the Committee to deem all clauses and the title of Bill No. 62 read and carried.

Unanimous consent re deeming clauses and title read and agreed to

Chair:   Mr. McLachlan has requested unanimous consent to deem all clauses of Bill No. 62 read and carried. Is there unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members:  Agreed.

Chair:   There is unanimous consent. The clauses and title of Bill No. 62 are read and carried.

Clauses 1 to 4 and title deemed to have been read and agreed to

Hon. Ms. Buckway:   Mr. Chair, I move that you report Bill No. 62, Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act, out of Committee without amendment.

Chair:   It has been moved by Ms. Buckway that Bill No. 62, Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act, be reported out of Committee without amendment.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   We would like to move to Bill No. 60, Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Bill No. 60 — Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act

Chair:   We will now open debate on Bill No. 60, Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Is there any general debate?

Mr. Fairclough:   I only have a few things to say about this act. The only question of substance in this bill is, why? What was the point of removing ATIPP from libraries to the archives, to Infrastructure? Like so much of renewal, the government hasn’t explained how this will make government more open and accountable or how this change will serve them better. There is certainly no guarantee that this will result in better service to the public. The government’s own employees aren’t convinced, Mr. Chair, and we see that about 88 percent of them don’t believe that renewal will improve services to the public. Eighty-one percent said they didn’t like the consultation process that was used, and we certainly agree with that majority view.

We’re not convinced that this multi-million dollar departmental juggling act will improve things for the public. We don’t believe that the Liberal government really listened to some of the employees any more than it listened to the opposition or the Yukon people.

The official opposition will not be voting in support of this bill.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   With all due respect to the member opposite, unfortunately he is in error on this particular legislation. The present Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act assigns procedural responsibilities to the "archivist" — and I use that word in quotes. This amendment simply reassigns the procedural responsibility to a records manager.

It’s simply a change in title, and the reason for this is that the vast majority of information involved in access to information requests resides in the active records of the government as opposed to those preserved in the archives.

So this change in particular will provide better service to the public and better administration of the access to information and protection of privacy requests, because this change — the person who deals with the ATIPP requests from the public is someone who is familiar with the government’s records and has good day-to-day contacts with all the departmental staff who manage the records.

It will simplify the internal communications involved in dealing with the requests and improve government’s ability to respond quickly to simple requests. This amendment is strictly a procedural matter, dealing with how information requests are processed. It has no impact at all on the rights and the responsibilities that are enshrined in the act. It is, however, a matter of confidence, as this and the other five bills related to renewal all deal with the money matters and confidence in the government, and I encourage the member opposite to reconsider his position on this particular bill, as this particular bill will improve service to the public under this particular legislation.

Chair:   Is there any further general debate?

Seeing no further debate, we’ll proceed then with line-by-line.

On Clause 1

Hon. Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I move that you report Bill No. 60, Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, out of Committee without amendment.

Chair:   It has been moved by Ms. Duncan that Bill No. 60, Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, be reported out of Committee without amendment.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. McLachlan:   Bill No. 58, Act to Amend the Economic Development Act.

Bill No. 58 —

Act to Amend the Economic Development Act