MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_01CAF29D.23270EF0" This document is a Web archive file. If you are seeing this message, this means your browser or editor doesn't support Web archive files. For more information on the Web archive format, go to http://officeupdate.microsoft.com/office/webarchive.htm ------=_NextPart_01CAF29D.23270EF0 Content-Location: file:///C:/B1334E70/220.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
=
=
=
Speaker: I will now call the House to order. We will proceed at this t= ime with prayers.
Prayers
DAI= LY ROUTINE
Speaker: We will proceed at this time with the Order Paper.
Tributes.
TRI=
BUTES
In remembrance of Marjorie Fisher
Hon. Ms. Horne:= 195; Mr. Spe= aker, I would like all members to recognize Mickey Fisher and his daughters who a= re in the House. I have a tribute to wife and mother, Marjorie Alvina Fisher.<= /p>
On behalf of all members, I rise to pay tribute to Marjorie=
Alvina
Fisher, the mother of Adrian and Lila, grandmother of Jamie and Jacob, and =
the
wife of Mickey, who is well known to this Assembly, having served as the MLA
for
I would like you to join me in welcoming husband Mickey Fis=
her,
daughters Adrian Fisher and Lila Nichol and Marjorie’s good friend, D=
inah
Laing.
Applause
Hon. Ms. Horne:=
195;
Marjorie Alvina Cole was born=
in
Bella Coola,
Marjorie marri=
ed
Mickey Fisher on Watson
In 1973, daugh=
ter
Adrian arrived and in 1974, daughter Lila was born. Marjorie called both gi=
rls
by one name: Adrilila and thus bypassed that thing that the other parents do
— calling the wrong name for the child she wanted to come.
Marjorie worke=
d in the
local daycare in
Marjorie was a=
n avid
sportsperson. She enjoyed basketball and softball and was a regular at the
local and various community curling rinks throughout
Marjorie loved
snowmobiling and got her first machine in 1969 and continued snowmobiling a=
ll
her life. In 1983, the Fisher family moved from
In 1986, they =
moved to
the
In 2002, Micke=
y and
Marjorie relocated to Stewart, B.C., where they lived for five years. While
living in Stewart, Marjorie, with her love of sports, played badminton.
In 2007, Micke=
y and
Marjorie decided to leave Stewart, return to the
One year, Marj=
orie and
her daughter, Lila, walked the
Marjorie was a
charming and calm human being. She was quiet and steadfast, smart as a whip,
funny and clever. Marjorie was always ready to listen and chances are that =
when
you and Marjorie were talking, it was inevitably always about you, never ab=
out
her. By being a steadfast friend, Marjorie made many, many good and lifelong
friends wherever she lived — Bella Coola, Watson Lake, Whitehorse,
Stewart, Faro and indeed throughout the Yukon.
Always up for =
good
times with close friends and family, she had a great sense of humour, as I =
am
sure anyone who met her will attest to. Her winning smile will be missed. S=
he
played the piano, loved to dance and was a dedicated rock and roll fan, and=
in
particular an Elvis Presley fan. She loved her grandchildren, Jamie and Jac=
ob,
and they in turn adored their beloved grandmother. Marjorie’s ashes w=
ill
be scattered privately by her family at her parent’s gravesite in Bel=
la
Coola and on the Little River, Yukon at a later date. Little River Roadhous=
e is
along the old Dawson Trail between
Margorie will =
surely
be missed. God gives us love, something to love he lends us. He lent us
Marjorie Alvina Fisher to love.
[Tlingit spoken]
Rest well, Mar=
jorie.
Thank you.
In recognition of Police Week
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> <=
/span>I
rise today on behalf of all members to pay tribute to Police Week in
Recent events =
have
challenged public confidence in the RCMP. These events should not detract f=
rom
the positive contribution made by members of M Division, who work diligently
and put themselves in harm’s way to keep our communities in
In looking ove=
r the
honour roll of officers who have given their life in the line of duty, I was
reminded of the officers who have died on duty in
The Government=
of
Yukon will continue to support the RCMP in their efforts to make our commun=
ities,
neighbourhoods and homes safe and healthy. Günilschish.
Speaker: Any further tributes?
Introduction of
visitors?
Returns or doc=
uments
for tabling?
TABLING RETURNS
Hon. Mr. Lang: I have for tabling the Fleet Vehicle
Agency business plan for 2010-11.
I also have for
tabling the Queen’s Printer Agency business plan for the year 2010-11=
.
Speaker: Any further documents for tabling?
Any reports of
committees?
Are there any
petitions?
Are there any =
bills to
be introduced?
Any notices of=
motion?
Is there a sta=
tement
by a minister?
This then brin=
gs us to
Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation/ATCO
Mr.
McRobb: Mr. Speaker, the Premier
continues to deny that he tried to sell out Yukon
The evidence is clear and the
Premier’s denials don’t stand up. But there is more. He still
hasn’t tabled the confidential documents promised to us last fall. Wh=
en
will he be tabling these documents or will he continue to hide them?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Mr. Speaker, I think what is really hard=
is
the Member for Kluane’s ability to actually understand the facts,
evidence and information that is put before him. The member says that there
were secret negotiations. Witnesses before this House refuted that and poin=
ted
out to the member opposite that there were some discussions going on with <=
/span>
Mr. Speaker, t=
he list
goes on. The member himself tabled evidence. Contrary to the claim that the
Member for Kluane is making that we were selling assets, the very documents
tabled by the member opposite refute that claim and show clearly that the g=
overnment
was not selling any assets. What is really hard, Mr. Speaker, is the Member=
for
Kluane and his Liberal colleagues’ ability to grasp the facts.
Mr. McRobb: Mr. Speaker, the witnesses confirmed the
facts. Yukoners have lost trust in this Premier and this government because
they continue to deny the facts.
Everyone else =
is wrong
and only the Yukon Party is right. He said the four YEC board members were =
wrong.
They resigned in protest over his attempts to privatize Yukon Energy, yet t=
his
government remains locked in hard denial. He said the former
Extensive inte=
rnal
documents prove his involvement in negotiations with
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Public inquiries are an instrument of gr=
eat
significance and importance when they are required, but for this type of
— it’s hard to put a name to this because there would be an iss=
ue
of Standing Orders, but I think I’ve been pretty clear in what this is
really all about and it does not serve the level of this institution;
therefore, there’s no reason to call a public inquiry.
But the members
opposite have every opportunity to further review this issue. Their very own
leader, the Liberal leader, is the chair of the Public Accounts Committee. =
They
should just go to work.
Mr. McRobb: It’s a sad state of affairs to aga=
in witness
this government’s continued denial of the facts, refusal to table
documents, refusal to honour the principle of complete disclosure, and refu=
sal
to call for a public inquiry. This Yukon Party government is allowing itsel=
f to
run and hide from the truth, and this should not be tolerated in our suppos=
edly
open and accountable democracy. The Premier continues to deny the meeting
records, the letters to
It’s tim=
e for an
independent public inquiry to finally get to the bottom of this whole mess.
Will the Premier at least tell us why he won’t call a public inquiry?=
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Well, the short answer, Mr. Speaker R=
12;
and it is really quite simple — there’s no reason to. In fact, =
the
government’s not running from anything. The government has been very
active in its role and responsibilities when it comes to energy, and that
includes investing in energy infrastructure; meeting the supply and demands=
of
the Yukon Territory; meeting the fact that we are growing and challenged to
ensure that we have reliable, affordable electricity for the ratepayer and =
the
consumer; adding large industrial customers to the grid; partnering with
governments like Canada to invest millions of dollars in more infrastructur=
e;
and partnering with the private sector, such as a mining company, to invest
millions further into infrastructure.
The real sad t=
hing
here is that the Liberals are against all those things of great value to th=
e
Question re:
Yukon Energy Corporation/
Mr.
McRobb: Mr. Speaker, the Premier could be caught red-hand=
ed
loading turbines in the back of his truck and heading to
Let’s ex=
amine
the hard evidence so far. On
Despite all th=
is, the
government is still locked in hard denial. Is not his letter thanking the <=
/span>
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
The member’s interpretation of the
letter is really quite interesting, Mr. Speaker, and I challenge the member=
to
show anybody in this territory where in that letter it in fact says what the
Member for Kluane claims.
You know, this=
could
be a lot easier for the Member for Kluane. Stand outside and formally accus=
e me
of being a liar and contravening government policy in this territory about =
privatizing
the Energy Corporation and then he’ll get his inquiry. Show a little
intestinal fortitude. Don’t hide in here behind the immunity of this
institution. Be a man. Go show the
Speaker’s statement
Speaker: Honourable members, before the Hon. Memb=
er for
Kluane starts again here, it’s perfectly acceptable to question the
policies of either side. The representations, however, are starting to get
personal. Honourable members, keep that under control. Member for Kluane, y=
ou
have the floor.
Mr. McRobb: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier prou=
dly
declared his Yukon Party caucus supported his negotiations to privatize our
energy future. This is hard evidence that proves he wasn’t alone in h=
is
privatization plans.
It proves that=
every
single member of his caucus knew about the negotiations and approved of tho=
se
negotiations. They’re all in it together. The Premier told the
The entire Yuk=
on Party
caucus was in this with him. Will the Premier tell Yukoners what he told Al=
bertans
— that his entire caucus was in this with him?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Once again, it is a fruitless exercise to
explain to the member opposite what actually was in a letter he seems to no=
t be
able to decipher. But let’s go further.
Yeah, the whol=
e Yukon Party
government caucus and government, as a team in general, is in all this
together. It is investing millions of dollars in
The member has
referred to openness and transparency. Well, the members have taken issue
recently with appointments to the Yukon Energy Corporation after witnesses =
from
the corporation came before a select committee of this House, presented
evidence and information on a totally independent, open and transparent pro=
cess
to choose those individuals.
The Member for=
Kluane
is in hard denial himself, not the government side. The government is doing=
its
job. It’s too bad the Liberal caucus can’t seem to do theirs.
Mr. McRobb: Well, Mr. Speaker, it sounds like the Pr=
emier
is confused. The only witnesses before this House confirmed that his secret
negotiations went far beyond rationalization. Now, what we have confirmed t=
oday
is that the entire Yukon Party caucus knew and authorized these negotiations
and they are all in it together. His caucus colleagues were there when he
started negotiations, they were there when he continued negotiations, and w=
hen
the scandal was finally exposed, they were there with him when he denied th=
ose
negotiations. They’re all in it together and together they have lost =
the
public’s trust. What’s the Premier afraid of?
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Point of order
Speaker: On a point of order, Minister of Justice.=
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Standing Order 19 (c): persis=
ts in
needless repetition; (g): imputes false, unavowed motives to another member;
(h): uttering a deliberate falsehood; (i): abusive, insulting language in a
context likely to create disorder.
Speaker: On the point of order, does anybody else=
want
in on this?
Speaker’s ruling
Speaker: There is no point of order; it’s s=
imply
a dispute among members.
Mr. McRobb: Mr. Speaker, what’s the Premier =
8212;
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Speaker’s statement
Speaker: Order. Sit down, please. A point of orde=
r is
never disruptive in this Legislative Assembly. Every member has the right to
stand up on a point of order, regardless of whether the Chair decides it is=
or
it isn’t a point of order. Every member has that right, sir — e=
very
member.
Member for Klu=
ane, you
have the floor.
Mr. McRobb: What’s the Premier afraid of? Why
won’t he finally clear the air and call for a public inquiry?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
I think the government side has demonstr=
ated
on a continuing basis that they’re not afraid of anything when it com=
es
to living up to our obligations to the
I think what t=
he
Member for Kluane is confused about and struggling with is the fear that the
Member for Kluane and the Liberals have about actually going out and formal=
ly
making some sort of accusation where they can actually present their eviden=
ce
and those being accused can defend themselves accordingly.
The members op=
posite fear
that because they fear the facts.
Question re: Kinship
care
=
span>Mr.
Cardiff: M=
r.
Speaker, positive ties with family members are a greater force for good than
any other element in a child’s life. Knowing this, dozens of grandpar=
ents
and extended family members throughout the
A year and a h=
alf ago
the minister received a report researching the situation of kinship care in=
the
Hon. Mr. Hart: Yes, we did meet with the group. We=
did
review the report that was provided with regard to this situation in the =
span>
Many of the
recommendations, in some form or another, that were provided by the study a=
re
being implemented in the Child and =
Family
Services Act and can be covered under the extended family process and
provide protection for the children through the extended family process. We=
are
looking very strongly at providing and ensuring that the children of those
families stay within the families — especially from the cultural aspe=
ct
— and that is one of the key focuses of the new Child and Family Services Act.
Mr. Cardiff: Many kinship caregivers do not want to become formal
foster homes, because that would require the children to be in the care and
custody of the government with social workers making important decisions for
their family members. Caregivers point out that they are saving the governm=
ent
millions of dollars in foster home payments, which would have to be paid if
they became foster homes.
One of the soc=
ial
policy recommendations in the report given to the minister was to establish=
a
special category of alternative care for extended families, other than form=
al
foster care. It would be without regard to custody and would allow for
financial, social, training and counselling supports similar to those offer=
ed
in foster homes. This has been done in other jurisdictions with positive
results.
Will the minis=
ter set
up a special category of alternative care for kinship givers?
Hon. Mr. Hart: <=
/span>I
thank the member opposite for the question. We did meet with these individu=
als.
We have had discussions with them. We have looked at their recommendations.=
We
feel that many of the recommendations can be afforded through the new Child and Family Services Act. The=
re are
some of the recommendations that are not going to be addressed under the ne=
w Child and Family Services Act. The=
re are
many reasons why we can’t move forward with some of those issues.
So, in the mea=
ntime,
we are looking at some of the other recommendations that are put forth in t=
he
study to see if in fact there is some value that we can put under the Child and Family Services Act to a=
ssist
the grandparents.
The big issue =
for us
is to ensure that extended family is included, which it is under the new Child and Family Services Act. It =
allows
for children of the family to stay within that family. If the parents are n=
ot
capable of providing that assistance, then the grandparents can and, in many
cases, do provide assistance in that process.
We are looking=
at ways
in which we can help those grandparents in providing respite care. We’=
;re
also looking at other venues in which —
Speaker: Thank you. Final supplementary, please.<= o:p>
Mr. Cardiff: The new Child=
and
Family Services Act allows for agreements with kinship caregivers for
financial and other services to support their caretaking. It sounds good on=
the
surface but the agreements are for children who, without the service outlin=
ed
in the agreement, would be in need of protection. Many of the children were=
in
need of protection before being placed with their kin. In most cases,
that’s why they were placed away from their parents. Now they are bei=
ng
cared for adequately and are not in need of protection. The result is no
agreement, no assistance to the kinship caregivers. Basically they’re
being penalized for doing such a good job.
Will the minis=
ter
reconsider this inflexible policy and give real support to deserving kinship
caregivers who are caring for children who would otherwise be the
responsibility of the minister’s department?
Hon. Mr. Hart: <=
/span>We
on the government side, as well as our department officials, are working wi=
th
all individuals dealing with the care of their children — foster pare=
nts
through our programming, through the parents, the grandparents who are look=
ing
after those individuals. We are looking at assisting and providing that
assistance to all those individuals to ensure the care of the child is being
looked after. That is our focus and that is what we are looking at. That is=
the
reason why, Mr. Speaker, for the first time in 20 years we increased the ra=
te for
foster parents. It was this government that did that and it was this govern=
ment
that provided that process.
Question re:
Deep Creek infrastructure
Mr.
Cathers: I =
have
some questions about infrastructure in the community of Deep Creek. I will
begin by following up with the Minister of Community Services about the pro=
ject
to develop water treatment infrastructure in Deep Creek. Possibilities that
have been considered in the past include a community fill point, a refill
station for fire trucks and, of course, public use. Money is in this
year’s budget for the project but the details of what that project is
going to entail have yet to be made clear. Is the minister able today to
provide me details on what this project entails?
Hon. Mr. Lang: There is an investment that is goin=
g to
be put toward a new well on Deep Creek. I know the figure is roughly $1.5
million, so there is an investment going there. As far as what it’s g=
oing
to service and whether it is going to be a bulk situation or otherwise, I
couldn’t address that today but I could get back to him with an overv=
iew
communication to tell him exactly what investment that will involve.
Mr. Cathers: Another infrastructure issue in Deep
Creek involves safety at the corner near the bridge across Deep Creek. As t=
he
minister knows, this bridge is on the Deep Creek south road. Immediately so=
uth
of the bridge, there’s a sharp curve where there have been at least t=
wo
accidents in recent years due to vehicles flying off the corner.
I personally w=
ent to
the scene of an accident there last fall, where a truck had flipped over on=
to
its roof due to excessive speed around the corner.
Will the minis=
ter
agree to have Highways and Public Works staff take a look at this corner and
consider whether a guardrail or some other measure would be appropriate to =
improve
safety at the corner, and will he commit following up with me in a letter a=
bout
the results of that review?
Hon. Mr. Lang: The Department of Highways and Publ=
ic
Works will certainly be looking at that to do an assessment on exactly what=
the
member has brought to the floor here today.
Mr. Cathers: <=
/span>I
thank the minister for that answer. Another issue in that community is the =
Deep
Creek dump. Last year, the Department of Community Services implemented hou=
rs
of operation and a locked gate at the Deep Creek dump to address some of the
problems that had been occurring before. It has indeed reduced problems that
were occurring, including heavy commercial dumping and unauthorized burning=
at
this facility.
The new operat=
ional
arrangement is a big improvement over what was happening a year ago, and I
appreciate the steps the minister and staff at Community Services have take=
n in
that area.
My question fo=
r the
minister today is whether the department has any plans to make changes this
year in how the facility is being run, such as changes to hours of operatio=
n,
addition of new recycling facilities, et cetera, or whether it will be cont=
inuing
in the same manner as it has been.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Mr. Speaker, the transfer station is
being looked at. We are ordering bins for the Deep Creek transfer station to
improve recycling opportunities at that facility. As well, we are working on
other upgrades. Improving signage, establishing facilities to safely manage
household hazardous waste and upgrading the free store are being considered=
as
part of these improvements. In other words, we are moving on with our
solid-waste action plan, and those are all part of the investment this
government is going to be putting into that facility.
Question re: Auditor
General report
Mr.
Mitchell: M=
r.
Speaker, Yukoners know the Premier doesn’t think much of the Auditor
General. That is a matter of public record. He has referred to her reports =
as
“just her opinion”; however, Yukoners are quite interested in w=
hat
she has to say about the state of the
Each year the =
Auditor
General of
That letter is
supposed to be in the Premier’s hands by October 31 of each year. This
past October came and went and the letter never arrived. The Auditor General
refused to sign off. This is very unusual. Either the Auditor General says =
the
books are okay or she says they are not.
Has the Finance
minister received this letter yet and are last year’s books signed of=
f?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
The Leader of the Liberal Party knows ex=
actly
what he’s referring to. The Yukon Housing Corporation was late in its
presentation of its books. Therefore, the Auditor General could not complete
that particular aspect of our consolidated statements. But as the member li=
kes
to refer to the Auditor General, the Auditor General has also been very cle=
ar
that all other matters of the government have been duly assessed.
I can tell the=
member
opposite that the Auditor General is, at this time, pleased with the progre=
ss
being made. The Department of Finance has assisted the Yukon Housing Corpor=
ation
over the last number of months and we have no reason to be concerned
whatsoever. When it comes to the
Mr. Mitchell:
Last December,=
the
Minister of Finance hosted a meeting with finance ministers from across
Mr. Speaker, w=
e know
the Auditor General has had harsh criticism for this government over its po=
or
handling of financial matters. We also know the Premier can’t get last
year’s books signed off. Can the Finance minister tell Yukoners when =
he
expects to receive a thumbs-up or thumbs-down on last year’s books?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Well, speaking of thumbs-down, it is
thumbs-down to the Liberal leader’s inferences. Mr. Speaker, I’=
ve
just articulated to the member opposite, the Leader of the Liberal Party, a=
nd
his colleagues that the Auditor General has assessed all the other matters =
of
the
This is all be=
ing
done, Mr. Speaker. As I said, the government and the Auditor General have no
reason to be concerned about the
Mr. Mitchell:
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Here we go. The Member for Kluane is tak=
ing
issue with the government for not being factual and, as always, the governm=
ent
has demonstrated, with a litany of examples, how factual, open and transpar=
ent
the government is. In explaining this very issue to the Leader of the Liber=
al
Party, he now claims that to be an excuse.
Well, Mr. Spea=
ker,
thumbs-down once again on the Leader of the Liberal Party, who can’t =
even
figure out what the Auditor General has actually said when it comes to the
public accounts tabled in this House. Let me repeat: all other financial
matters of the Yukon government have been addressed and duly noted, save and
except the Yukon Housing Corporation’s issue of being late with their
year-ends. Progress is being made on that, Mr. Speaker. The Department of
Finance has provided a great deal of assistance over the last number of mon=
ths
to deal with the issue, and the Auditor General and the
You know, Mr. =
Speaker,
we actually have money in the bank these days. We are not paying debt-servi=
cing
charges or borrowing money to pay employees’ wages; we have more than
doubled the financial capacity of the
Question re:
Auditor General report
Mr. Mitchell:
We saw it last=
week
when the government refused to take responsibility for its unjust firing of=
the
former workers’ advocate, and we have seen it repeatedly whenever the
topic of the Premier’s $36-million investment in asset-backed commerc=
ial
paper is brought up.
Recently the P=
remier
again tried to duck responsibility for his role in this investing fiasco. He
tried to say the government was given a clean bill of health by the Auditor
General when she looked at this matter in 2008. In fact, she said
“…that the
Government's investment in summer 2007 in two asset-backed commercial
paper trusts that were set up by non-banks … did not meet the
requirements of the Act.R=
21;
Speaker: Sorry, you’re out of time.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Actually, the government has taken
responsibility. As the Auditor General said — and, once again, I would
hope the member opposite doesn’t deem this to be an excuse — and
I’m going to try to quote from the auditor’s report. The Auditor
General clearly said on the matter that this had been a past practice of th=
e
Secondly, this
government, after decades of that practice, is the government that took
responsibility and implemented a policy so that practice could not continue=
. So
I hope that helps the member clear up his confusion about what the Auditor
General says or doesn’t say, Mr. Speaker.
You know, it g=
oes
further. The member opposite doesn’t know the difference between
“scandal” and “partnership”. He doesn’t know =
the
difference between “due process” and “personnel
matters”. He doesn’t know exactly what position the members tak=
e at
any given time, given their deviance from the Civil Forfeiture Act. We’re all confused about the Libera=
ls
these days.
Mr. Mitchell:
During debate =
on April
8, the MLA for
The MLA for =
span>
The Premier ap=
proved
investing $36 million in ABCP in 2007. Those investments, quote: “did=
not
meet the requirements of the Act,” according to the Auditor General o=
f
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Mr. Speaker, we all understand what the
Auditor General’s role is and the report she provides, especially thr=
ough
the public accounts. That is no secret. I am sure Yukoners would certainly
accept those as factual versus the Leader of the Liberal Party’s
interpretation of what the Auditor General says. Now, Mr. Speaker, the memb=
er
opposite believes that the government is wrong. Well, let me remind the mem=
ber
that the government has delivered a vision and a plan for the
We said weR=
17;d be
taking care of our environment. Well, Mr. Speaker, I don’t think
there’s any government in history here that has done the job that the
Yukon Party government has done on the environment. When it comes to arts a=
nd
culture, this government said it would do something there and it has done i=
t.
The list goes on, and I can tell you that we have not been wrong, because t=
he
quality of life in this territory has dramatically improved.
Mr. Mitchell:
The Deputy Pre=
mier has
also risen in this House many times and said she supports the Premier’=
;s
decision. They’re all in it together, Mr. Speaker, and voters will
remember that in the coming election. The MLA for
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Speaking of being repetitive and needless
repetition, my goodness, Mr. Speaker, what we’ve been hearing for many
years now from the Liberals is the same old thing, yet the Liberals fail to
explain to Yukoners what they would do.
The Liberals l=
ike to
make suggestions and inferences but have little to back that up. The govern=
ment
side will continue to do its job, as we were elected to do. We’re not
wrong about that; that’s exactly what we committed to do and thatR=
17;s
what we are delivering on behalf of the
Where the Libe=
rals are
wrong is they fail to understand that very important commitment to the
It appears the=
Leader
of the Official Opposition is on a campaign. Unfortunately, there’s no
election.
Speaker: The time for Question Period has now ela=
psed.
We’ll proceed to Orders of the Day.
ORD=
ERS OF THE
OPP=
OSITION
PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS
MOTIONS OTHER THAN
GOVERNMENT MOTIONS
Motion No. 1092
Clerk: ̳= 4; Motion No. 1092, standing in the name of Mr. Cardiff.
Speaker: =
194;
It is moved by the Member for
THAT
this House urges the Yukon Government to protect the principles of democracy
and accountability by:
(1) ensuring that citizens have a r=
ight to
organize referenda on issues of concern, as was intended in the Municipal Act; and
(2) bringing forward amendments to =
the Municipal Act and to the Ombudsman Act to allow the Ombudsm=
an to
hear citizens’ appeals when they feel they have been treated unfairly=
by
a municipal government.
Mr.
Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, New Democ=
rats
have always been a party of democracy and in the
I
think it is important and, as a politician, I recognize the vast amount of =
work
and time and effort that goes into representing your constituents and, not =
only
that, the toll that it takes on your personal life, your family life and the
criticism that you come under.
The issues I=
8217;m
bringing up today are not meant to slight those individuals — those
municipal politicians. I’m not trying to say that they’re infer=
ior
or incapable. What I am trying to say is that we all need to work together =
to
address the concerns of
It’s up =
to us to
work with municipal councils to provide a good quality of life, to provide
citizens with an opportunity to have a say about issues that are important =
to
them, to participate in the democratic process. So my points today are to s=
peak
to the importance of democracy, accountability and the need to follow the
intentions of laws as they were created to strengthen that democracy.
Do we as legis=
lators
here in the Legislative Assembly have the right to speak about how democrac=
y is
practiced in our communities? I believe we do. We have a right, and with ri=
ghts
come a responsibility to increase democracy exercised in this House and in
territorial politics. We have made some efforts in that area with select co=
mmittees
and encouraging governments to consult more. Recently in this Legislative A=
ssembly
we’ve seen citizens speak out about what is important to them and to
raise their voices. It’s important to note that government listened.
That’s the thrust of what I want to talk about today —
people’s voices being heard, and being given the ability to participa=
te.
In recent year=
s, the
New Democrat caucus has brought forward pieces of legislation — the Democratic Reform Act, which looke=
d at
both electoral reform and legislative reform.
We also tabled=
and
brought forward an act called the L=
egislative
Renewal Act. We tabled a motion in the Legislature that was debated last
fall and passed unanimously to strike a select committee on legislative ren=
ewal
to talk to Yukon people about how we can improve territorial politics and, I
think more importantly, about how they can improve territorial politics, how
they can advise us on how to do our job better, and communicate better with
them.
I think that=
8217;s
important. It’s how we make our system function better and be more
accountable and more responsive to the needs of the citizens we’re
elected to serve.
We brought thi=
s motion
forward because we’re concerned. We’re hearing concerns from pe=
ople
in various communities that, when it comes to municipal government, to that
important relationship between the
Some of the ot=
her
indicators are — and we hear this all the time and I’ve heard it
spoken many times in this Legislative Assembly that our democracy is under
threat. I would just like to point out a few things about why that appears =
to
be.
What we see is=
a
dissatisfied and apathetic public who have a tendency to tune-out rather th=
an
participate in the decisions that affect them. The reason why they do that =
is
because they feel their voices are not being heard. In the interest of part=
icipating
in something that was going on in the Legislative Assembly, where members w=
ere
talking about songs that relate to issues that we were talking about, I bel=
ieve
there’s a song that Michael Jackson sings, and the lyrics go, “=
All
I wanna say is that they don’t really care about us.”
There are peop=
le out
there who honestly believe that we’re in this Legislative Assembly
talking about matters and we really don’t care what goes on out there=
. We
need to do a better job because I know, as a legislator and as someone who =
has
participated here, that we really do care about the issues that affect peop=
le.
How we deal with them, what our response is to them and the actions that we
take, may be different, but I honestly believe that we really care and
it’s the actions that we take that are important.
Some of the ev=
idence
that people feel that way is seen when you look at voter turnout. If you lo=
ok
at the past territorial election, voter turnout was the lowest it has ever
been. In the last municipal election, voter turnout in
It is a pretty=
high
number compared to what happens in some jurisdictions down south. So I would
believe there is actually more enthusiasm for participation, but we need to=
get
that number up. The way we do that is by responding to voters so that they =
know
that we’re listening to them.
Why do people =
tune
politics out? Why do they not pay attention? I think we all have to take so=
me
responsibility in turning this around and bringing people back into the
political debate. How we do we turn that tide? We need to improve the syste=
m so
that it is more relevant, more accountable, more ethical, more democratic a=
nd I
think, most importantly, more accessible. In the So the motion =
is
urging the Yukon government to protect the principles of democracy and
accountability by ensuring that citizens have the right to organize referen=
da
on issues of concern, as was intended in the Municipal Act, and to bring forward amendments to the Municipal Act and the Ombudsman Act to allow the ombudsm=
an to
hear citizens’ appeals when they feel they have been treated unfairly=
by
a municipal government. I would just l=
ike to
read a little bit from the preamble to the Municipal
Act: “WHEREAS=
this
Act was developed in a spirit of partnership, mutual respect, and trust bet=
ween
the Government of the “=
“That the
Government of the “That =
span> “That the
primary responsibilities of municipal governments are services to property =
and
good government to their residents and taxpayers;” And most impor=
tantly
— although it doesn’t say that, but one of the ones that I feel=
is
important is: “That pu=
blic
participation is fundamental to good local government; and “That
sustainable communities require financially solvent local governments that =
are
responsive to the public’s need for affordable public services; and “That lo=
cal
governments have a significant responsibility for furthering compatible hum=
an
activities and land uses.” So that’=
s from
the preamble to the Municipal Act=
i>. So the motion,=
as I
read it, raises the two issues related to accountability and democracy. The=
re
are probably many more issues that the public will hopefully have a chance =
to
debate through public processes to review the act. I am going to =
touch on
that a little bit more toward the end of my talk today. I really hope that =
when
the minister gets up to debate this motion, to speak to this, that he clari=
fies
the approach to the next act review and provides timelines, scope and
guarantees that citizens will be involved because, in 2008, the review
basically — the conversation and the questions that were asked were d=
efined
by politicians and bureaucrats. They weren’t defined by public input.=
In
fact, I’ll talk a little bit more about that later, as I said. The first issu=
e of the
motion speaks to ensuring the viability of referenda. This is a major part =
of
the Municipal Act and it falls =
under
the section, public votes. Under the public votes section of the act, there=
are
sections on plebiscites, which are non-binding votes when a municipality wa=
nts
the public’s opinion. There is anoth=
er
section on referenda. Referenda allow a citizen-initiated process of petiti=
oning,
and if thresholds are met, that forces municipalities to put a bylaw to a v=
ote.
If there’s an issue that’s important and enough citizens feel
strongly enough, municipalities need to respond. I think it’s an impo=
rtant
vehicle for citizen participation. There are thresholds and there are reaso=
ns
why there are thresholds. If the threshold was set too low, municipalities
could be forced into situations of holding referenda every other month. The=
re
are thresholds and they have to be important issues that are really engagin=
g to
the public. The act says t=
hat a
referendum can go ahead with at least 25 percent of the total number of
electors and communities may have their own bylaws on referenda. Section 153 of the act says that ci=
tizens
“… may petition council for a referendum … on any matter
within the jurisdiction of the council including capital projects ...”
So, on any matter — that’s a pretty broad mandate. What we̵=
7;re
saying is that the government of the day has not stood up for this important
part of the act. The evidence of that comes from a court case. The minister
will be fully aware of this court case and there is correspondence. The case
was City of Whitehorse v. Darragh=
i> for
which the B.C. Court of Appeal ruled that the City of Basically it i=
s my
understanding that there are three specific exemptions in the act and that =
the
official community plan is not one of those exemptions to public votes or
referenda. The citizen who
brought this forward and went out collected the names of voters, or elector=
s,
in the City of The question f=
or the
government, I guess, is: can they state now whether or not it was the inten=
tion
of the act to exempt the OCP from the public vote section of the act? I can
tell you that the former Minister of Community Services, who brought the act
in, in 1998, earlier this year said no, that wasn’t the intention. The official c=
ommunity
plan was in fact intended to be subject to public votes and others, apparen=
tly,
who were part of the conversation when bringing in this act — and I
don’t know maybe the Member for Mayo-Tatchun will remember this, beca=
use
he was there for this discussion and I’m sure will remember that this=
is
part of the decision. So if thatR=
17;s the
intention, that may be one of the areas the minister — I’m not
trying to give him an idea because I think it’s a bad idea — may
want to bring that up. What I would warn the minister about, I guess, if I =
had
to warn him of something, is what the public is going to say about that =
212;
to ensure that we’re not just listening to a select group of people; =
that
we’re listening to the people who vote and want to have their voices
heard. Despite the ac=
t that
says in section 153(1)(3) “Eligible petitioners may petition council =
for
a referendum on any matter within the jurisdiction of the council including capital projects,” he act gives the minister and Cabinet bro=
ad
powers to interpret the act. In section 13,=
“The Commissioner in Executive Council may make any regulations and
prescribe any forms considered necessary for carrying out the purposes and
provisions of this Act.̶=
1; The act gives =
the
citizens the right to hold a referendum on any topic. The intent of the
legislation, when it was written in the past under the stewardship of an NDP
government, was that the definition of what the public could bring to a vote
was exteremely broad. It was a major piece of the legislation. I am going to =
quote
from Hansard in 1998 — so=
me of
what was said about the act. The new act re=
places
ministerial control and approvals with a system that empowers votes to prov=
ide
direction to municipal government. “The provisions for petitioning and
public votes puts the checks and the balances into the hands of the
electorate.” That’s pretty powerful. That’s what was said
when the Municipal Act was brou=
ght
in, in 1998. It’s
unfortunate; maybe the minister wasn’t here when the act was brought =
in,
and I hope he’s not missing the opportunity to listen to what was said
then, because it’s very important. These are othe=
r quotes
from Hansard: “ So 12 years a=
go —
11 and a half years ago — this was what was said in the Legislative
Assembly about our Municipal Act. At
the time, the act was leading-edge. We’ve go=
t the
act. It is significantly broad. It grants people the rights. It grants citi=
zens
the ability to have public votes and it is an act that allows the minister a
great deal of discretion. Now the minister could have stood up and told the
City of I remember whe=
n I
first started attending the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Speaker, and there wo=
uld
be senior officials sitting in the gallery listening, taking notes and using
our words — the words of ministers especially, because it’s the=
ministers
who are responsible for the legislation that comes forward by a government
— listening intently to what it is that the ministers are saying as to
the intent of the law. They would be listening intently to what opposition
members are saying could be the flaws in the law, and listening to the
responses of the ministers, because that’s how you’re supposed =
to
interpret the act. That’s how you’re supposed to interpret the =
legislation.
It’s about what the intent was, not what the B.C. Court of Appeal bel=
ieves
the intent was. It’s about what the intent was. I won’t read the
quotes again, but the Hansard q=
uotes
from What this mini=
ster did
was allow the B.C. Court of Appeal to decide instead of reading the quotes =
from
Hansard. I’ll send those =
over
to the minister later, so he has the opportunity to read them. What did this
cause — allowing it to go to court and forcing citizens to stand up f=
or
their rights that are enshrined in the Municipal
Act? He allowed an individual to go through a lengthy court process and
spend a fairly handsome sum of money — close to $15,000. The
minister’s response to this person was that basically he was glad the
court ruled and set a precedent on the matter. Instead of looking at what t=
he
intent of the legislation was, he applauded the government and dismissed a
citizen’s concerns. In response to=
this,
the minister got a bill from the citizen, and the minister, it would appear,
preferred that the court rule on the matter, rather than having his lawyers
look at the act, read Hansard a=
nd
actually take a stand on it. Now, perhaps when the minister gets up to resp=
ond
to my comments today, if he would please, he would indicate whether or not =
he
will be paying that bill. Some would suggest the minister has seized the
opportunity from the court decision to completely turn his back on the
act’s principles of citizen self-determination, as is laid out in the
preamble, as is laid out in the act and as was discussed in November of 199=
8. The second pie=
ce of
the motion speaks to bringing forward amendments to the Municipal Act and to the Ombudsman
Act to allow the ombudsman to hear citizens’ appeals when they fe=
el
they have been treated unfairly by a municipal government. I want to clear =
up a
little bit of misinformation out there about appeals. As it stands, =
if a
citizen feels a decision made by a municipal council is unfair, they have a
right to appeal that. I understand that. They have a right to appeal it to =
the
Yukon Municipal Board. When a citizen has a complaint about an employee of a
municipality, they have to take that appeal to city council. I think it sho=
uld
be pretty obvious that there may be a problem here that the employer is hea=
ring
a citizen’s appeal judging their employee, and there’s this rule
about not being the judge in one’s own matter. Any review of the act
needs to look at the question of appeals, I believe, so when the minister is
initiating the next review — which he indicated he would be several t=
imes
in various correspondence — he has indicated that future consultations
will involve public consultation. I would encourage him to not just have pu=
blic
consultation. I would encourage him to have public participation as well, a=
nd
it should look at the Yukon Municipal Board, which, in the interest of publ=
ic
awareness is another important body that is chaired by another person who is
well known to this Legislative Assembly. He has appeared here as a witness =
many
times in his capacity as chair of other organizations. I really want =
the
minister to address this issue: when you look at the Yukon Municipal Board,
there is a pretty serious anomaly to other appointments to other boards, an=
d it
appears that the chair of the Yukon Municipal Board has a lifetime job ther=
e.
I’m not sure if he has a lifetime job on any of the other boards he is
involved with, but this chair has been the chair since I know in his =
other
capacity as chair of something else, he may be working on something that wo=
uld
allow someone to maybe live longer — we’re not aware of it, and=
I
hope the Minister of Health and Social Services will make us aware of what =
it
is that they’re working on over there that would allow this to happen=
. The Municipal =
Board as
well is not ATIPPable. It does not maintain a public library or a website w=
ith
its rulings. We would hope that it is added to the list of public bodies wh=
en
the ATIPP regulations are drafted. In the interest of fairness, Mr. Speaker,
transparency and accountability, we think that the ombudsman could play a r=
ole
in the appeals process when citizens have concerns about the actions or the
decisions that municipal councils are taking. Currently, the=
ombudsman’s
powers are as follows: “The mission of the Office of the Yukon Ombuds=
man
is to provide an independent, impartial means by which public complaints
concerning the Government of Yukon can be heard and investigated with the g=
oal
of promoting fairness, openness and accountability in public
administration.” They can inves=
tigate When it comes =
to
municipalities, it’s only if the municipality requests the ombudsman =
to
investigate a matter. We know that it’s not very likely that, if a
citizen has a concern or an issue, that a municipality — We’ve se=
en here
in this Legislative Assembly the government not want to investigate or hold
inquiries or investigations into some of the actions they’ve been
responsible for. I guess it mak=
es it
difficult when you’re in that position; not being in that position, I
don’t feel that way. But feeling that way, I think it’s importa=
nt.
The other thing I think is important is that, when you make those decisions=
, if
you take that stand, you be willing to live by it. What I’m saying is=
, I
would be willing to live by that. If that’s what I’m saying, if
I’m saying this is what I believe in, then I’d be willing to li=
ve
by that and we all have to do that. So the request=
has to
come from the municipality; it’s not a citizen-driven initiative when=
it
comes to complaints regarding municipal governments, their actions, their
decisions, capital projects. The ombudsman cannot investigate disputes betw=
een
individuals; it doesn’t investigate the federal government, the court=
s;
it doesn’t investigate landlord and tenant matters; it doesn’t
investigate the Legislative Assembly. It doesn’t investigate the
elections office; it doesn’t investigate banks, home or auto insuranc=
es,
businesses. What it does i=
s it
provides a channel for redress for the poor and for those who are without m=
eans
to hire lawyers — and we saw in this instance this citizen went to a
great personal expense to stand up for what she believed in and without any
redress. Maybe this would have been a better channel than going through the
act. The Ombudsman Act could be
amended to give the ombudsman the power to hear appeals. It may be, as a la=
st
resort — I’m not saying ditch the Yukon Municipal Board, but wh=
en
the citizen has exhausted other avenues and recourses and still feels
aggrieved, using the ombudsman’s office would be a good option.
It’s something that exists already and it talks about fairness; it ta=
lks
about openness and it talks about accountability in government and public
administration. So those are t=
he
points that are salient to the motion, as I brought it forward. The only ot=
her
thing that I would like to address is the act itself and the process, becau=
se
what we’re proposing is that the government bring forward amendments =
to
certain acts — to the Municip=
al Act
— to ensure that they stand up for the principles of the act, as outl=
ined
in the preamble, to go back and read Hansard
— and I will send that over to the minister when I’m done ̵=
2;
and to put in place a process that allows for public participation. You know, how =
should
we handle these important issues? The two issues are that the public votes =
and
provisions in the Municipal Act=
are
respected — not allowed to wither and die or be tied up by court acti=
on —
and that how citizens’ appeals are heard is looked at seriously with =
the
possibility that the ombudsman could be brought into this process to give it
more openness, fairness and, indeed, more accountability. How should we =
handle
these issues? I think we need to talk to the people. The minister has made
several statements on this. In his letter to Ms. Darragh, he said, “A=
ny
future review will include a public consultation component as well.” =
We
support that. I’m going to go back to this; I raised this earlier. We
support it and we thought the 2008 review was problematic because, while
citizens were given the opportunity to participate by receiving a questionn=
aire
with the questions being defined by the minister, by the minister’s
department, by municipalities and the Association of Yukon Communities, the=
re
was no provision. When we debated the revisions to the act in the Legislati=
ve
Assembly, the minister basically said, “These are the only things tha=
t we
looked at.” I don’t find that acceptable. I think that c=
itizens
need to be engaged; they need to be able to bring forward issues. If
there’s an issue with the Mun=
icipal
Act that is important to citizens, we should allow them to come forward=
, to
bring those issues forward, and we should put them out there for public
discussion, not muzzle them, not say, “Go away. These are the only is=
sues
we want to talk about.” We need to be prepared to talk about all issu=
es. The minister m=
ade
these statements in the Legislative Assembly just the other day that suggest
that the public’s participation may not necessarily be guaranteed,
because what he said was, “We certainly have worked over the last eig=
ht
years with the act itself and we are reviewing that act as we move forward.=
” Is the minister
reviewing the act or are the minister and municipal governments reviewing t=
he
act? This is a piece of legislation that belongs to the public. The other t=
hing
he said is, “We are reviewing the act itself with our partners, the
actual communities that are affected by the Municipal
Act and we’re doing that as we speak.” As I just said=
, the
most important part of this matter and the most important part of democracy,
Mr. Speaker, is the citizens. It is not us here in the Legislative Assembly=
. It
is not those who have dedicated their lives to serving in municipal
governments. The most important part about democracy is citizens and citizen
participation. It is about listening to them. It is about the actions that =
we
take as politicians. My hope, Mr. S=
peaker,
is that this is not going to be some sort of a closed-door review or a targ=
eted
consultation. That seems to be another one that comes up on the hot key:
targeted consultation. I hope the minister meant what he said when he sent =
that
letter — that any review will involve the public, and not just in a
cursory way but in a real engaging way. We want to ensure people’s vo=
ices
are heard and not just that they are heard but that they know they are heard
and what we say in the Legislative Assembly reflects that. The laws that we
bring in need to reflect what we’re hearing from citizens and the leg=
islation
that we bring in, the words that we speak, should mean something to people.
They can see by not just our words but by our actions that they’re be=
ing
heard. I really would=
like to
hear some answers from the minister in response to the questions. I donR=
17;t
want to just hear him get up and read a speech that has been prepared. I as=
ked
some questions about the act review process, what public consultation is
planned, how engaging it will be, will he pay his bill when he basically
allowed the B.C. Court of Appeal to interpret the legislation? Contrary to =
what
I read in Hansard, obviously =
8212;
and I’m not one to judge what the B.C. Court of Appeal says but it wo=
uld
have been a good thing if they had actually read some of those comments in =
Hansard, because that’s what
really should be guiding the intent of the legislation. When the minis=
ter gets
up to speak about the public’s opportunity to participate, and I want=
to
know about the issue of referenda and public votes and the issue of appeals=
. I
want to know whether or not the minister will commit today to making that p=
art
of a public review of the Municipal=
Act.
I thank everyone for their interest and attention to my comments today, and=
I
look forward to the comments from others this afternoon. Hon. Mr. Lang: “THAT th=
is House
urges the Yukon Government to protect the principles of democracy and
accountability by: (1) ensuring t=
hat
citizens have a right to organize referenda on issue of concerns, as was
intended by the Municipal Act; =
and (2) bringing f=
orward
amendments to the Municipal Act and
to the Ombudsman Act to allow t=
he Ombudsman
to hear citizens’ appeals when they feel they have been treated unfai=
rly
by the municipal government.” That is the mo=
tion
that we see before us today. Certainly, we =
as a
government, having the responsibility to oversee the government as it is to=
day,
have worked on the act itself. We encourage Yukoners to work directly with
their municipal governments, and if they have any concerns, they may also a=
sk
the I have points =
to bring
forward today, Mr. Speaker, on what this government is looking forward to, =
or
what we see in the future of our communities in the territory. This governm=
ent
has established a Municipal Fiscal Framework Review Committee that will
consider important issues related to the municipal fiscal picture. This rev=
iew
committee will have representatives from Association of Yukon Communities a=
nd
the The establishm=
ent of
the Municipal Fiscal Framework Review Committee is an important step in
addressing the long-term sustainability of our This is the co=
mmitment
that I wanted when I met with Association of Yukon Communities in Dawson Ci=
ty
in the last couple of weeks — a commitment that this committee would =
give
me a report at the next Association of Yukon Communities meeting next year.=
In
other words, they have a 12-month window of opportunity to do the work
we’re laying out for them to do, in partnership with the AYC and of
course the government of the day. We as a depart=
ment
continue to track legislative issues when they are raised by the public. In
other words, we are constantly, through the department, tracking issues that
are raised by the public, by the communities and by the Association of Yukon
Communities. We do this to ensure the issues can be discussed in a future
review of the Municipal Act. Ag=
ain,
this is an ongoing monitoring of issues that are brought forward by the gen=
eral
public and by the communities themselves. The department=
will
consider undertaking the next review of the Municipal
Act when the department and Association of Yukon Communities agree that=
a
sufficient number of proposals for amendment have been identified to warrant
such a review. In other words, the issue about a review will be brought for=
ward
in partnership with AYC and the communities. Another point =
is that
the The official c=
ommunity
plan part of the Municipal Act
clearly established the requirement for a public hearing and all other steps
that municipalities need to take when developing or amending an official
community plan. While the ruli=
ng does
prevent referenda on OCP-related matters, the referenda provision of the Municipal Act continues to allow
residents to petition for a referendum on the wide range of other issues. This is addres=
sing
what we as a government are doing. We’re looking forward to working w=
ith
the municipalities and, of course, with the general public on this review.
I’m looking forward to AYC and the government going out and talking to
our municipalities and seeing where we can be of assistance to those
communities. Of course, our communities outside of Whitehorse — as the
member opposite was looking toward the Ombudsman or some form of ATIPPing or
whatever for the general public — we have to be very, very conscious =
of
the strength of our municipalities to do a lot of this work that we decide =
here
in the House that should be another burden on our communities. Certainly, t=
hese
are things that have to be discussed by those municipalities. The We have to dea=
l with
these municipalities in a fair and open way to make sure they have the capa=
city
on the ground to do the job that their community expects them to do. In oth=
er
words, holding public office in our communities is virtually a volunteer
situation. There isn’t much return, as far as financial benefit, for
being on town council or being mayor or taking on other responsibilities. I=
f we
as the senior government in the territory can make their job easier, I would
recommend that, because they do a very responsible job in our communities a=
nd
are very much a necessity, when it comes to our job as a department in the =
government.
We look at those municipalities as being very supportive of our department.=
We are very co=
nscious
of the capacity of our municipalities, and we don’t want to do anythi=
ng
that would put them in jeopardy or in a situation where they couldn’t=
manage
their community financially. Again, we have to think of this not from the
municipality of Whitehorse level; we have to look at our smaller communities
like Carmacks and Mayo and Watson Lake and Dawson City and be very consciou=
s of
their capacity to do the job of running these municipalities. Mr. Speaker, I=
do
appreciate the fact that this motion has been brought forward. I have gone =
over
this review that we’re doing in partnership with AYC and, of course, =
the
government. The commitment we’ve made is that, over the next 12 month=
s,
we want to open up the dialogue on the economics of the municipalities, on =
the
capacity of our municipalities and where we can be of assistance —
whether it is monetarily or with personnel or other issues that will be bro=
ught
out. Again, Mr. Speaker, I don’t want to second guess what is going to
come out of this review, but when I made the announcement in In looking at =
that, we
as a government have signed a five-year financial commitment with our partn=
ers.
I’m looking forward to next year’s report so that the next
five-year arrangement can be organized so that we can move forward and make=
our
community stronger. I would like to propose an amendment to the motion. Amendment proposed Hon. Mr. Lang: (1) the colon =
after
the word “by”; (2) the number
“(1)” where it appears; (3) the words
“was intended in” and substituting for them the words “set
out in section 150 to159 of; and (4) all the wo=
rds
after the word “act” where it first appears in the motion. Thank you. Speaker: The Chair is going to seek the advice of=
the
mover of the amendment in that, in my reading of Beauchesne’s Parliamentary Rules and Forms=
, section 578(2), which I’ve sent over to the member =
212;
it appears that if this amendment is to stand, it asks the House to do what=
it
is already doing and that is just simply
enforcing the Municipal Act as =
it
stands in our current orders — just advice =
from
the honourable member, please. Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible) Speaker: So has the honourable member advice for the Chair, please? Hon. Mr. Lang: Speaker’s ruling Speaker: As I shared with the honourable member, section 578(2), an
amendment that would produce the same result if the original motion were si=
mply
negated, that appears to the Chair to be exactly what your amendment is
proposing. The amendment would produce the same result as if the original
motion were simply negated; therefore, the amendment to that motion is out =
of
order. The honourable=
member
still has the floor, still has unlimited time. The remedy is to simply defe=
at
the motion or to move a different amendment. Hon. Mr. Lang: Speaker: The amendment is negated, so there is no
amendment on the floor, so you’re speaking now to the main motion. Hon. Mr. Lang: Speaker: All right. Does any other member wishes =
to
speak? Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> That’s interesting, the events tha=
t just
took place in an attempt to amend the motion as put forward by the Member f=
or I understand p=
erhaps
where the minister is coming from. I had listened to a lot of the debate th=
at
took place around the table at the Association of Yukon Communities meeting=
in I know where t=
he
minister is coming from. I understand what he is saying about working with =
the
municipalities. This motion “…urges the I know that the B.C. Court of Appeal
process took place. This motion is a result of a lot of this. There is an a=
rea
where I think the minister could have said a few more words on why perhaps =
he
disliked the second part of the motion — that was (2) “bringing
forward amendments to the Municipal=
Act
and to the Ombudsman Act to all=
ow the
Ombudsman to hear citizens’ appeals when they feel they have been tre=
ated
unfairly by a municipal government.” I didn’t=
hear
the minister say a whole lot. I was hoping to hear the minister react to th=
is
section. I know that simple message could have been that the government nee=
ds
to have some consultation with AYC and engage them in having an ombudsman h=
ear
the citizen’s appeal when it comes to unfair treatment by a municipal
government. I think AYC and municipalities would be quite interested in this
and voicing their concerns. I just wanted =
to put
that forward and say a few more words on the motion, as it was first presen=
ted
by the Member for The Municipal Act, in part 3, division=
16,
speaks directly to and in regard to referenda. With respect to part 3, wher=
e referenda
are referred to and part 7 of the act, many municipalities are engaged in a
discussion with the Association of Yukon Communities on these parts.=
The minister a=
lluded
to that in some of his remarks, and I was hoping he could perhaps expand on=
it.
He has stated that, in the government’s work with municipalities and =
AYC,
they discuss concerns when a legislative issue is brought forward and they
track that issue so it may be considered in any future reviews of the Municipal Act. We of course a=
re
pleased to hear the minister say that. It is also reflected in a letter sig=
ned
by the minister. We have brought forward many questions in this Legislature=
to
ensure public consultation does take place on decisions that affect people =
the
most. The Civil Forfeiture Act =
was a
good example of that. The only thing=
is that
a review needs to happen. When is the government going to do the work and g=
et
on with the review and the necessary changes, if there are changes that nee=
d to
be made? I’ll com=
e back
to this committee in a second. The decision that was made on I also heard t=
he
minister say that the government is going to be talking with the municipali=
ties
in quite some detail by forming a committee that was announced at the annual
general meeting in Now, it was in=
teresting
to hear the amendment put forward by the Minister of Community Services. It
took away the first section of the motion that refers to the ombudsman hear=
ing
citizens’ appeals where they feel that they have been unfairly treate=
d by
municipal governments. I know the minister didn’t have an opportunity=
to
speak to his amendment because it was ruled out of order, although he did h=
ave
an opportunity to continue to debate this motion. It would have been nice to
hear from the government side if they laid out their rationale for why they
disliked the second part of the motion that was put forward by the Member f=
or I know the min=
ister is
going to rely a lot on this new committee that he announced in I think that, =
with all
of this, it has gone to the public and people are talking about this quite a
bit, particularly the municipalities that may be affected by this. Yukoners
need to have clarification on how the B.C. Court of Appeal ruling will affe=
ct
the Municipal Act. This is what
we’re hoping the minister could lay out clearly to us in this House. =
Tell
us how this B.C. Court of Appeal ruling will affect the Municipal Act and basically the ongoing work of the municipalit=
ies.
The government=
made
some commitments in regard to ensuring there will be some public consultati=
on,
particularly when it comes to reviewing the Municipal
Act. The motion is basically urging government to protect the principle=
s of
democracy and accountability. That’s within the act itself. ThereR=
17;s
another area where I believe the government could state their case. I really
think this government needs to make a decision. I think this government and=
the
minister need to speak with the municipalities — particularly with AYC
and Yukoners — on this matter, and a public consultation must be unde=
rtaken.
I know the min=
ister is
going to rely on the committee that is formed to deal with priorities and t=
he
ongoing function of municipalities and he would have a report back to him
within a year to see how governments could react to the municipalities. Tha=
t is
well and good and we in the Official Opposition do agree with this approach=
. There
was a big announcement by the minister to AYC and it was fairly well taken =
by
all members who were there — what they want to see is how well itR=
17;s
going to work, how things are going to unfold with this committee and the f=
inal
recommendation, and how this government will commit to those recommendation=
s. How will the
referendum section be kept in the act and comply with the court ruling? Thi=
s is
the question that must be answered by the government and by the minister. It
must be talked about now, so I’m hoping that perhaps the next speaker
could continue on with debate on the motion as it was presented with all the
words in it and nothing changed or deleted. It will be int=
eresting
to hear how government will deal with conforming to the ruling of the act a=
nd
how they will deal with that. The minister said, yes, they will. The minist=
er
didn’t really say how they would go about dealing and conforming to t=
he
ruling of the act. These are questions we would like to hear from the
government side. I believe that perhaps the government is working on propos=
ing
another amendment to this motion — the second attempt — or
altogether scrapping this motion and voting against it, which the minister =
said
they will do, instead of what the Yukon Party always says in this Legislatu=
re:
making some positive changes, either to acts or motions, and the government
side has always invited the opposition to be constructive and to make
improvements where they can. We are expecti=
ng the
Yukon Party government, if they have an issue with the motion itself, to al=
so
come forward with something constructive and conform to the rules of the Le=
gislature,
whether it is making amendments to the act or giving some positive directio=
n to
how they would ensure that the government is going to continue to protect t=
he
principles of democracy and accountability. This is what we on this side of=
the
House would like to hear. We do have som=
e issue
with how this will take place on number (2) of the motion as it is read out.
From what we’ve heard, the government was bringing forward amendments=
. I
didn’t realize it was to scrap all of that section. I understand that=
if
you’re going to allow the ombudsman to hear citizens’ appeals w=
hen
they feel that they have not been treated fairly by a municipal government =
that
a lot of discussion in that section needs to take place with AYC and
municipalities before we even bring a motion out like that. I am just bring=
ing
this forward to the Member for I hear the int=
ent of
the mover of the motion in number (2) of this motion, but we also have a bi=
t of
concern where we think the best method to deal with all of this is to take =
it
back out for public consultation, particularly to the municipalities. If th=
is
new committee that has been formed through Community Services, to help with=
the
tough issues in the municipalities, and perhaps give some good direction for
change in government, will do this, then perhaps the minister could lay that
out a lot clearer for us in the House. Perhaps if there was good rationale
behind it, we may look at the position the government is taking on this. If there’=
;s
reassurance, I suppose, by the government side that they would go down this
road and even give some timelines in the actions they’re going to be
taking, we may look at it in a more positive light. But we too feel the With that, Mr.
Speaker, I look forward to hearing what the government side has to say on t=
his
motion. Speaker: The honourable member has spoken already=
and
this is still the main motion. If he now speaks, he’ll close debate. =
Does
any other member wish to be heard? Mr. Cardiff: I am pleased that the amendment was not in order. As =
the
Member for Mayo-Tatchun said, the government encourages us to be constructi=
ve
in our debate and make good suggestions. It appears the minister made an
attempt at trying to improve the motion. It’s my view that basically =
it
gutted a major part of the motion. If the ministe=
r is so
concerned about his relationship and his partnership, and the fact that it
needs to be part of a process, then that should have been what the
minister’s amendment was. The minister could have amended it by
suggesting that what it is we’re proposing in our motion should be pa=
rt
of the Municipal Act review pro=
cess,
because basically, our intent was to urge the government to protect the
principles of democracy and accountability. The minister has stood up and he
has said he’s going to vote against that. That’s going to be a
challenge. I hope it’s a challenge to every member on that side of the
Legislative Assembly to vote against protecting the principles of democracy=
and
accountability. How dare they? I can’t believe it. I asked the mi=
nister a
few questions. One of the questions was exactly that: would he consider
ensuring citizens have the right to organize referenda on issues of concern=
, as
was intended in the Municipal Act=
i>? Obviously the =
minister
wasn’t listening to what I was saying when I asked him if he would
consider taking that out and making that part of the process. What has happ=
ened
is, when you go back and when you listen — and I sent this over to the
minister and he obviously didn’t read it. These are the minister̵=
7;s
words in 1998: “The n=
ew Municipal
Act gives voters the power to oversee the affairs of the municipality a=
nd
to provide binding direction to councils on important issues … This g=
ives
citizens a meaningful process to ensure that councils act on issues the vot=
ers
consider important.” “ Now, the mini=
ster
believes — he respects the court decision. The other question he
didn’t answer is, is he going to pay the citizen’s legal bill f=
or a
court decision that basically took away the rights that I just read —
about the intent of the Municipal A=
ct
when it was brought in. The intent of the Municipal
Act in 1998 was the same as the intent of the Municipal Act is today, and it shouldn’t change. <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I mean, we make
legislative changes, but read the preamble. The preamble hasn’t chang=
ed;
it talks about public participation as fundamental to good local government=
. It
talks about local governments having a significant responsibility for furth=
ering
compatible human activities and land uses. That’s what the court issu=
e is
about. It’s about public participation being fundamental to good
government in those processes and the ability of citizens to participate in
that decision-making, and the power the act was supposed to give voters and
citizens to oversee the affairs of municipalities and provide binding
direction, to have a discussion in the public. The minister
doesn’t support that. He is more concerned about — he mentioned=
his
partnership with AYC and municipalities. I understand. I’ve been here
just as long as the minister has, maybe not in the same capacity, but I
understand the need to work with people, with other organizations. We have =
to
do it in here all the time. We have to work. When I first b=
ecame
elected, that was one of the biggest issues in my riding — the issue =
of
official community plans, about land development in communities, about citi=
zen
participation, so it’s not unfamiliar to me. I appeared as a represen=
tative
of my constituents in front of city council in order to ensure that their
voices were heard and that there was a process. At the end of the day, they=
may
not have gotten what they wanted, they may not have achieved what their goal
was, but at least they knew that their voice had been heard.Yukon won much praise, not just here in the <=
/span> but across the country, for being progr=
essive,
for being democratic. I would like to address the member
opposite on the motion we have on the floor here, Motion No. 1092. As we lo=
ok
at that motion, we certainly appreciate the work that went into it. This was
brought forward by the Member for Mr. Speaker, I move that Motion No.=
1092
be amended by deleting: I guess in covering comments, Mr.
Speaker, we certainly want the act to do what it is supposed to do and
we’re bringing that back to the floor here. If we can’t amend the motion =
as we
put forward today, we won’t be accepting or voting for the amendment
that’s on the floor this afternoon. Yes, and we won’t be supporti=
ng the
main motion. municipalities endorse these new checks=
and balances.
They believe they should strive to deliver a high standard of local governm=
ent,
and they should be fully accountable for their actions.”
There was an
opportunity for me to speak as their representative but, most importantly,
there was an opportunity for them to speak and be heard at city council mee=
tings.
What the act w=
as
intended to do, if you read what the minister said, was to give voters the
power to oversee the affairs of the municipality and to provide binding
direction to councils on important issues. I’m not talking about every
little issue. We are not talking about referenda on a bimonthly basis;
we’re talking about thresholds that are in the act.
The minister s=
eemed to
want to amend the motion so that what it basically said was that the govern=
ment
was going to continue to do what it’s doing. But what is it going to =
do?
Because if you go back, if you talk to the former Minister of Community
Services who brought the act forward, and you talk to others who were invol=
ved
in the drafting of that legislation — what they’re telling us is
that the intent was to include the official community plan and make it subj=
ect
to public votes, as is laid out in the Municipal
Act.
So we’re=
talking
about — this is what the intent of the legislation was. That’s =
what
was agreed to in 1998. This minister has allowed a court process to overturn
what the intent of the act was.
He’s not=
even
prepared to respond to that. The average citizen doesn’t have the
resources at their disposal to deal with that.
I find it dist=
urbing
that the minister feels this way and that the government wants to vote agai=
nst
protecting the principles of democracy and accountability. The other questi=
on I
asked the minister was, would he consider — it’s in the motion:
we’re urging the government to protect the principles of democracy and
accountability by bringing forward amendments to the Municipal Act and the O=
mbudsman
Act, to allow the ombudsman to hear citizens’ appeals.
I’m not
suggesting they just go out and do that. The minister has obviously —=
if
he has any sensitivity to what has happened here in the Legislative Assembly
— and obviously they do, because they heard what the people said when
they appeared here in the Legislative Assembly. I’m not saying this h=
as
to be a cut and dried deal. What I’m saying and what I asked them at =
the
end of my opening comments, when I was speaking to this motion, was would he
consider making this a part of the process — to bring forward those
amendments to the Municipal Act=
and
the Ombudsman Act to allow the =
ombudsman
to hear citizens’ appeals when they feel they have been treated unfai=
rly
by a municipal government?
What the minis=
ter said
in his amendment was basically a flat out “no.” Then what the
minister said when his attempt to do that failed was that he’s not ev=
en
going to urge the government to protect the principles of democracy and
accountability. Unbelievable; totally unbelievable. The minister needs to t=
hink
hard and long about this. The other thing the minister said was that he was=
in
It is a partne=
rship.
It’s a partnership between the minister, the government and the
municipalities. It’s a partnership between the municipalities and AYC.
It’s a partnership between the minister and AYC and the department and
Association of Yukon Communities, but it’s also a partnership between=
all
of us and those municipal governments and the Association of Yukon Communit=
ies.
Most importantly, democracy is a partnership between us here in this
Legislative Assembly and the people who are walking up and down the street
outside who want to have their voices heard. The only way that they can do =
that
through the Municipal Act is to=
go
and vote once everything three years, to go to city council and make their
voices heard. Another way is for them to organize a referendum, go out and =
get
the support in the community, meet that threshold, and then there’s a
public discussion about an important issue in the community.
But the govern=
ment
wants to limit what’s up for discussion and what’s up for a
referendum. The government unfortunately believes the appeal process, as it
currently exists, is good enough, and that the ombudsman’s office, wi=
th
the mandate they have to investigate and promote fairness, openness and
accountability in public administration and public government, is too strin=
gent
a test for the citizens of the Yukon, that they don’t deserve that. I
find that shameful.
I understand; =
the
minister has indicated once again that this government is not willing to
protect the principles of democracy and accountability in the
Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: =
b> Division.
Division
Speaker: Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Disagree.
Hon. Mr. Hart: Disagree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon:=
Disagree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Disagree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Disagree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Disagree.
Mr. Nordick: Disagree.
Mr. Mitchell:=
Agree.
Mr. McRobb: Agree.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree.
Mr. Inverarity: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree.
Mr. Cardiff: Agree.
Mr. Cathers:=
Agree.
Clerk: Mr. Speaker, the results are six yea, se=
ven
nay.
Speaker: The nays have it. I declare the motion is
negatived.
Motion No. =
1092
negatived
Introduction of visitors
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
I would ask the House’s indulgence=
to
welcome former Chief of the Liard First Nation, Ms. Anne Magun-Worton and h=
er
sister Marion.
Applause
Mr. Nordick: Mr. Speaker, I move that the Speake=
r do
now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.=
Speaker: It has been moved that the Speaker do now
leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
COM=
MITTEE OF
THE WHOLE
<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Chair (Mr. Nordick): =
Order please. Committee of the Whole wil=
l now
come to order. The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 20, First Appropriation Act, 2010-11. =
We
will now proceed with general debate on Department of Community Services. Do
members wish a brief recess?
All Hon. Members: Agreed.
Chair: Committee of the Whole will recess for 15 minutes.
Recess
Chair: Committee of the Whole will now come to =
order.
Bill No. 20 — First Appropriation Act, 2010-11 — continued
Chair: The matter before the Committee is Bill =
No.
20, First Appropriation Act, 2010-1=
1.
We will now proceed with general debate on Vote 51, Department of Community
Services.
Department of Community Services
Hon. Mr. Lang: I am pleased to introduce the Depar=
tment
of Community Services’ budget for the year 2010-11. The budget includ=
es
$65,763,000 in operation and maintenance expenditures and $77,005,000 in
capital investment. It is a budget that includes significant investment in
community infrastructure and in programs and services. It is a budget that =
demonstrates
this government’s commitment to building vibrant, healthy and sustain=
able
Mr. Chair, thi=
s is a
budget that is designed to serve
Mr. Chair, we =
continue
to invest in community infrastructure in partnership with
We are demonst=
rating
support for municipal governments and increasing municipal operating grants=
. We
continue to work on partnerships with municipalities to develop and supply
residential, commercial and industrial land in our
Mr. Chair, Com=
munity
Services promotes vibrant, healthy and sustainable
Under the Buil=
ding
Canada fund, $1.45 million is allocated to improve the Carcross drinking wa=
ter
treatment system to meet newly revised guidelines for Canadian drinking wat=
er.
A request for proposals has gone out and construction is planned in the year
2010. We are undertaking arsenic treatment upgrades in several communities =
to
meet newly revised guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality. In total,
$3.41 million is allocated under the Building Canada fund to improve the =
span>
Construction is
planned to start in the year 2010. In addition to improving physical infras=
tructure
and developing treatment processes to improve water quality, the Department=
of
Community Services is working with all municipalities and First Nation
governments and community partners to address the human health and
environmental safety issues involved in water handling.
We are providi=
ng
$203,000 to train and certify
This initiativ=
e will
help to ensure
$200,000 is al=
located
to examine engineering options for the disposal field and septic tanks in <=
/span>
$150,000 is go=
ing
toward investigating alternate waste-water treatment options in Old Crow,
including interceptor ditches to capture migrating water, and maintenance.
$16.8 million is allocated under Building Canada for the
The project in=
cludes
engineering, design and construction of a district biomass heating system t=
hat
ties into the waste-water treatment facility. This is environmentally sensi=
tive
and will help to offset costs of maintaining the facility.
Under this bud=
get, Mr.
Chair, Community Services is implementing the Yukon Solid Waste Action Plan and taking steps to modernize the
management of our solid waste in
Mr. Chair, $32=
0,000 is
allocated for facility improvements and implementation of the strategy.
$262,000 is allocated to complete the transition of the Tagish and Carcross
landfill to transfer stations. The =
Yukon Solid
Waste Action Plan complements the government’s ongoing support of
recycling and will, in the long-term, help to ensure all government-operated
solid waste facilities meet the 2012 deadline for stopping all open burning=
.
$1.521 million is allocated under B=
uilding
Canada to complete the Carmacks waste-water treatment plant. Community Services is continuing to work =
with
the federal government, First Nations and community governments to upgrade =
and
construct high-quality community infrastructure to enhance the quality of l=
ife.
Through joint investment and Community Services leadership, we are maximizi=
ng
benefits of the funding opportunities. We continue to advance Carcross and =
Phase 2 will r=
equire
three years to complete and 50 percent of all costs are recoverable from =
span>
A feature proj=
ect for
the
Mr. Chair, ove=
r the
past three years,
In 2009, the <=
/span>
The community =
input
has been combined with previous reports and research to create the <=
st1:State>
We heard that =
water
quality is a concern and we have responded with 16 projects in Faro,
Our investment=
will
ensure Yukoners have safe and sustainable access to drinking water. Yukoners
identify cleaner air and cleaner water as a priority. We have identified
projects that improve waste water, treatment systems, green energy options =
and
include solid-waste facility upgrades.
A waste-water
treatment facility is being constructed in
Another key pr=
oject is
Over all, the =
more
than $81-million investment under the 2009-10 and the 2010-11 annual capital
plan will bring real benefits to our Yukon communities, provide jobs and
benefits to the economy and balance the availability of expertise and labour
and the priority of the communities themselves. In the 2010-11 budget, Mr.
Chair, Community Services has allocated $3.37 million for planning and desi=
gn
related services on the entire suite of projects listed in the recent annual
capital plan. Construction is planned for the year 2011-12 and 2012-13. This
planning and step approach ensures that infrastructure investments and
construction will benefit our local economy. This will be of a long-term
benefit to
I also want to
acknowledge
For the third =
year in
a row, we have increased the comprehensive municipal grant. In this budget,=
we
are providing an additional $808,000. That means that this government is pr=
oviding
$14,962,000 in operating grants to eight
We continue to=
work
closely with our municipal partners to build capacity for effective local
governance that is open, accountable and fiscally responsible. Community
Services is also committed to developing land in partnership with the munic=
ipal
governments and to making land available in our unincorporated communities.=
In
total, there are $15 million allocated in the 2010-11 budget for land
development projects in the City of
The
In
The Whistle Be=
nd
development is beginning construction and lot supply is anticipated for the
fall of 2012. Eight million dollars will go toward Whistle Bend in this
year’s budget.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I thank the minister for his opening rem=
arks.
I understand that he may not be finished his opening remarks. I would like =
to
thank the officials for the briefing they gave in Community Services and for
being here today, helping the minister out.
Just listening=
to the
minister’s opening remarks, right at the end he talked about the
development of lots in some of the outlying communities around
I would give t=
he
minister an opportunity to give us more details on that and provide us with
that information.
Hon. Mr. Lang: We are working with the municipal
government to address the issue in Carmacks. There is some need in the
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I didn’t hear the minister fully on
this, but he mentioned
Hon. Mr. Lang: I maybe didn’t make myself cl=
ear.
When we were talking about a lottery, we were talking about the new lots co=
ming
out in Arkell and Ingram this coming fall, so that’s where the lottery
would be held.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> The minister also said recreational lots=
will
be made available in
Hon. Mr. Lang: I didn’t mention it in my add=
ress
here this afternoon, so I’m not sure where the member got the informa=
tion
from. There’s a $15-million sum of resources. It has been allocated in
this year, 2010-11, for land development projects in Dawson, Carmacks,
Moving on to my
opening address, I do have some more comments to make here on behalf of the
government. We as a department are working to build community roadways, imp=
rove
pedestrian bridges and assist homeowners when they need it most. In Old Cro=
w,
we are upgrading community roads and constructing a stormwater drainage sys=
tem
to alleviate standing stormwater within the community. Resurfacing will make
roads safer for all our users in our communities.
Again, the Dep=
artment
of Community Services has allocated $200,000 to repair the Miles Canyon wal=
king
bridge and $600,000 to repair the Ross River suspension bridge — very
popular facilities we have, both in Ross River and in the City of Whitehors=
e.
The Department=
of
Community Services is also working with other departments to assist homeown=
ers
by finding solutions to the subsurface water issues in the
We support com=
munity
sports and recreation programs in the
There is $120,=
000
marked for
We are utilizi=
ng the
recreational infrastructure fund to leverage funding for several sports and
recreation projects throughout the
This past year=
saw
Community Serv=
ices is
also a department that focuses on excellence in emergency preparedness,
response and management. In this budget we demonstrate our dedication to pu=
blic
safety and our commitment to protect life and property from human and natur=
al
causes/threats through key investments in emergency services and management.
Community Services is working to create safer communities by providing
integrated, high quality, dependable protective services to all of our comm=
unities
throughout the
In June 2009, I
announced an increase in funding for volunteer fire departments. In this
budget, Mr. Chair, we are providing an additional $57,000 for our volunteer=
s’
pay. This funding commitment is in line with the support that this governme=
nt
has provided to Emergency Medical Services and the overall support the
The year 2009 =
was a
prolonged hot and dry summer, with strong winds and extreme fire conditions.
The effectiveness of our wildland fire management program is a good news st=
ory,
and the working relationship between our wildland fire program and our
volunteer fire departments is essential to continued success.
In this budget
Community Services is investing in the purchase of emergency response vehic=
les
to enhance services throughout the
We are providi=
ng
$250,000 to design and construct a
We have increa=
sed
Emergency Medical Services’ operating budget by $1.022 million this y=
ear,
bringing the total to $6.913 million to further enhance Emergency Medical
Services in
In addition, w=
e are
allocating $357,000 to plan and design a new integrated emergency response
facility, which will house Alaska Highway
A total of $1 =
million
has been allocated to the FireSmart program to help reduce the threat of
wildfire in and near
This budget
demonstrates the collectivity — we are a department that believes in
service excellence. We continue our support for public library programs and
have allocated $15,000 for library database development and $20,000 for lib=
rary
building renovations in the community of Carcross.
We continue to=
offer
the rural domestic water well program and the rural electrification program=
for
homeowners, and have allocated $1.2 million for both of these programs.
We are also co=
mmitted
to improving services for
The summer 201=
0 budget
for the Department of Community Services includes $65.76 million in operati=
on
and maintenance expenditures and $77 million in capital investment.
It is a budget=
that
includes significant investment in community infrastructure, programs and
services, and maintains our commitment to build vibrant, healthy and sustai=
nable
We are investi=
ng in
drinking water, waste water, solid waste, community infrastructure —
including community roads, pedestrian bridges and recreational facilities. =
In
this budget we demonstrate our dedication to public safety and our commitme=
nt
to protect life and property from human and natural causes and threats thro=
ugh
key investment in emergency services and management.
We are a depar=
tment
that fosters strong local governance and supports healthy, active communiti=
es.
In this budget our department is encouraging healthy lifestyles and personal
achievement by investing in our athletes, our coaches, and our host societi=
es
for local and national sport events. This budget demonstrates that we are a
department that believes in services and excellence.
Community Serv=
ices is
a department that promotes vibrant, healthy and sustainable
I would like t=
o take a
few moments and thank not only the staff I have here in the House today for
answering questions, but the department itself for all of the hard-working =
individuals
who work in the department and do the excellent job they do in all of our
communities throughout the territory.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I do have a few more questions for the
minister. I would like to go into some of the municipal funding, but first =
the
minister said there was a project with the LSCFN through the municipal rural
infrastructure fund. I believe this project was necessary to comply with the
more stringent regulations that have been put out there. I’d just lik=
e to
know if we’ll end up seeing projects like this in more of the
communities. Perhaps the minister can also let us know if he sees an end to=
the
municipal rural infrastructure fund.
Hon. Mr. Lang: In addressing the member opposite, =
the
First Nation was the lead on this project. It was through MRIF, which was a
partnership. We certainly worked with the First Nation, but they definitely=
are
the lead on this project.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> The municipal rural infrastructure fund
— the minister didn’t ask about that. Does this have a deadline=
? Is
there a deadline to the fund? Is it going to be ending soon?
Hon. Mr. Lang: In addressing the member opposite, =
there
will be no new projects under that fund process. It will be sunsetted as so=
on
as these projects are finished, so MRIF has grown into the Building Canada
fund. As far as that one program is concerned, it will be terminated with t=
he
completion of the projects that are on the books at the moment.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Safe water — drinking water in the
communities, of course, is a big deal. The minister said he has addressed s=
ome
of the issues in some of the communities with regard to arsenic and so on. =
The community =
of Pelly
Crossing had a low-pressure piped water system in the community that cost q=
uite
a bit more, I think, than they realized. Part of that project — the o=
ther
community that was part of designing that project was Little Salmon Carmacks
First Nation, which wanted to see a piped water system in their community.
I’m just wondering how the department is addressing that issue.
Hon. Mr. Lang: That’s another project that w=
as
MRIF-funded, and the lead on that was the Selkirk First Nation. We are in
discussions with them, so there has been dialogue between the two governmen=
ts,
but it is the lead of the Selkirk First Nation through the MRIF application=
.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I realize that, and it was also deemed a=
s a
pilot project to see how well, I suppose, this would go. Part of designing =
this
low-pressure water system was the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation, which
worked with Selkirk on designing this. I was just wondering how the minister is addressing that piped-water
issue for Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation, if at all.
Hon. Mr. Lang: The agreement is between the three
governments and of course in that agreement is an outline of how it will
unfold, which is all written into the agreement. So it includes the First
Nation government, the
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I realize that. Has the minister had any=
discussions
with the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation in addressing that issue of pi=
ped
water in that community?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I haven’t been in discussions=
with
the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation government personally, but I’=
ve
been told by my capable staff that it’s a process of a fill station a=
nd
we have had discussions with them. So internally, between the two governmen=
ts,
there has been dialogue.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I believe they are two very different
projects, and I’m hoping that if the minister is down in that communi=
ty,
he would open up some discussions with the First Nation on this, as it
continues to be a very important issue, as they do need help. They have
accepted help from the Canadian Auto Workers in trying to upgrade their wel=
ls,
at least to have some safe drinking water for the time being. This has been=
on
the books for quite some time, so I’m hoping the minister, in his
community tours, would initiate discussions on this, if there is an interes=
t on
the part of government.
The minister a=
lso
raised that in this budget there is money for community roads and bridges. =
He
mentioned the painting of the bridge across the
I have experie=
nced the
one in Carmacks and part of the issue was the amount of paint that would dr=
ift,
I guess, with the wind, onto people’s property and particularly vehic=
les,
and that was a big issue in the painting of the Carmacks bridge. I just wan=
t to
flag that for the member opposite, ensuring that things like that don’=
;t
take place because it’s frustrating for people to deal with. But I do
realize that this bridge needs to be painted. It’s an eyesore and eve=
ntually
down the road, if it is not taken care of, it will become a problem.
The minister s=
aid that
by the year 2012, there will be no burning in municipal landfills allowed. A
lot of the communities have already gone to the trench-and-bury pile, and t=
here
are still some communities that are under the government’s watch that=
are
still burning their trash in the community dumps. Some of them have inciner=
ators
as part of that. But a situation has occurred here in Whitehorse where, bec=
ause
of the cost of taking a few bags of garbage into the municipal landfill her=
e in
Whitehorse, a lot of garbage ends up in some of the dumpsters that are in a=
nd
around Whitehorse and the transfer stations. Then the government ends up pa=
ying
to have garbage that has been produced here in
I’m wond=
ering
how government is going to make improvements and have this more cost-effect=
ive.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Going back to one of the questions =
the
member talked about — the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation water
supply treatment. We do have $1.133 million being invested through MRIF to
improve the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation water supply. The project w=
ill
improve the water-delivery fill system, which means that more households in=
the
community will benefit from reliable potable water. There are resources goi=
ng
toward the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation water supply and modernizati=
on
— $1.133 million.
As far as our =
solid
waste is concerned, we have been very active and very concerned about the
management of solid waste throughout the territory,
understanding that we as a territorial government have control and manageme=
nt
over a number of these facilities.
Of course, the=
As we went thr=
ough the
community and worked in consultation with our partners — whether it w=
as
our municipal governments or the First Nation governments — one of the
first things we did and one of the first initiatives implemented under the =
Yukon Solid Waste Action Plan was =
the
establishment of transfer stations in Carcross and Tagish which would resul=
t in
at least 75 percent of Yukon’s solid waste being transferred and
landfilled instead of being burned. So we are moving toward that target of
2012.
Another invest=
ment we
made is that we have management on-site at these transfer stations to make =
sure
that they are managed in a proper and a controlled way. So Carcross, Deep C=
reek
and Tagish all have management teams put together and they’re managed=
on
a daily basis.
I was in Carcr=
oss last
weekend, and they are pleased with the transfer station and the improvement
that has brought to the community. We all know there is a date there —
2012 — that we have to comply with the no-burn, and with the movement
we’re making inside the territory to get to that goal, we are making =
some
very positive investments.
We’re lo=
oking at
the Haines Junction area and we’re looking at Mayo and
So those are a=
ll
things that the government is aware of and certainly are working with our
communities.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> From what I understand, in some of these
transfer stations it does become a problem when these stations are only ope=
n a
few days a week. That issue has been raised with us. I am sure that it has =
with
the department and the minister. I am wondering how the government is addre=
ssing
that and whether or not the minister feels that the government will be ready
for this no-burn by 2012. Is the government ready for that? Are all the pla=
ns
put in place to ensure the government itself complies with its own rules?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Certainly we are working with the
communities on the hours when these transfer stations are managed and we are
flexible on that. It certainly has been an improvement on what we had in the
past. We look forward to the improvements we can make as we move through th=
is
transition that we’re going through at the moment.
As far as bein=
g ready
for 2012, we’re working very positively toward that date. I’m v=
ery
confident that this department can do just that and have the facilities up =
and
running and in place, so we can comply with a 2012 date for the no-burn leg=
islation
and policies. No, I think that I’m comfortable with that date. From a
management point of view, it’s positive to have a date. We’re
working toward that, so as we work through it will we have something to jud=
ge
on where we’ve come from and where we’re going, but 2012 is the
date.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> The minister said that they are working =
with
communities to address the hours and the amount of time that these dumps or
solid-waste areas are to be used. I guess we can take that information back=
and
basically say that the minister is committed to making some improvements th=
ere.
With this kind of a project, 2012 will come pretty quickly. The minister sa=
id
that they’ve been working at this for quite some time to address these
issues and trying to work out all the issues that are related to the no-bur=
n restriction
by 2012.
Can the minist=
er tell
us what additional costs this will mean to government?
Hon. Mr. Lang: There’s certainly more cost t=
o managing
the solid-waste process that we’re doing now. The transfer stations a=
re
costly because of the nature of the operation itself, but it’s an
investment a modern society has to make in managing solid waste, and certai=
nly
whatever those amounts of money are — I have a figure here for the
gentleman. There’s a $320,000 commitment here. It’s allocated f=
or
facility improvements and implementation of the strategy. So, as we move
through this, we have resources for the improvements in the facilities
themselves. Of course, there’s a cost to managing them. So we’re
doing just that.
As we grow int=
o these
transfer sites, there is a question about hours. We are working with the
communities, but the nature of what we’re operating — part of t=
he
management is the restricted hours of access to the facility. So there will=
be
a give-and-take and, as people grow into this, there will be a balance betw=
een managing
this in a fiscally responsible way and also making it accessible to the gen=
eral
public in a very positive way. So there is a balance here.
We don’t=
want to
see our transfer stations in a situation we found our solid-waste managemen=
t in
in the past. They were open to the general public on a 24-hour-a-day basis,=
and
we found that didn’t manage well, either.
As we work in =
our
communities and put our transfer stations in place, we eliminate the issue =
of
people moving around and putting waste in unmanaged sites and making it a
little harder for individuals to utilize one solid-waste area because anoth=
er
area is under management.
We will see th=
at as we
grow into this — there will be more and more management of our solid
waste. Certainly by the year 2012, the no-burn restriction will be in place=
. So
it’s going to be a constant policing obligation for the government of=
the
day, but certainly there will be costs to do just that.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I don’t want to go too much furthe=
r on
this, but the minister said this obviously has been worked on by government=
for
quite some time. Tagish, Deep Creek, and Carcross and others that the minis=
ter
mentioned, including the community of Keno — I would like to know exa=
ctly
where these transfer stations are going to be located. Perhaps the minister
could tell us how, for example, this would work for the community of, say,
Keno? Is the solid waste going to be trucked to Mayo — an hour’s
drive? Is a position — basically, a part-time position — going =
to
be created in, or contracted out, in the community of Keno? I’m just =
wondering
exactly where these transfer stations are going to be and if the minister c=
ould
give us an example of how it would work. I gave him the example of the
community of Keno.
Hon. Mr. Lang: As we move through with the Whiteho=
rse
area plan on solid-waste management — in other words, with our transf=
er
stations that are around the City of Whitehorse — the next plan is the
Haines Junction area and looking at how we manage that. Then we’ll be
looking at Mayo as a centre, then eventually moving to the
As far as how =
a community
like
Again, the
There are obli=
gations
put in place that weren’t there 20 years ago. There’s always a
balance on how we would work with the
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I thank the minister for that answer. I =
know
2012 is not very far away, and these plans and management plans have to be =
put
in place and talked about fairly quickly, because it could be that we’=
;re
steered in a bit of a different direction. Does this mean that in 2012 there
will be no incinerators left in the territory? The community of Keno, for
example, uses one. Are we getting rid of these?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Keno
2012 is a date=
we’re
working toward, and I’m optimistic that we can meet that date. As far=
as
the department is concerned, they feel they are comfortable with that date.
There haven’t been any red flags on dates being extended or anything
else. They seem to be on target and on budget in how this thing would unfol=
d,
so I’m very confident that we can meet that date.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Mr. Chair, we will definitely be monitor=
ing
that as this is pretty important stuff. Some communities have complied with
that no-burn situation for quite some time.
The minister, =
in his
opening remarks, talked about an increase in taxes, in revenue and grants-i=
n-lieu
of property taxes and I believe he said that this was due to an increase in
residential buildings. Can the minister tell us whether or not this is larg=
ely
due to the increase in houses that First Nations have built, because their
property taxes are grants-in-lieu?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Governments can’t tax each ot=
her, so
in lieu of taxes, we pay an agreed amount of money for taxes in municipalit=
ies
where we have investments — in other words, government infrastructure=
. So
that’s an agreed amount. As the appraised value goes up, then our
obligation is to pay more taxes. But it’s not a First Nation issue.
It’s not part of their tax base. It’s what we do as a territori=
al
government. In lieu of taxes, we pay a grant to the municipality so they ha=
ve
operating money. It’s not a complicated process; it’s just what
governments do among themselves. The federal government does the same. In t=
he
City of
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Just one comment to that is that First Na=
tions
continue to build homes and their property taxes are grants-in-lieu of prop=
erty
taxes.
I’m just
wondering, because that goes straight to the territorial government and not=
to
the municipal government. That was the reason for asking that question.
During the AYC=
meeting
in Hon. Mr. Lang: Certainly, we =
are
aware of the history of the municipal grant and how the communities and
municipalities manage the grant over a 12-month or business year. Certainly=
, we
extended it for one year. We’re open for discussion on an ongoing yea=
r,
but I remind the member opposite that this is one of the things that the
Municipal Fiscal Framework Review Committee is going to have to talk about =
with
the municipalities. This is one of the things I see the committee going out=
and
working on and talking about, then and coming back with recommendations on =
how
we get closer to the Auditor General’s recommendations and how the
municipality can work and manage their finances too. I visualize this being=
one
of the questions that will be answered by this review committee. Certainly,=
I
tasked them with that. Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> What has been said to AYC by the ministe=
r is
that, yes, this year, the quarterly grants to municipalities has been waive=
d,
but it’s going to happen. That’s reason for asking that questio=
n.
The minister also said that this review committee will be looking at these
types of issues that are significant to municipalities and perhaps making r=
ecommendations
to the government. They are tasked to do this, to work with the municipalit=
ies
and come up with these recommendations. I can’t remember when the
minister said that he would like to see this work completed by the committe=
e.
Perhaps he can tell us now. Hon. Mr. Lang: Also, I’m
looking forward to that, but it was very clear from me as the minister and =
the
department that we were looking at a 12-month window of opportunity to put
those questions out and have some answers brought back to me. This is being =
led by the
Association of Yukon Communities with the help of the government or Communi=
ty
Services. We’re going to go out — I visualize going out —=
and
talk to all of the municipalities on their specific issues, but also I̵=
7;m
looking at probably hiring expertise to work with this group of individuals
that could answer some high level questions or work with them on resolving =
some
of these issues. This is a review that this government is going to take very
seriously and it’s not only the resources municipalities have, but the
day-to-day management of the municipalities throughout the territory. Understand, Mr=
. Chair,
that every community has different issues, different obligations, different
sizes and of course different resources. It’s very important that this
group gets out and talks to every municipality and resolves — no, not=
the
word “resolves” — but brings back to us some solutions or
some recommendations that we can work with to make the municipalities not o=
nly
strengthened financially, but also to bring their capacity into a position
where they can see the job they’re doing, which makes their life a li=
ttle
bit easier. I hope that we=
can
help strengthen our communities wherever they are in the territory, whether
it’s solid-waste or waste-water management — all of these issues
that come up — and these groups of individuals in our municipalities =
have
to manage them on a daily basis. I’m look=
ing
forward to the report and I look forward to working with the group that wil=
l be
put together. They do have a 12-month window of opportunity to get back to =
us
as a government and put recommendations in front of us, so that we can addr=
ess
them as quickly as possible after that 12-month window. Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> It would be good to be able to see this =
report
completed before the end of the fiscal year, so we could see some reflectio=
n of
any of the recommendations coming in the next fiscal year. I know it̵=
7;s a
12-month window of opportunity here, as the minister says. I think a lot of
this work could probably be completed quite a bit before that and that
governments do get an idea as to what the committee will be recommending. <=
o:p> I want to go i=
nto the
costs a little bit, but first, this was a committee that the minister
recommends to work with municipalities to make improvements in whatever way,
whether it’s management or even dollar-wise to the municipalities. But
there were some in attendance at AYC who were looking on and taking in the
discussions between the municipalities and government and have shown some
interest perhaps in this committee. Is this committee to deal directly with=
how
to make improvements in those communities? How are the unincorporated
communities included in this? Perhaps the minister could give us an idea of=
how,
for example, Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation, which has a community wit=
hin
the municipality — well, they’re within the boundaries of the m=
unicipality,
but they’re excluded from them. How is this government going to be
dealing with them? Is this commit=
tee
going to have an expanded mandate to deal with communities, such as Little
Salmon Carmacks First Nation, such as Stewart Crossing, Keno and those unin=
corporated
communities and those First Nation communities? Hon. Mr. Lang: We increased t=
he
municipal grants to the municipalities by just over $800,000 this year. We =
as a
government in the last five years have given improvements to the municipal
grant. By the way, that was a decision we made as a government, understandi=
ng
that municipalities were struggling with their budgets because there
hadn’t been an increase for many, many years. I am looking forward to=
the
findings of this group. At that point, once the findings are put in front o=
f us
as the government, we’ll go to work on those findings. As far as outs=
ide
the municipality, this group is tasked with working with the eight municipa=
lities,
coming back to us with the findings. As a government, we will take a look at
the findings and move forward with those findings when they are put in fron=
t of
us as the government. Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Mr. Chair, I am sure that the minister a=
nd the
department also have people tasked in monitoring progress and are still dea=
ling
with other issues. I want to read a couple of motions that have been put on=
the
floor of this Legislature and perhaps ask the minister how he responds to t=
hese
motions, because they are directly dealing with municipal funding. So I’ll =
read
them out first and then the minister can respond to that, because I definit=
ely
wouldn’t be able to debate it here in the House. The first one =
is
Motion No. 1041 and is: “THAT this House urges the Yukon government to
examine and project the increased Operations and Maintenance costs that wil=
l be
incurred by municipalities before implementing new regulations, such as hea=
lth,
safety and environmental regulations, that require new spending by
municipalities in order to: (1) provide accurate projections of the additio=
nal
costs to municipalities of implementing new regulations; and (2) provide
additional funding support above the Comprehensive Municipal Grant to cover=
the
increased costs of implementing new regulations.” I know the min=
ister
may say, well, this is exactly what this review committee is going to be do=
ing,
but this is an issue that was raised directly to the minister at the
Association of Yukon Communities and it was raised by the mayor of Dawson a=
s a
very important issue that government should be dealing with and not have th=
ese
additional costs that are forced upon them by new regulations that basically
would require increased and new costs to municipalities. I’m just
wondering if the minister can answer that question first. Hon. Mr. Lang: We understand =
the
day-to-day operation of municipalities throughout the Yukon is an obligation
and a growing cost and, with more regulations, whether it’s solid was=
te
or potable water and all the questions around that, the new accounting proc=
ess
that’s in place for all our municipalities, it all requires resources.
That’s exactly why we jump-started this process we have. I’m
looking forward to the work that will be done and the results of that work
within the next 12 months. That would coincide with AYC’s next meeting
next year. I certainly look forward to having them in front of me then. The Auditor General was commenting =
on how
we should manage the expenditure through the department, so it was red-flag=
ged
by the Auditor General. I was very clear in my presentation=
to
AYC that we have a 12-month window of opportunity to get this thing in fron=
t of
the government. Certainly, with AYC leadership and of course the government=
itself,
the Department of Community Services being part of that, I visualize that b=
eing
jumpstarted as quickly as possible. There are all sorts of issues. It is not
just resources that municipalities have issues with. It is capacity. It is
accounting questions, like the member opposite’s question about the g=
rant
itself, how it is handled by the territorial government and how it flows to
municipalities. I’d like to remind the member=
opposite
that we have eight municipalities in the territory. This review involves the
eight municipalities. It’s being led by the Association of Yukon
Communities and the government itself. So it’s going to address munic=
ipal
questions, and I feel it’s timely to do this. We’ve just received the recom=
mendations
from AYC and we’re looking at them and will respond as quickly as we =
can.
That’s exactly why we put together this group — to address most=
of
the issues, hopefully, in the municipality.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> So if we were ever to have debated this
motion, that would have been the minister’s answer.
The other moti=
on I
wanted to read out, too, because it’s not just with the territorial g=
overnment,
but it says, “…urges the Government of Yukon to consult and work
with the Association of Yukon Communities and all municipalities to ensure =
that
municipalities are provided the necessary funding support to address the
increased operation and maintenance requirements to run the new infrastruct=
ure
that is being built through federal infrastructure funding programs.”=
This is Motion=
No.
1042. I expect perhaps the minister’s answers will be the same as the=
one
he just gave.
Hon. Mr. Lang: The answer is yes, it would be the
committee’s responsibility to come back with the cost. But we canR=
17;t
lose sight of the improvements the Building Canada program will have, of
course, in partnership. A lot of this infrastructure is going to be upgrade=
d.
That will be a balance from an economic perspective, too, because of the co=
sts
of running the old infrastructure, and we have new infrastructure in place.=
I am looking f=
orward
to the next seven years and the investments that are going to be put on the=
ground
for our municipalities. I would like to thank the department for the work t=
hey
have done to jump-start this committee and get out there and do a thorough
review and a thorough think-tank on how municipalities and the territorial
government can work together in the future to make municipalities stronger,=
but
also to have the partnership work in a modern way and in a balanced way. I =
look
forward to working with those municipalities to address just what the member
opposite has been speaking about.
From my
conversations with mayors and councillors throughout the territory, they are
looking forward to participating in this review and certainly they have man=
y,
many questions, and I look forward to those questions. Certainly, once they=
arrive
on my desk or in the department, we’re going to treat those concerns =
very
seriously.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I thank the minister for that answer. I =
would
like to move on. One of the objectives of the department is to ensure compl=
iance
with the minimum building code and electrical codes and so on.
One of the
government’s commitments here, in their buildings, is to build to gre=
en
standards, or SuperGreen standards. Are there any changes to our building c=
odes
that would include green standards or improvements to what we have right no=
w to
ensure energy efficiency?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Here are some interesting statistic=
s.
Last year in Building Safety we issued 2,696 codes in standard permits and
registrations. That’s a growth over the last period of time. We compl=
eted
7,242 inspections for building, plumbing, development, electrical, gas and
boiler pressure vessels and processed 1,457 building file information reque=
sts.
Building Safety of course sits under Consumer and Safety Services —
infrastructure and development — along with Consumer Services, Corpor=
ate
Affairs, Labour Services, Motor Vehicles. In other words, the department is
tasked with a very responsible job, and it’s not only here in the Cit=
y of
Another innova=
tion the
department has is that we’re implementing a new electronic permitting
reporting software system to enable building inspectors to create permits a=
nd
reports on-site — in other words, when the building inspector is out =
in
the field, he can work right from his remote location and issue permits and
reporting software. That’s a modernization of the program we have in
place.
The Building S=
afety
branch issues permits, licences and performs inspections under the following
pieces of legislation: the Building
Standards Act, Electrical Protection Act, Gas Burning Devices Act, Boiler a=
nd
Pressure Vessels Act, Elevator and Fixed Conveyances Act and Area Development Act. It also prov=
ides
advice to the public and construction industry regarding requirements and
interpretation of the above acts and regulations. We provide building file
information to the legal banking community.
The department=
has a
responsibility in all these areas. As far as green building, we have made a
commitment as a government and I look forward to the Yukon Housing Corporat=
ion
debate. When it’s up, you can talk to the minister responsible for Yu=
kon
Housing Corporation. They’ve invested a lot of resources into green t=
echnology
and have been a leader in the territory to show what green technology can d=
o,
and of course, in those kinds of decisions, what the costs are.
Public Works, =
another
department that will be up — we as the Department of Highways and Pub=
lic
Works have a responsibility to look at green construction on whatever we bu=
ild
for the government.
Now, we have
responsibilities that we manage for Yukon Housing Corporation, other
departments and, in some respects, Yukon Hospital Corporation, but we again=
are
leaning toward the green technology for all our building and we certainly r=
ecommended
that any buildings in the territory being built today meet a certain green
standard, which will make their footprint more compatible with what we̵=
7;re
trying to do here in the territory, but also the economic ramifications of
building green are very real. It does have a cost up front when you do build
it, but it has a savings, as you move down in the years of the construction
itself.
A couple of qu=
estions
back, Mr. Chair, there was a question about residential land or land
availability. In the residential files here in the Community Services, $13.=
823
million consists of 11 projects, Mr. Chair. There is a
There is $2.328
million to continue construction of 52 fully serviced urban residential lot=
s in
Haines Junction; $1.175 million to continue construction of 29 country
residential and two commercial lots at Willow Acres in the Haines Junction
community. There is $100,000 for planning of country residential lots on th=
e
There is $150,=
000 for
examining options for residential lots in the community of
So those are t=
he
investments we have made on the ground. There is an industrial component to
this. There is $770,000, which consists of one project. That’s the Da=
wson
Callison industrial subdivision, so that’s for lot development. So we=
are
doing a balance of both.
If we were to =
look at
the Whistle Bend, stage 1 and 2, there will be 298 lots, a mixture of
townhouses, single-family duplexes and multi-family lots. This is in
partnership, of course, with the City of
Land development projects in the pl=
anning
phase are what we’re doing in planning in the department. We’re
looking at
Most communiti=
es in
the territory are going to be touched by Community Services in respect to l=
ot
development, whether it’s residential — and as you can see,
residential and recreational and also a bit of industrial in all of our com=
munities.
So, again, it’s a need. In fact, Community Services has staff on the
ground in
If you were to=
look at
our inventory, our lots are being eaten up very quickly: Beaver Creek resid=
ential
— they have one lot available; Carmacks, country residential — =
they
have 13 available — commercial, two and the total is 15; Dawson City
— 14 residential lots available; and Haines Junction — tourist
commercial, four.
You can see wh=
ere they
need that investment on the ground there.
Teslin has res=
idential
airport lots — they have 36 there and, commercial, they have two, so =
they
have a bit of inventory.
The capable st=
aff we
have will be travelling to
As you can see=
from
our inventory, there is a need out there and certainly the municipalities h=
ave
been working with us. The urgency is there and we certainly are taking that=
urgency
very seriously.
Mr. Chair, see=
ing the
time, I recommend we report progress.
Chair: It has been moved by Mr. Lang that Commi=
ttee
of the Whole report progress.
Motion agreed to
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
<=
/span>I
move that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Chair: It has been moved by Hon. Mr. Rouble tha=
t the
Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Motion agreed to
Speaker resumes the Chair
Speaker: I will now call the House to order.
May the House =
have a
report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole?
Chair’s report
Mr. Nordick: Committee of the Whole has consider=
ed
Bill No. 20, First Appropriation Act, 2010-11, and directed me to re=
port
progress.
Speaker: You have heard the report from the Chair=
of
Committee of the Whole. Are you agreed?
Some Hon. Members: =
b> Agreed.
Speaker: I declare the report carried.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I move that the House do now adjourn.
Speaker: It has been moved that the House do now =
adjourn.
Motion agreed to
Speaker: This House now stands adjourned until
The House adjourned at
The followi=
ng
documents were filed
10-1-152
Fleet Vehicle =
Agency
2010-2011 Business Plan (Lang)
10-1-153=
Queen’s =
Printer
Agency 2010-2011 Business Plan (Lang)
|
&n=
bsp; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; HANSARD &n=
bsp;  =
; &n=
bsp;  =
; &n=
bsp;
|