MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_01CB6A0E.130F0930" 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_01CB6A0E.130F0930 Content-Location: file:///C:/B1334E96/236.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Speaker: I will now call the House to order. We w=
ill
proceed at this time with prayers.
Prayers
DAILY ROUTINE
Speaker: We will proceed at this time with the Or=
der
Paper.
Tributes.
Introduction of
visitors.
INT=
RODUCTION
OF VISITORS
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Mr. Speaker, I’d ask all Memb=
ers of
the Legislative Assembly to join me in welcoming Mr. Tim Falkenberg and sev=
eral
students from Porter Creek Secondary School to our Assembly today. Welcome.=
Applause
Mr. Cardiff:
Applause
Speaker: Are there any further introduction of vi=
sitors?
Are
there any returns or documents for tabling?
TABLING RETURNS
&nb=
sp; Mr. Cardiff: I have =
for
tabling, for the information of the Legislative Assembly, briefing notes
regarding the motion debated yesterday.
&nb=
sp; Speaker: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Are there any further returns and docume=
nts
for tabling?
Any
reports of committees?
Are
there any petitions?
Are
there any bills to be introduced?
Are
there any notices of motion?
NOTICES OF MOTION
&nb=
sp; Mr. Inverarity: Mr.
Speaker, I rise today to give notice of the following motion:
THAT
this House urges the Government of Canada to reinstate the long-form census=
, as
the decision to abandon the census will cost Yukoners more than $1.5 millio=
n,
and
&nb=
sp; Mr.
Cardiff: I =
give
notice of the following motion:
THAT
this House urges the Yukon government to establish an independent commissio=
n to
review all processes and procedures regarding appointments to government bo=
ards
and committees, including the major government boards and committees listed=
in
Standing Order 45(3.2), including processes for Yukon government appointmen=
ts
to boards and committees established under the Umbrella Final Agreement; and
THAT
this commission report its findings and recommendations to the House not la=
ter
than the end of the 2011 fall sitting of the Legislative Assembly.
Mr. Cathers: <=
/span>I
rise today to give notice of the following motion:
THAT this Hous=
e urges
the
Speaker: Are there any further notices of motion?=
Is there a sta=
tement
by a minister?
Hearing none, =
this
then brings us to Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Yukon Housing
Corporation mortgage portfolio
Mr. McRobb: = Once again it is necessary to revisit an issue this government denied in this House. Evidence obtained later through an access-to-informat= ion request has provided hard evidence proving this government wrong. On April = 12 of this year, the minister responsible for the Yukon Housing Corporation was asked about selling off mortgage portfolios. The minister not only closed t= he door to this possibility, he slammed it shut with these words: “It is absolutely not true,” he said.
Mr. Speaker, the minutes from the Y=
ukon
Housing Corporation Board of Directors meeting for provide the hard evidence that proves the question was legiti=
mate
and the minister’s answer was wrong. Why did the minister deny it, wh=
en the
hard evidence proves otherwise?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
I thank the member opposite for the quest=
ion
since it does give us a chance to clear the record. The documents that the
member opposite referred to before — this summer — when he call=
ed
me some uncomplimentary names, which were, in fact, very much as
uncomplimentary to him. What he presented as evidence, was an analysis done=
by
the Management Board Secretariat, not by Yukon Housing. That analysis from =
the
Management Board Secretariat was never actually presented to the Management
Board. It was never considered by this government. We like to deal with fac=
ts,
not fiction. I do realize that the member opposite does continue to rumble
around, and he has no experience in government. I can understand that he do=
esn’t
understand what a Management Board analysis is. It was never presented to t=
his
government.
Mr. McRobb: Mr. Speaker, this government is in denial=
. This
is the same government that denied it was negotiating the sell-off of
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
The member opposite obviously doesn̵=
7;t
understand what an analysis is and something that has actually been present=
ed
to government. He also seems to forget that the Yukon Housing Corporation B=
oard
of Directors is, in fact, an independent body. If he Googles that, I’m
sure he would be able to discover that, and that seems to be the way he gets
most of his information.
For the member
opposite, I will repeat: it is absolutely not true. It was never considered=
by
this government to do anything with the mortgage portfolio. What we did do =
was
allow some people to go into the private sector — to banks and other =
mortgage
lenders to take a look at their mortgages — because it opens other
things, such as lines of credit, et cetera — things the Yukon Housing=
Corporation
does not do.
At that time, =
we
decided we would probably — at the discretion of the board — wa=
ive
the three-month or whatever the penalty clause is within that mortgage. That
only makes sense. We had no intention of selling anything off. It was a
decision document. We like to deal with facts. The member opposite seems to=
be
more content dealing with speculation.
Mr. McRobb: It’s no wonder why Yukoners are cr=
ying
out for good government. It, too, is no wonder why this Yukon Party governm=
ent
has fallen into disfavour with the people it is supposed to serve. The hard
evidence, which I will file now, proves this government was actively working
behind the scenes to sell the Yukon Housing Corporation’s mortgage
portfolio to a private sector company. Hansard
proves this minister denied it was actively considering any such thing, and=
he
just confirmed that today. The evidence is clear — this matter will be
decided in the court of public opinion and, once again, the verdict wonR=
17;t
be good news for this Yukon Party government. Again, why did the minister d=
eny
it, when the hard evidence proves otherwise?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
The hard evidence is that it was a decis=
ion
document done by the Management Board Secretariat. That’s what they do
for a living. They analyze options and analyze what would happen — pr=
os
and cons — of various decisions. The document was never presented to
Management Board; it does not appear in Management Board documents; it does=
not
appear in Management Board decisions.
Again, the mem=
ber
opposite seems to confuse that the Yukon Housing Corporation Board of Direc=
tors
is an independent body from government. I don’t even get copies of th=
eir
minutes because it’s not part of what I want to know or should know. =
We
have discussions occasionally on philosophy and that sort of thing, but in
terms of being an independent board, they are in fact an independent board.=
I again go bac=
k to
Question re: Yukon Housing Corporation mortgage portfolio
Mr. McRobb: I’ll agree with the minister on th=
at
one. If he would just answer some of these questions, then we would have an
answer.
Yukoners deser=
ve
better — much better. We have a clear-cut case where the minister
responsible for the Yukon Housing Corporation denied privatization efforts =
were
occurring behind the scenes, yet the hard evidence proves otherwise. The bo=
ard
meeting minutes filed this afternoon undeniably prove otherwise. The minutes
revealed the sell-off of the mortgage portfolio to a private sector company=
was
considered. The minutes then went on to analyze public reaction to this opt=
ion.
By the way, it’s also interesting to note that public consultation was
never considered prior to the privatization of Yukoners’ mortgages.
Can the Housing
minister explain that to Yukoners? Why would he not want to hear from Yukon=
ers
first?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Again, the mem=
ber
opposite seems to be confused about the Housing Corporation Board of Direct=
ors,
and the fact that they are an independent body. Now, we do know what the
Liberal Party and the Liberal members think about good Yukoners serving on
independent boards. We appreciate those comments; we appreciate the
participation. We don’t go after and assault these individuals and ma=
ke
claims against them. We accept their advice, and part of that advice is to
advise — that’s the definition. If the member Googled that
definition, he’d probably know that too. So, Mr. Speaker, I really
don’t know if it’s ignorance or apathy, but, frankly, I donR=
17;t
think he knows, and I don’t think he cares.
Unparliamentary language
Speaker: The use of the=
term
“ignorance” in relation to another member in this House is not
acceptable. I know the minister wasn’t referring to the individual me=
mber
himself, but please be careful of that type of terminology.
Mr. McRobb: One would have
thought this government would have learned its lesson about selling off
Yukoners’ assets without a mandate from the voters, yet this
behind-the-scenes activity occurred after the public uproar following the
exposure of this government’s secret plan to privatize Yukoners’ energy future. Furthermor=
e, not
only did this government not let Yukoners in on its secret plan, this Housi=
ng
Corporation minister stood up in this Assembly and pointblank denied it, as=
he
continues to do today. It’s no wonder Yukoners have lost trust in this
government.
Why did the mi=
nister
sanction this secret plan and order it to be taken to Cabinet through a Cab=
inet
submission, yet still deny it in this House?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Again, I do feel that perhaps the member
opposite has some difficulties, having never been able to sit in government
— he has been a long time in this House but has never really been pri=
vy
to what actually happens.
It was never p=
resented
to Cabinet; it was never presented to Management Board. The Yukon Housing
Corporation Board of Directors did their good work to give advice. The Mana=
gement
Board Secretariat did their good work to give advice and options, and the d=
ecision
was made that it would not be taken to government; it was never presented to
government at any point in time.
So I do hope t=
he
member opposite continues to understand that, regarding Yukoners involved w=
ith
boards and committees, we really appreciate their work and we appreciate th=
eir
input.
We
really appreciate their work and we appreciate their input but, frankly, th=
is
government is not about to go after these members, as the member does give =
some
impression that he might be.
Mr. McRobb: Mr. Spe=
aker,
make no mistake about it. This sell-off was considered at the Cabinet level.
This means that all members of Cabinet, which means all Yukon Party ministe=
rs,
were in this together. The board meeting minutes prove it was brought to
Cabinet. I refer everyone to the blanked-out section marked “15.1R=
21;,
which means this section was whited-out due to Cabinet confidentiality.
That’s the hard evidence.
The
hard-working board members were concerned about the ramifications of this
secret Yukon Party plan and the minutes reflect that concern. But that
didn’t stop this Housing minister from ordering a Cabinet submission.
Again, why did he sanction this secret plan and order it be developed into a
Cabinet submission, yet he continues to deny it in this House?
&nb=
sp; Hon.
Mr. Kenyon: For
the member opposite, this was never presented to Cabinet; it was never
presented to Management Board. And
if the member opposite wants to say again it was considered at Cabinet leve=
l,
he is wrong. He is wrong again. I could be more blunt about that — I
can’t in this House — but I do ask the member opposite to go
outside and make some of these allegations, because they are simply not tru=
e.
We deal with f=
act; we
deal with analysis. That’s what government does, and what we do on th=
is
side of the House — we are responsible for what we say, and what we d=
o,
and for the actions that we take. The member opposite and the Official Oppo=
sition
aren’t. They can say anything they want. What’s the member
opposite’s view of collaboration and consulting with Yukoners? As the
Member for Mayo-Tatchun pointed out in Hansard
on May 29, 2002, the Minister of Renewable Resources — and that is the
Liberal minister, Mr. Speaker — rented an RV to travel to the Yukon
campgrounds — $5,000. Is that the Liberal way of consultation? We con=
sult
with our boards and the good people that serve on them.
Question re:
Boards and committees, appointments to
Mr.
Cardiff: Yesterday we presented a proposal to look at the
important work done by 600 citizens serving on 100 boards and committees on
behalf of Yukoners. We brought this proposal forward because we are quite f=
rankly
disturbed by the acrimony, the mudslinging around appointments to boards.
Opposition and government are both guilty of this. We brought forward this
proposal because we were looking for solutions, Mr. Speaker. We wanted to s=
ee
improvements to our extremely important method of citizen democracy and how=
we
recognize the valuable contribution that they make.
It only makes =
sense.
But the government shot this down. They amended the motion so the government
could conduct the review, which they then vetoed.
Why was it so
important for this government to maintain control on this issue?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Actually, the government doesn’t
maintain control on this issue at all. There is the Umbrella Final Agreement; there are legislative mechanisms, pol=
icy
and regulatory processes that control boards and committees. There are even=
corporate
acts that control boards and committees.
Unfortunately,=
the
member of the Third Party, after coming to my office to talk to me about th=
is,
does not reflect here in the House to Yukoners what our discussion was. I w=
as
very open and clear with the member opposite that what the Third Party was
proposing logistically, timeline-wise, and given the order of magnitude of =
what
must be addressed, cannot be done. I expressed that to him in no uncertain
terms. Then I said the government would probably, in the debate in this Hou=
se,
amend that motion so we are better able to actually conduct the process that
the member seeks.
That’s w=
hat the
amendment was about. Unfortunately yesterday, as private members’ days
tend to go, the debate turned into political theatre instead of focusing on=
the
item at hand. The government does not control boards and committees.
Mr. Cardiff: But they wanted to control the review process.
Now when the i=
ssue of
wages for MLAs came up, what did we do? We had an independent review. It ju=
st
makes sense that on certain matters we ask others who have no stake in the
outcome to review and to make recommendations. Our boards and committees sy=
stem
is an integral part of our democracy. Our boards are responsible for so many
functions and so many laws. Through our motion we suggested that there are =
some
problems that might need to be addressed, like the inconsistency with
remuneration levels, like deciding when boards outlive their usefulness, or
when new boards should be created. The major issue is the politicization of
appointments. Whether truth or perception, this is a problem and it may mak=
e it
more difficult to find Yukoners willing to participate on boards. Yesterday=
was
an opportunity to be non-partisan and to give away a little bit of power to=
do
something for the good of all. Why did the government reject that opportuni=
ty?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Unfortunately, the member oppos= ite not only doesn’t understand the task and the scope and the order of magni= tude of what boards and committees do, how they’re structured, how appointments are made, how all facets of this process are conducted, he doesn’t even understand what transpired in the debate yesterday. The government side was pretty clear in our response to what we thought was a constructive motion, which is now appearing to be something else, but we pointed out that this Assembly and these members and this House should not = even be alluding to a perception of politicization when Yukoners submit their na= mes. If the member had looked at the process, he’d realize that soliciting names from Yukoners to serve on boards is done is a very public manner. It’s advertised through the media. Yukoners who choose to put their n= ames forward aren’t expecting a political appointment; they’re expec= ting to serve on boards and committees on behalf of Yukoners. That’s what = the member doesn’t understand.
Furthermore, the member, once again,
ignores the fact that the Third Party was clearly told that the scope of the
undertaking of what the motion proposed was impossible. The government offe=
red
an alternative to get there.
Mr. Cardiff:
The former MLA=
for
Whitehorse Centre used to talk about the need for us as MLAs to raise our g=
ame
and to set a higher standard. For him that was critical if we were to engage
people and to combat cynicism, the indifference and the apathy. That was our
motivation in bringing this motion forward yesterday, to get away from the
mudslinging, the accusations around appointments and to improve the system.=
At the end of =
the
debate, Hansard records that th=
e government
voted against the motion, even after they amended it. It was their motion at
that point. Unfortunately, Hansard<=
/i>
doesn’t capture everything. It doesn’t capture the behaviour on=
the
government side; it doesn’t capture the mocking, the laughter and the
derision. Maybe they can let Yukoners in on the joke: what was so funny abo=
ut
yesterday’s motion debate?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Nothing is funny about yesterday’s
debate. What’s even more of a concern is, before the government side
could even fully articulate the amendment it was proposing, media were call=
ing
government offices about an amendment. I wonder how that happened, when it
comes to raising our game?
Furthermore, w=
hen you
talk about raising our game, yesterday the NDP released a press release
regarding the Peel planning process. Clearly, the NDP would usurp the
obligations of governments in that planning process by standing down on the
public consultation required under the Umbrella
Final Agreement, which is enshrined constitutionally.
Raise our game=
? I
think it’s time the Third Party raised its game.
Now, back to a
constructive approach, the member tabled a motion, once again, and the
government’s side offered, unequivocally, our support to address the
issue, but the government’s more interested in doing it in a manner w=
here
we actually get something done.
Question re: Peel watershed land use plan
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>I have some questions for the Minister of
Tourism. Yesterday I asked the minister about a proposal by one of her
colleague’s for a new tax on tourists. The minister didn’t resp=
ond.
We know it’s the minister’s prerogative, but Yukoners want to h=
ear
from her. She was silent yesterday, just like she has been silent about the
Peel. Last week, one of her colleagues was talking about tourism, and how t=
his
Yukon Party government should put a new tax on tourists using the Peel area.
Now I quote: “…if you’re going to have a value for that
pristine environment, then the people who use that pristine environment will
have to be taxed accordingly.” Let’s hear from the Tourism
minister. Does she support her seatmate’s new tax on tourists?
Hon. Mr. Hart: <=
/span>I
rise today to advise the House that I misspoke during the second reading of
Bill No. 22 on September 28 with regard to a tourism tax. My remarks were t=
aken
out of context. I would like to make it emphatically clear to the House that
the
I apologize to=
the
House for my comments being taken out of context.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Mr. Speaker, last week in this House, in=
the
middle of debate, while the cameras were off, the Minister of Health and So=
cial
Services told Yukoners that he supports a new tax on tourism. He said that;
that was clear. The members opposite know that this is going to have a very=
negative
impact on our visitor industry, and the Minister of Tourism knows that. Thi=
s is
what the Minister of Health and Social Services said: “…if we a=
re
going to have a value for that pristine environment, then the people who use
that pristine environment will have to be taxed accordingly.”
That was clear=
from
the Minister of Health and Social Services. It was clear; we stated it
verbatim. Yukoners want to know from the Minister of Tourism whether she
supports this new tax. Now the Minister of Health and Social Services is
retracting this statement from last week; my goodness, they must have heard=
a
lot from the general public. Why did it take so long for the Minister of He=
alth
and Social Services to change his mind?
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
Again, to the contrary, this govern=
ment
is not imposing any new taxes. It’s not increasing taxes. In fact, th=
is
government has worked very hard over the last eight years to reduce the
corporate tax rate. As the Minister of Health and Social Services just
outlined, a bill is before the Legislature right now that further raises the
small business deduction limit — in fact, to the tune of 150 percent =
when
one looks over the last eight years. Again, this government has been very
supportive of the tourism industry. We recognize that it is very integral to
the growth of the economic health of this territory and, as such, that is w=
hy
this government continues to invest in infrastructure that is complementary=
to
the growth of the tourism sector — infrastructure such as the expansi=
on
of the Whitehorse International Airport — something the members oppos=
ite
take issue with. We continue to invest in product development, in marketing=
and
in research. We continue to work very hard in collaboration with the tourism
sector to grow this territory and continue to invest in infrastructure that
will see the continued growth of the tourism sector.
Question re:
Land-based healing initiative
Mr. Mitchell:
Can the minist=
er tell
the House how much money was spent on this program this past year?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
What’s interesting is the concept =
that
the Liberals continue to put forward about muzzling. We just experienced a
prime example of that very thing.
Furthermore, i=
f the
Leader of the Liberal Party would reflect on the factual information and it=
ems
like party platforms, the member would see clearly that the Yukon Party gov=
ernment
committed to land-based treatment to the Yukon public, and we’re very
pleased with the efforts that the Minister of Health and Social Services
brought to this commitment and that the Minister of Environment brought to =
this
commitment. We’re extremely pleased with all the efforts the Kwanlin =
Dun
First Nation and their government brought to this commission and to the Dep=
artment
of Justice. By the way, in that regard we’ve even had inmates from the
Whitehorse Correctional Centre attending programs and treatment at the
land-based treatment centre. It’s another commitment delivered and
we’re extremely pleased with that.
The problem fo=
r the
Liberals is they voted against the investment dollars that actually created
this treatment program, and now they’ve demonstrated how they muzzle
their own colleagues. First it was the Member for Vuntut Gwitchin on the
long-gun registry and now it’s the Member for Mayo-Tatchun in what he
seems to think is a very important issue.
Mr. Mitchell:
The program wa=
s funded
last year with money from the Government of Canada. It was from a program
that’s now expired. The government cannot go back to that well next y=
ear.
If the government had better controlled their spending, it could have been
funded next year out of the remaining surplus. Yukoners know that two years=
of
reckless spending by this government has almost drained the savings account
down to near nothing. The minister’s officials confirmed last week th=
at
funding for this program is currently up in the air. How does the Premier, =
or
the Health minister, plan to pay for this program next year?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
The Liberals appear to now think that the
program is a very important program for Yukoners. Unfortunately, they
weren’t there, at the camp itself, standing before all its clients and
the individuals who were doing the hard work to create this program —=
to
create this healing camp. They weren’t there expressing their
appreciation for all their efforts and their support. They were nowhere to =
be
seen — speaking of taking a walk, Mr. Speaker.
Furthermore, t=
he
member, the Leader of the Liberal Party, has just stated in this House that=
the
Yukon Party government has conducted, by some measure, reckless spending. H=
ow
can the member explain, then, to the public, that in North America during t=
he
time of a global recession, Yukon was one of the only bright spots of econo=
mic
growth — real economic growth in North America? The reason is our
stimulating the economy through our investments because we had created a
savings account after doubling the fiscal capacity of the
Question re: &=
nbsp;
=
span>Mr.
Mitchell: =
Mr. Speaker, we have asked this gov=
ernment
repeatedly why the residents of Whitehorse Centre don’t deserve to ha=
ve
their own representative in this Chamber. The government has repeatedly dod=
ged
this question and the residents of downtown
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Of course, the government fully supports=
the
fact that all citizens of the territory deserve to be represented in this
House. That is a given. But when it comes to the opposition benches, I think
Yukoners deserve to be represented much better than what we’re seeing
today. The Leader of the Liberal Party, who opposed a healing camp — a
land-based treatment camp — now stands and voices his opinion that th=
is
is a very important program for Yukoners and how the government is going to
continue to support it.
The members opposite — the Li= beral Party — have recently implied that Yukoners, people who serve on boar= ds and committees, are somehow involved in cronyism, Mr. Speaker. Well, by def= inition, that would mean that these individuals are either friends, trusted companio= ns or partners in a criminal organization. Is that called fair and equitable representation for Yukoners — how they’ve singled out those hard-working individuals?
When you compare representation fro= m the Yukon Party — the government side of the House — and the Liberal Party, there is quite a contrast. We actually represent people. We actually deliver for people programs like land-based treatment while the Liberals, w= ho don’t really care about Yukoners — it’s about power ̵= 2; simply oppose all those things.
Mr.
Mitchell: Since the Premi=
er
suggests it can be done better, perhaps the Yukon
The Premier has dragged his heels o=
n this
issue. He has dragged his heels on calling a by-election and he says his go=
vernment
is deliberating on what would be in the best public interest.
Let’s de=
fine the
term “public interest”, since it’s clear this government =
has
been so caught up by its own agenda that it has never fully grasped this
concept. “Public” in this case refers to Yukoners, all of whom
would be in support of giving the citizens of Whitehorse Centre their
democratic rights to be fully represented. “Interest” in this c=
ase
refers to what is best for these people — not, we might add, what is =
in
the best interest of the Yukon Party.
So we would as=
k the
Premier again: how is it in the public’s best interest not to have a =
say
in who represents them and how they are represented?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
In the first instance, the Liberal
leader’s assertions about representation are incorrect. Furthermore, =
it
is all about the public agenda. That’s why the Yukon Party government=
has
been working so hard over the last eight years, now going on nine years, to
ensure the public interest is being met. We have a litany of examples of the
Liberal Party where the public interest is not even part of the discussion.=
I point to the=
facts
where the Liberal Party has singled out citizens of this territory because =
they
practice their right to freedom of speech. They are brought before this Hou=
se
in a manner that is unacceptable when it comes to the public interest; when
they reference people’s involvement in boards and committees and, by =
some
strange assertion, that they may have a political affiliation and that spea=
ks
to some type of wrongdoing.
That’s n=
ot
representing the public interest, Mr. Speaker; that’s an attack on the
public interest. The Liberals can’t have it both ways. They’re
either here for the public interest and the public agenda or their own.
Mr. Mitchell: Well, perhaps the Premier is afraid to call a by-election because he
knows that any Yukon Party candidate would face an uphill battle trying to
explain why there was no election in time to sit in this Chamber. This would
serve as a reminder of just how little Yukoners respect and trust this curr=
ent
government. People are tired of the scandals; they’re tired of not be=
ing
given straight answers, and they are tired of being treated like their opin=
ions
are an inconvenience to this government. The people of Whitehorse Centre ha=
ve a
right to elected representation in this House, and it is truly sad that this
right has been squashed by this Premier. It may be fruitless to expect a di=
rect
answer from this Premier, but in the best interests of the public, let̵=
7;s
try one more time. When will the residents of Whitehorse Centre be given th=
eir
right for elected representation?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that we’=
;ve
already responded to that on many occasions, and the fact of the matter is =
that
we are endeavouring, as quickly as possible, to do exactly that. It is about
the public interest, Mr. Speaker, but the Leader of the Liberal Party is now
suggesting that there are numerous scandals. You know, the real problem her=
e is
how the member presents that to this Assembly, because they use the fact th=
at
people who serve in the public are somehow affiliated to government in what=
ever
manner and that’s how they intend to present to the The member obv=
iously
wants to get into an election campaign — soon enough — and the
Liberals will have a lot to answer to in an election campaign, frankly, and=
we
know what that’s all about. That’s where we’re not hiding
behind the immunity of this Assembly. That’s where the Liberals will =
have
to face the public with factual information. Speaker: The time for Question Period has elapsed.
We’ll proceed to Orders of the Day. ORD=
ERS OF THE
GOV=
ERNMENT
MOTIONS Motion No. 1172 Clerk: Motion No. 1172, standing in the name of=
the
Hon. Ms. Taylor. Speaker: It is moved by the Government House Lead=
er THAT the membe=
rship of
the Members’ Services Board, as established by Motion No. 7 and Motion
No. 887 of the First Session of the 32nd Legislative Assembly, be
amended by appointing Steve Cardiff to the board. Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
<=
/span>I
won’t be too long in my remarks in response to this motion that I am
bringing forward. The motion is =
quite
self-explanatory; it speaks to a reconfiguration of the Members’ Serv=
ices
Board, with the loss of the former Member for Whitehorse Centre. He is to be
replaced by the Member for Mr. Mitchell: Mr. Cardiff: I would like to thank the Government House Leader and=
the
Leader of the Official Opposition for the motion and for their support. It =
is
extremely difficult, given the circumstances, but I look forward to serving=
on
the Members’ Services Board and hope to provide good representation, =
just
like my former colleague from Whitehorse Centre. Mr. Cathers: This is a housekeeping matter occas=
ioned
by the sad loss of the Member for Whitehorse Centre. It is a change to bring
about the standard configuration on the Members’ Services Board, so I
will be supporting the motion. Motion No. 1172 agreed to GOV=
ERNMENT
BILLS Bill No. 86: Act
to Amend the Business Corporations Act — Second Reading Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 86, standing in=
the
name of the Hon. Mr. Lang. Hon. Mr. Lang: Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Com=
munity
Services that Bill No. 86, entitled Act to
Amend the Business Corporations Act, be now read a second time. Hon. Mr. Lang: I’m pleased to rise today spe=
ak to
Bill No. 86, Act to Amend the Busin=
ess
Corporations Act. Before highlighting the changes in this bill, however=
, I
want to take a moment to point out that amendments proposed to the Business Corporations Act are part=
of a
much larger initiative by this government. This initiative, called the
“business legislation reform project” began over two years ago =
when
we introduced The goals of t=
he business
legislation reform project are to modernize Since the spri=
ng of
2008, a working group of representatives from Community Services and Justice
have been working collaboratively on the business legislation reform projec=
t.
This work includes full public consultation, as well as close collaboration
with the local business law subsection of the Canadian Bar Association. I want to ackn=
owledge
the I would like t=
o thank
the team of professionals — both in government and in the private sec=
tor
— who have worked so hard to develop and review the proposed amendmen=
ts.
Through their efforts, I have the honour today of introducing this bill, an
important step to highlight that the Its changes pr=
ompt
complementary and consequential amendments to the three other The other piec=
es of
legislation to be introduced in this session are the Act to Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act, which cont=
ains
rules for partnership, registration and renewal, and for legally naming
partnerships and sole proprietorships, the Act
to Amend the Societies Act, which contains the rules for registering and
operating of charitable and nonprofit entities, and the Act to Amend the Cooperative Associations Act, which covers
registration and operation of cooperatives. As I stated ea=
rlier,
our commitment to business legislation reform comes from our awareness that=
Updates to the=
se
business-related acts will provide the legal infrastructure necessary to
facilitate current business and encourage new economic development to take
place. For example, if the number of corporations registered here increased,
there would be increased tax revenues for Standing still=
with
outdated legislation is not an option. In all five acts introduced during t=
his
session, our goal is to use terminology clearly and consistently to avoid c=
onfusion,
to reduce barriers to effective management of corporations, to fully enable=
the
use of technology and to accommodate modern business practices. I’ll now=
speak
more specifically about Bill No. 86, an Act
to Amend the Business Corporations Act. The Yukon’s =
Business Corporations Act contains=
the
rules around corporations carrying on business, including what shares can be
issued, the rights and obligations of shareholders and directors, the
requirements around record-keeping and holding meetings and other specific =
or
corporate structures and management. Users of the a=
ct
include corporate lawyers, accountants, directors, shareholders and credito=
rs,
as well as the general public and parties dealing with corporations. The
existing Business Corporations Act<=
/i>
has 208 sections and it is by far the largest, most comprehensive and compl=
ex
of the acts being amended during this session. The amendments themselves are
very technical and there are over 100 pages of changes to this act. The amendments=
are
primarily modelled on the In order to su=
mmarize
for you the numerous and highly technical changes proposed to the act, we w=
ill
group them into three themes. The first theme of amendments updates sections
that deal with corporate governance. These amendments include measures desi=
gned
to facilitate communications, enhance the effectiveness of audit requiremen=
ts
and balance privacy concerns with public access to information. Some of the ch=
anges
are related to financial structure and transactions, record-keeping,
corporation reorganizations and the decision-making responsibilities and
liabilities of management. Other amendments improve measures related to for=
eign
entities carrying on business in Collectively, =
these
amendments provide for more effective management of corporations. They prov=
ide
more flexibility and efficiency, clarifying procedures, create a better def=
ined
scope for directors’ duties, and provide broader access for corporati=
ons
to resolve issues through the courts. The registrar’s powers are
clarified, and balanced consideration is given to the rights of all
stakeholders. The second the=
me of
amendments deals with securities transfer law, which involves security cert=
ificates,
registration and transfer of securities. Updating these topics in the propo=
sed
new Securities Transfer Act mea=
nt
deleting much of part 6 of the existing Business
Corporations Act and making related changes in the other sections of the
act. The third them=
e of the
amendment corrects errors and omissions and updates terminology. For exampl=
e,
the amendments now allow most company naming requirements to be specified in
the regulations rather than fixed in the act. These amendments remove
inconsistencies, uncertainty, and provisions that duplicate, and sometimes
conflict with, provisions in the new Securities
Act. Penalties are moved to regulations where they are typically found =
in
legislation, rather than fixed in the act. Various administration procedures
are clarified, and additional authority is given to the registrar to correct
incorrect documents. Public and
stakeholders consultation on this bill took place in May and June of this y=
ear.
Due to the complexity of the subject matter and the large number of proposed
amendments, draft legislation, a plain language document and question-and-a=
nswer
notes were provided to key interest groups and posted on-line. Feedback from =
the
consultation was positive. Both the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce and the
Institute of Chartered Accountants of Yukon welcomed the proposed amendment=
s. As a result of=
these
proposed changes, I move that Bill No. 86, entitled Act to Amend the Business Corporations=
Act,
be now read a second time.YukonYukonYukon
We
recognize that some smaller corporations incorporated under the current act
have been created without legal advice. The proposed changes will allow
maintenance of those corporations exactly as in the past. Rather than making
life more complicated, the amendments will increase options regarding meeti=
ngs
and record-keeping.
Most
Corporations t=
hat do
issue public shares, known as reporting issuers, will still be required to
comply with the securities laws in the
Combined with
amendments to the other acts that are part of the business legislation refo=
rm
project, the amendments that form the Act
to Amend the Business Corporations Act will improve the existing regula=
tory
framework through modernization. This will contribute to making
In conclusion,=
the
benefits of the amendments proposed for the Yukon
The general pu=
blic
will still have access to corporation records that show, for instance, who =
the
directors of a corporation are.
Directors of e=
xisting
corporations will find that the amendments clarify, simplify or add flexibi=
lity
to their day-to-day responsibilities. For instance, they will be allowed to
hold virtual meetings and conduct electronic voting, using modern technolog=
y.
Directors will=
be able
to be elected for terms of up to three years, instead of the current one-ye=
ar
maximum. The fundamental responsibility of directors to manage the business
affairs of the corporation will be unchanged.
As a public
government, we do need to take a balanced approach when introducing legisla=
tion
reform. I am confident this bill is an appropriate balance that makes Yukon=
a
more attractive jurisdiction in which to register and operate business
entities, the interests of the corporate law community and the very importa=
nt
consideration of protecting shareholders’ and consumers’ rights.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Mitchell:
I also would l=
ike to
thank the members of the
As the ministe=
r said,
it is time to update this legislation. The amendments to the Business Corporations Act are some=
131
pages long. It may be the weightiest tome to have been tabled in this Assem=
bly
over the last four years, and it is certainly the most technically complex.=
As has been ex=
plained
by the minister and also explained by the local members of the Canadian Bar
Association, Yukon
We will certai=
nly have
questions in more detail when we get to Committee, but we haven’t mov=
ed
the bar too far, so to speak, in that all of the parties, the corporations,=
the
shareholders, and the financiers that are involved within corporate structu=
res
within governance are all being well served by this new legislation, and we
have every reason to believe that they will be. As the minister explained, =
this
act is sort of the quarterback — if I might use the sports analogy
— to the other acts, and it does drive changes in the Securities Transfer Act, which is =
being
separated into its own act, as well as to Act
to Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act, Act to Amend the Societies Act and Act to Amend the Cooperative Association Act, all of which requ=
ire
updates in concert with this act.
I won’t =
spend
much more time, because we will have the opportunity in Committee to debate
this in detail, other than to say, as the minister did, that this act, Bill=
No.
86, really involves three main areas. The changes — the first one bei=
ng
to corporate governance, modernizing the act, facilitating communications,
enhancing the effectiveness of audit requirements, affecting financial
structures and transactions, improving record-keeping and a number of other=
s.
Clarifying decision-making and responsibilities and liabilities and a few o=
ther
things that are quite interesting even in terms of the ability of directors=
of
a corporation to pursue opportunities that they become aware of within the
corporation, should that corporation turn down those opportunities directly,
but a proper way of documenting that everybody has been protected in that
process. The changes in the securities transfer law — because they are
now in the old Business Corporation=
s Act
— result largely from the fact that they are being put in their own
separate bill, and that’s only logical, and then there’s a numb=
er
of housekeeping amendments. I’m sure the minister will go through tho=
se
in detail when we’ll be in Committee.
We do think th=
at this
is positive legislation, and it’s important that we update these bills
from time to time. This particular act is a lot more than housekeeping. The=
re
are some substantive changes and we look forward to the more detailed debate
when the officials are present in Committee, and we can get answers to spec=
ific
questions.
Mr. Cathers: <=
/span>In
rising to speak to second reading on this legislation, I want to first of a=
ll
thank the minister for tabling this legislation and thank the officials for=
the
briefing this morning. I certainly recognize where the business reform proj=
ect
began. I was involved in discussions at the start of that exercise and
recognized a need to update our legislation.
In reviewing t=
he
legislation and discussing it with officials, it does appear to be good
legislation. I also have not yet heard from constituents any concerns relat=
ed
to this piece of legislation. Without having had the opportunity to engage =
in a
very lengthy review or the detailed line-by-line review of policy and wordi=
ng
at the Legislative Overview Committee and Cabinet Committee on Legislation
stages, I am, to some degree, relying on information from the minister and
officials in addition to my own perusal of the legislation.
I would note, =
though,
that the Deputy Minister of Community Services — when I was Minister =
of
Energy, Mines and Resources — did an excellent job of leading another
major legislative project — the Forest
Resources Act — and I certainly have confidence in his work and
abilities in getting the details right.
I would apprec=
iate
hearing, at the Committee of the Whole stage, further details about this
legislation and would appreciate it if the minister would provide informati=
on
including the list of the 122 issues I understand were identified during
consultation. I did ask for that information, but I asked for the informati=
on
only late this morning, so I understand that the minister will be providing
that, but he undoubtedly has not had time to do so yet.
I again look f=
orward
to discussion in Committee of the Whole. No concerns are coming to light at
this point in time, but I recognize the importance of both this legislation=
and
the entire package of legislation, which is part of the business reform pro=
ject.
I want to do my due diligence as a member of this House in reviewing it and
identifying any concerns that come to light.
I look forward=
to
further discussion and to more information at the Committee of the Whole st=
age
in this Assembly.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> <=
/span>My
comments today will focus on the following areas: the context of bills; why=
we
need business legislation; responsibility to facilitate capital investment
through regulatory regime; and responsibility to protect investors.
I want to begi=
n by
putting this bill within the larger context of how this government is
delivering on our platform commitments. One of the things I’ve notice=
d is
that sometimes the members opposite lose sight of how these areas interconn=
ect.
The
I have spoken
previously about things that we need to build a better economy. We need a
transportation network to move people, supplies and products. We need a
communications network to share information. We need access to energy at
affordable rates. We need a pool of skilled and available workers. We need
access to investment capital and we need a balanced, consistent, modern
regulatory regime.
These changes =
fit with
our platform commitments; they also address some very important needs, like=
the
need to improve access to investment capital markets and the need for a
balanced, consistent, modern regulatory regime.
I want to summ=
arize
the progress we have made to date. I just noted that a strong economy requi=
res
a transportation network to move people, supplies and products. We are
constantly improving our transportation network. This year we are investing
some $15 million in the
I stated that =
we need
access to energy at affordable rates. We have the Mayo B project underway. I
would also note we are nearing the completion of the power line that connec=
ts
Carmacks to Stewart Crossing and the Dawson-Mayo grid. Part of building a
successful economy is connecting employers with a pool of skilled and avail=
able
workers. My colleague, the Minister of Education, has been very diligent on
this file. I’ll just note that we in the government have made substan=
tial
investments in this area, including a substantial commitment to the previou=
sly,
often ignored, trades and technology sector of the economy.
As an aside, p=
eople
who have viable, healthy employment options are less likely to stay in
unhealthy or unrewarding situations. I believe that a job is the best solut=
ion
to unemployment. Today, we have a job market that is accessible to people of
all skill levels. Today, we have jobs looking for people. Contrast that with
the Liberals: under the Liberals, we had people looking for jobs and we had
people looking for U-Hauls.
These changes =
fit with
our platform commitment; they also address some very important needs, like =
the
need to improve access to investment capital markets and the need for a bal=
anced,
consistent, modern regulatory regime. I think about the different sectors of
the economy that are going to need investment capital — like mining, =
for
example. In 2003-04, the Fraser Institute ranked
Mining compani=
es are
able to do business here with legislative and regulatory certainty. The top=
10
scorers in a 2010 update are: third and and rounding out the top 10.
Part of our ag=
enda is
to institute a regulatory regime that enables investment while protecting
investors. Ten years ago under the Liberals’ watch, people were willi=
ng
to invest in Northwest Territories
A review of the
literature indicates that the Liberals’ regulatory nightmare was a key
factor in driving investors away from
The Liberals looked at the process
negotiated and agreed to in the land claims treaties — looked at it a=
nd
said, “no thanks”. The Liberal idea of good governance is to cr=
eate
duelling rival regulatory regimes that are hopelessly confusing, convoluted=
and
expensive. The Liberals set up that duelling land regulatory process. Inves=
tors
got caught in the crossfire and fled and, consequently, so did
We heard earli=
er today
that the Liberals wanted a chance to have the keys again to drive the bus
— I think not.
I’ve spo=
ken in
the past about what an economy needs to be successful and one of the things=
I
noted was the ability for individuals and businesses to access capital. Cap=
ital
is the lifeblood of any business, but especially small businesses. Without
adequate financing through microloans, commercial lending or investment
capital, most entrepreneurs cannot start a new business or grow their exist=
ing
companies.
Obtaining capi=
tal can
be especially difficult for start-ups and small firms that often lack the y=
ears
in business or established credit history financial institutions may require
prior to lending. We have moved to address some of the challenges facing
Yukoners when it comes to accessing capital.
Part of the st=
rategy
has been to leave more money in Yukoners’ pockets.
Today’s =
business
people recognize the available labour pool in Yukon communities, the
infrastructure in place to service development, and a favourable tax regime=
as
successful components in building a healthy return on investment.
The remaining =
pieces
are being addressed in this suite of bills. The Business Corporations Act is the legislation under which compan=
ies
are incorporated in the
Additionally, =
there
are many parts of Yukon’s Bus=
iness
Corporations Act that are out of date, simply from the passage of time =
and
the updating or introduction of related legislation, such as the Securities Act, and the proposed Securities Transfer Act.
As I stated ea=
rlier,
the government’s job is to ensure that our legislation is balanced
— that it both enables activity and offers protection to Yukoners. The
companion legislation to the Busine=
ss
Corporations Act includes the S=
ecurities
Act. The
In plain langu=
age,
reporting issuers sell securities to the general public, while non-reporting
issuers are private or closely held businesses.
The Securities Act sets out disclosure
requirements for reporting issuers. Business
Corporations Act legislation in most Canadian jurisdictions has
historically followed the federal C=
anada
Business Corporations Act model. The Canada
Business Corporations Act was significantly amended approximately nine
years ago, and many other Canadian jurisdictions have also updated and
modernized their respective Busines=
s Corporations
Acts.
There has been=
little
change to
One of my conc=
erns was
ensuring that, in the course of making these changes, we maintain protection
for our investors. The general public will still have access to corporate r=
ecords
that show who the directors of a corporation are for both reporting issuers=
and
non-reporting issuers. The general public will still be able to find out who
the shareholders of a reporting issuer are; however, for non-reporting issu=
ers,
access to shareholder information will be limited to other shareholders, di=
rectors
and creditors of the corporation and any other group identified in the
regulations, in order to safeguard legitimate privacy concerns of individua=
ls.
Shareholder re=
medies,
meaning those options available to shareholders who disagree with actions
contemplated or taken by the corporation, contained in the Business Corporations Act are clarified and will continue to
provide protection to shareholders of both reporting and non-reporting issu=
ers.
Shareholders, directors and company managers will continue to seek legal ad=
vice
in order to properly canvass all the options available to them and their
corporations under the amended Busi=
ness
Corporations Act.
The proposed Securities Transfer Act recognizes=
there
is, in addition to the traditional hard-copy securities, the modern electro=
nic
methods of holding and transferring securities, and its uniform legislation
mirrors rules applicable in almost all other provinces and territories. It =
is
part of a national initiative to harmonize securities legislation across =
span>
I know these c=
hanges
do fit with our platform commitments. They also address some very important
needs, like the need to improve access to investment capital markets and the
need for a balanced, consistent, modern regulatory regime.
I urge all mem=
bers of
this Assembly to support this bill.
Mr. Cardiff: I’ll try to be brief. First of all, I’d l=
ike
to thank the officials and the staff in the Department of Community Services
for providing the briefing this morning. I’d also like to thank all t=
he
people — this is a very complex and technical document and I’m =
sure
that much work and thought went into it. It’s a lot to digest in a sh=
ort
period of time. I think I understand the intent of the business legislation
reform project and the bill to modernize our legislation and to harmonize i=
t so
that it works not just here in the
I think that
it’s good that we’re working with other jurisdictions to make o=
ur
legislation throughout
I understand t=
here are
some modernization pieces to the act, as well as taking the security transf=
ers
piece of the legislation out of it and creating a second piece of legislati=
on,
Bill No. 87 — which we’ll probably be speaking to later this
afternoon, as long as we don’t get too many more infomercials from the
government — and some housekeeping amendments.
While I’=
m not going
to be long in debate here, I suspect there will be some questions we would =
like
to ask of a general nature when we get into Committee of the Whole, to ensu=
re
this legislation is in the best interest of all Yukoners and that it serves=
us
well into the future.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
<=
/span>I
am also very pleased to add my voice to Bill No. 86, Act to Amend the Business Corporations Act. I’d like=
to
thank the Minister of Community Services and his officials for bringing for=
ward
this statute for consideration of the Legislature. As has already been poin=
ted
out, it is a very substantive bill, to the tune of 298 sections, comprising
about 100 pages of proposed changes for consideration. It is a somewhat com=
plex
bill, it is a long bill, but again it is a part of this government’s =
mandate
to provide good governance. In general ter=
ms, it
is updating our business legislation pertaining to the territory; we know t=
hat
it has not been touched for some 20 years, so it is in need of modernizatio=
n,
with all that has transpired across this country over the last number of ye=
ars.
We have heard of some of the benefits accrued from some of these changes co=
ming
forward: more businesses incorporating in the territory, the tax revenue th=
at
comes along with those businesses coming to Yukon
The changes
we’re speaking to have been in the making for some time. There have b=
een
ongoing discussions for a long time. I know we’ve had some discussions
over the years with the business community on the need to look at modernizi=
ng
and harmonizing our legislation to make us a competitive destination of cho=
ice,
to bring us not only up to par with other jurisdictions, but also to give u=
s a
competitive advantage with some of the proposed changes.
I also want to=
thank
the Department of Justice for working collaboratively with the Department of
Community Services on this project. As you can appreciate, there’s a
substantive amount of technical information and attention to detail in putt=
ing
forth a statute such as this for consideration, and it takes a lot of thoug=
ht,
research, and dialogue with the community and all our stakeholders.
I would also l=
ike to
thank all of the public who provided their input during public consultation,
especially the business law subsection of the Canadian Bar Association. I a=
lso
want to acknowledge the
As we have alr=
eady
heard, these proposed changes also prompt other changes — complementa=
ry
consequential amendments — to other
As I mentioned
earlier, this will have some significant benefits to what we have in place,=
but
what we have already talked to — and the Minister of Justice just poi=
nted
out — it does build upon our mandate, our commitment to Yukoners, to
provide a climate that is conducive to the growth of the private sector and
other governing bodies in the territory. We have been able to do just that.
This is part and parcel of adding to the long list of initiatives this
government has brought forward over the last number of years — eight
years, to be exact — in terms of providing tax relief.
There has been=
a bit
of debate in terms of what taxes are being proposed; again, I’ll just
speak to the contrary, that it’s this government that has actually go=
ne
to work to reduce taxes by lowering, for example, the small business corpor=
ate
tax rate. It’s one of the first things this government did upon being
elected. We are also looking at another piece of legislation that is also
before the Legislature, which further raises the small business deduction
limit.
When one puts =
it all together,
as I’ve mentioned before, it totals about a 150-percent increase just
over the last eight years, so this bill and the associated consequential
amendments that are being brought forward as a result of this statute only
serves to complement what we have brought forward and what we continue to b=
ring
forward as part of our good governance in the territory. It also builds upon
some of the very significant and strategic investments that this government=
has
made over the last number of years, which are conducive to the growth of
industries in the territory. From the tourism perspective, I have made refe=
rence
many times to significant infrastructure, when it comes to providing the
infrastructure that is conducive to the growth of air access — the
expansion of the international airport in Whitehorse being one of them; mak=
ing
improvements to our other airports — Dawson City, Old Crow.
When it comes =
to
expanding our network of highways throughout the territory, again, signific=
ant
dollars are being invested, in collaboration with other governments and this
too promotes the
We have been a=
ble to
significantly invest in a number of other pieces of infrastructure over the
years, in terms of providing attractions and assisting with the heritage co=
mmunity
— our museums, First Nation heritage cultural centres, community inte=
rpretive
centres. We have also been very pleased about our investments to expand our
broadband access, in collaboration with the private sector.
As well, we ha=
ve been
pleased to invest in other programs through the Department of Economic
Development, Tourism and Culture, Department of Finance, and there are many
others that have also helped support many strategic opportunities in the
territory pertaining to the tourism sector, as well as the mining sector, f=
ilm
industry, sound recording, arts and culture, when it comes to the IT, and m=
ore
recently, working to expand the knowledge sector with the investments going=
on
at Yukon College, and working to enhance our cluster of innovation that is
going on throughout the circumpolar north and being able to capitalize on t=
hose
investment initiatives, such as what is going on at Yukon College, in
collaboration with a multitude of different partners — governments,
agencies, organizations, individuals at large.
When we look a=
t our
own Department of Tourism and Culture — we spoke recently about touri=
sm
marketing, product development, research, and providing opportunities throu=
gh
our tourism cooperative marketing fund, for example. All of these lend to t=
he
growth of the tourism sector and these have all been identified as priority
initiatives for moving forward in assisting and meeting those strategic
opportunities associated with the tourism sector.
Likewise throu=
gh the
Department of Economic Development, we’ve been able to invest in new
programs — the strategic industries development fund, which provides =
the
opportunity to generate significant revenues through the development of new
initiatives. The regional economic development fund facilitates that
coordinated, collaborative approach to community planning throughout the
territory.
The enterprise=
trade
fund has proven to stimulate and support the growth of our business activity
through business development, building export capacity, and revenues.
Even when we l=
ook to
the community development fund — we’ve been very pleased to
reinstate that program, as it was dismantled by the previous government. Th=
is
is a fund that continues to support
Mr. Speaker, t= here is significant investment by our government over the years, and this bill spea= ks to one more piece to complement that which has been already invested.
I am just look=
ing
through some of the specifics of the bill before us. We talked about benefi=
ts
accruing from enhanced tax revenues, which will help supplement government
programs that we already deliver, as well as new programs. It will generate=
job
creation in the legal profession, as well as enhance interest in investing =
in
the territory and all that brings with it.
The bill itsel=
f goes
through a number of different parts. I don’t want to repeat what has
already been stated on the floor by the Minister of Justice and the Ministe=
r of
Community Services, but it helps to clarify and consistently avoid confusio=
n.
It reduces barriers to more effectively managing corporations and it fully
enables comprehensive acts being amended during this sitting, which are als=
o on
the docket here this afternoon.
The proposed
amendments will also enhance the effectiveness of audit requirements, while
balancing our privacy concerns with access to public information — ag=
ain,
raising the bar in terms of providing a transparency and openness in conduc=
ting
business in the Yukon climate.
Collectively, =
when all
is said and done, the amendments do propose more effective management of the
corporations doing business in the territory. We know that, pursuant to con=
sultations
and the briefings that have been made to the members opposite, it will prov=
ide
not only greater transparency but greater flexibility for individuals to
customize their corporations, their internal structure, to better reflect t=
heir
own mandate and intentions, while having public access to corporate records=
, as
it has already been pointed out, that show, for example, who the directors =
of a
corporation are.
In terms of the
directors of the corporations, they will find that these amendments help
clarify, add flexibility, simplify day-to-day responsibilities, and in term=
s of
even being able to conduct business electronically — something new wi=
thin
this bill — that again reflects the ever-evolving trend of technologi=
es
as we see it today. For example, they will be able to conduct virtual meeti=
ngs
and conduct electronic voting using technologies of the day. These are all
things that make sense, but again weren’t necessarily around some 20
years ago. As has already been pointed out by the Minister of Community Ser=
vices,
directors will be able to be elected for terms of up to three years versus =
the
current one-year maximum. At the end of the day, the fundamental responsibi=
lity
of directors is to manage business and the affairs of the corporation, and =
that
remains unchanged.
I believe the =
tenets
of the bill do strike a balance. It has taken significant time — over=
two
years — to come up with this suite of legislation before us, but it
clearly sets out the relationships of our corporations to each other and the
entities to which this particular bill applies.
It not only pe=
rtains
to the interpretation, it also brings clarity to the application of the
definitions and the relationships. It also speaks to incorporation, capacity
and powers and registering an office. It speaks to corporate finance —
issuing shares and numerous share-related matters. It speaks to various mat=
ters
as they pertain to share certificates, including the issuance, registration=
, delivery,
transfer of warranties and corporate borrowing. It sets out some of the
parameters for borrowing by corporations.
It pertains to
receivers, receiver/managers, where a corporation, for example, is in
receivership; the functions and the duties — spelling it out very cle=
arly
— of the receivers and receiver/managers. The bill also, as I mention=
ed,
makes reference to directors, including election and meetings pertaining to
matters of importance, appointment of officers and making bylaws.
I see that my =
time is
waning. It is unfortunate, because there is a multitude of different areas =
that
I could speak to at greater length. Again, I would commend this bill before=
us
to members of the Legislature. I thank the minister and his department offi=
cials
for bringing this forward. Thank you.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
We have to look at this act in terms of =
the
economic impact, and specifically the Act
to Amend the Business Corporations Act — really, the whole gamut =
of
what we’re talking about here. The purpose of the Act to Amend the Business Corporations Act is really to enable =
and
regulate the creation of local
The Department=
of
Economic Development continually strives to assist in promoting Yukon to ot=
her
jurisdictions close to home and around the world as a great place to do
business, and we’re very pleased to get back into this business after=
the
department was so creatively disbanded under the previous Liberal governmen=
t.
The number one=
reason,
really, involved in this is, of course, our location. Our geography, our
political borders and proximity to major economic centres and amenities mak=
e us
ideally situated for new business. It’s this
proximity to It’s alw=
ays a
challenge when we go with PNWER — Pacific NorthWest Economic Region
— to meetings, both in Canada and the United States, to remind both
nations that, from the United States’ perspective, there is a southern
border, a northern border and then a more-northern border. Sometimes that is
completely missed, particularly with the U.S. Department of State, which se=
ems
to forget it’s there. The second poi=
nt is
unprecedented access and infrastructure — we’ve built amenities
that are ideally suited to the way we work and live, and they include, for
instance, the Erik Nielsen Whitehorse International Airport, plus 10 commun=
ity
airports, over 40,700 kilometres of all-weather roads and a year-round high=
way
system that can accommodate loads up to 77,000 kilograms, a modern
telecommunications network with Internet access in most communities, and I
point out, specifically, the broadband Internet. We have clean,=
stable
energy, and recently expanded electrical grids, soon to tie the north grid =
and
the south grid together. It will increase our capacity; it will increase our
flexibility; it will increase our stability, and we are all looking forward=
to
that. Hydro produces over 80 percent of capacity, supplemented by diesel pl=
ants
and renewable energy, though there remains a large potential for hydro and
wind. I do have to make a comment on wind there, Mr. Speaker. Wind remains =
an excellent
way; it has so much potential. Unfortunately, not in the Yukon, and
that’s not just saying something; that’s the result of engineer=
ing
studies that have been done by the Yukon Energy Corporation, which only sho=
w a
couple of very distinct areas that would be suitable. One is well off the g=
rid
and would be horrendously expensive to tie into, and the other one is in the
middle of a wildlife sanctuary, so I don’t think that any member of t=
his
House wants to go there. Wind is really not that good; we need altitude. We
don’t need the power in the summer as much as we need it in the winter
and in the winter we have rime icing — much like aircraft — whi=
ch
requires a fair amount of the energy produced to keep the ice off the blades
rather than producing power for the grids, so it has very limited capabilit=
ies
here. We have year-r=
ound
road access to the ice-free ports as I mentioned, to We have world-=
class
heath services and recreational opportunity. Now the opposi=
tion has
been saying that they wanted us to establish a university. I will leave som=
e of
those comments to our Minister of Education, but I do want to point out tha=
t I
believe the opposition actually voted for the bill a year or two ago that n=
ow
modifies the act that allows If we take the
pan-northern approach, depending on where that goes, by the time you fly fr=
om and southern Haines, ’s 880,000 cruise ship passengers a=
lso
visit — with a population of roughly 650=
,000
— provides a sizable potential market for and Whitehorse
There are 28 p=
ublic
schools that offer award-winning programming for K to 12; Catholic and Fren=
ch
emersion streams are also available. Look at the
Our communitie=
s are
radiant and thriving. We are well known for our traffic minute, as opposed =
to a
traffic hour or rush hour. When I was in , I had five people working for me who co=
mmuted
over an hour and a half each way to get to work. It takes me about four min=
utes
actually, and some of our staff walks across the street. The traffic jams a=
re
really not there.
Urban sprawl a=
nd long
commutes are non-existent. Instead, Yukon offers easy access to favourite
recreational pastimes, as I mentioned — be it on the ski hills, which=
is
a vibrant activity up here, both downhill and cross-country, and many
areas for cross-country are
illuminated. We have golf courses and cross-country trails. We choose
We offer excit=
ing and
varied year-round recreational possibilities, whether you take advantage of=
our
many recreational facilities or choose to make your own fun, the options are
limitless.
They
have realized that the opportunities here are far ahead of what is available
down south — just simply nature is going to draw people in under an
enhanced business regime. What if
So
with the lower tax rates — and all the members opposite have claimed =
that
we’re looking at raising rates. We are certainly not, and in fact
legislation which is through second reading in this session, which they vot=
ed
for, actually lowers tax rates. They didn’t notice that. That kind of
missed their attention there.
So
with our wide, open spaces and the sense of excitement — it’s
incredible — and its very friendly and supportive communities, the
quality of life is better here, and we think a better business regime will
accomplish that.
We have no ter=
ritorial
sales tax, and we have very highly competitive taxation. It’s one of =
the
things that drew me up here initially — before I saw it — was t=
he
fact that the highest taxation regime in Canada, at that point, was in Onta=
rio,
which is where I was doing time. I did manage to escape from during the Ray regime, 20-some years ago=
. At
that time,
We’re op=
en for
business. Yukon has, as I say, no government debt; we have the lowest perso=
nal
income tax rates in Canada; very competitive corporate income tax rates; an=
d despite
the low taxes — and there’s an issue — we have a bill that
the Liberal Party actually voted for, and then promptly forgot about. Even =
in that
case, our government spends a higher percentage of its annual budget on cap=
ital
projects than any other capital jurisdiction — anywhere in
The advantages=
of
doing business in the
Progressive
legislation, like the
Any business w=
ill soon
discover that our most valuable resource, really, is our people.
From forestry =
to
mining, for more than 100 years, people have worked to develop expertise for
working in remote, cold climate conditions. Innovation is in our nature,
finding unique solutions to northern challenges, and we are dynamic
self-starters with an entrepreneurial spirit and a willingness to learn.
With those com=
ments, I
will let others speak to Bill No. 86, an Act
to Amend the Business Corporations Act and the whole gamut of Bill No. =
87,
the Securities Transfer Act; Bi=
ll No.
88, the Act to Amend the Partnershi=
p and
Business Names Act; Bill No. 89, the Act
to Amend the Societies Act; and Bill No. 90, the Act to Amend the Cooperative Association Act.
This is a suit=
e of
acts, which together, we refer to as the business legislation reform projec=
t.
It has been two years in the making. We introduced the Yukon
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Mr. Speaker, I must say I do apprec=
iate
you recognizing both titles because certainly both titles are appropriate f=
or
the debate that we’re entering into today.
Mr. Speaker, i=
t has
been said that part of the role of the Department of Education is to prepare
Yukoners for
We’ve be=
en
accused in the past of being legislative-light. Members in opposition have
criticized us before. Really, I think the proof is in the pudding — we
are focusing on legislation-right. When you look at the changes that
we’ve added in our legislation to ensure the safety and the security =
of Yukoners,
to help promote taking advantage of opportunities, we have really hit it ri=
ght
more often than not. Where we have missed the mark, we’ve certainly
learned and made changes and we continue to go from there. I recognize that
some might hear the title of the Bu=
siness
Corporations Act and their eyes might soon glaze over; however, we do h=
ave
to recognize the importance of this suite of legislation.
It provides fo=
r our
corporate entities to conduct business in order to employ Yukoners, and
providing the services that we need here in the territory is important.
It’s important to our economy, and it’s also important to our
quality of life. In recent years, we’ve made some changes to legislat=
ion.
A couple of these that I’d like to touch on are the Quartz Mining Act, and the Miners
Lien Act. Again, these were also complicated pieces of legislation, but
after they were tweaked, and tweaked right, in a responsible manner, we can=
see
the impact that that has had on the territory, on the resource industry and=
our
economy. With the help of changing some pieces of legislation and making ot=
her
regulatory changes, such as working with the
The placer min=
ing
industry is also strong; I mentioned working with our federal colleagues,
conservation people, Yukon First Nations and others on issues such as the <=
/span>
We’re se=
eing
strong benefits in the mining industry. It is employing people. It’s
paying royalties — royalties that are not only coming to the territor=
ial
government, but also to Yukon First Nations. We are also seeing people empl=
oyed
in the territory, and along with that comes the taxes they pay. It is clear
that making responsible amendments to our legislation, which makes <=
st1:State>
The amendments=
to the Business Corporations Act before u=
s are
done for a number of reasons. One is to keep it current with the rest of =
span>
This fulfills =
an intergovernmental
agreement regarding national securities harmonization, and it also addresses
many of the concerns that the
The business l= egislation will benefit the Yukon in bringing new businesses to the territory; seeing increased regulatory revenues, mostly from Outside companies; offering increased tax revenues from corporations registered here; provide job creat= ion through law firms and new businesses, plus additional spin-offs; and see an increase in business because of more people coming here for meetings — annual general meetings and board meetings — and that type of thing.<= o:p>
It will also c=
lear up
some of the issues with the previous legislation, including the confusion d=
ue
to inconsistent use of terminology, the lack of recognition of uncertified
shares, the inability to fully use technology, and reduce the increased bus=
iness
costs due to lack of clarity existing with the current piece of legislation=
. It
will also significantly reduce some of the burdensome administration costs.=
This is a larg=
e piece
of legislation and it also affects a significant number of other pieces of
legislation. The Business Corporati=
ons
Act is really the foundation and it has strong ties to the new Securities Transfer Act. This is a=
lso
intertwined with the Securities Act=
.
Through this legislation, we’ll also see consequential amendments and
changes to other legislation, such as the Personal
Property Security Act, the Exec=
utions
Act, the Cooperative Associatio=
ns Act,
the Societies Act and the Partnership and Business Names Act=
.
This legislati=
on
before us amends the legislation that was established in the early 1980s. T=
he
purpose of the original legislation was to enable and regulate the creation=
or
incorporation of local
The users of t=
his act
obviously include corporate lawyers, accountants, directors, shareholders,
creditors, the general public and other parties dealing with corporations.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>
We’re se=
eing a
number of changes that the Minister of Community Services is putting forwar=
d in
this legislation and they fall into three themes — that being changes=
to
corporate governance, securities transfer law and housekeeping amendments. =
In
regard to corporate governance, these changes are aimed at modernizing the =
act
and include measures to facilitate communications, enhance the effectivenes=
s of
audit requirements, establish financial structures and transactions, improve
record-keeping, clarify decision-making, responsibilities and liabilities of
management — I’ll come back to that one in a moment — and
also to balance privacy concerns with public access to information.
That’s an important one to note.
It will also r=
egulate
foreign entities carrying on business in
As you can ima=
gine, this
is a situation that affects many in the corporate world and it’s
important to bring some clarity to this issue to ensure that people can act
appropriately, that the corporation and the shareholders are protected from
people misusing the information and to also ensure that people are working =
in
the interest not only of the company but the environment that they are in, =
the
people in the corporation and society as a whole.
Mr. Speaker, t=
he act
also balances privacy concerns with public access to information and, as
we’re all aware in this age of access to information and greater leve=
ls
of scrutiny, this will be an important component. I should note that, as
we’ve done in other pieces of legislation, this is enabling Yukoners =
to
benefit from additional opportunities while, at the same time, minimizing r=
isk
to Yukoners.
The second the=
me of
the securities law transfer deals with securities certificates, registers, =
and
transfers to the extent those topics are now covered by the Securities Transfer Act, and now w=
e’re
making related changes to other sections. Again, there are many pieces of
legislation within this suite of acts, and it’s important to ensure t=
hat
there is consistency and that the appropriate component is addressed to the
appropriate part. Also, this legislation before us addresses some housekeep=
ing
amendments that correct errors and omissions, updates terminology, and allo=
ws
for naming requirements to be specified in regulations rather than fixed in=
the
act.
Members will r=
ecall
the issues that were created when a previous government, for some reason,
decided to prohibit words like “
This legislati=
on also
removed provisions to duplicate, and sometimes conflict, with the new Securities Act.
It allows fine=
s and
terms of imprisonment to be set up by regulation, rather than fixed in the =
act,
and it clarifies various administrative procedures, procedures for correcti=
ng
errors or dating of documents. There has been a tremendous amount of work d=
one
by the Department of Community Services, and I would like to thank them for
their extensive work in this area. They have also worked very closely with =
I understand t=
hat the
Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce has publicly indicated its support and has a=
lso
provided comments to this working group and that the
We’ve se=
en how
this Yukon Party government has taken a balanced approach with legislation,
amending different pieces of acts, and we’ve seen the positive impacts
they’ve had here in the territory. This is another example of that an=
d I
would hope all members of the Assembly support the legislation.
Mr. Nordick: <=
/span>It
gives me great pleasure today to rise and speak to Bill No. 86, Act to Amend the Business Corporations=
Act.
I would like to start by saying that when I was elected in 2006 I committed=
to
creating a better quality of life for Yukoners; I committed to protecting t=
he
environment; I committed to improving the economy; and I committed to pract=
ising
good governance. This is an example of all four of those commitments.
What I do find
interesting, before I get on to the bill, is the Liberal opposition’s
input, beliefs and theory of legislation. I find it interesting because last
week, during a debate on distracted drivers, there were complaints levied w=
ith
regard to briefings — we need briefings before we can speak to the le=
gislation,
yet they spoke to the legislation with regard to distracted drivers. Today,
we’re discussing and debating the policy behind a major piece of busi=
ness
corporation legislation. There was a briefing offered to the opposition
members, today actually, so it should be very fresh in their memories.
Are they speak=
ing to
this major piece? No. We heard from one member from the Liberal opposition.
Where’s the Member for Porter Creek South? Where is the Member for
Mayo-Tatchun? Where is the Member for Kluane? Where is the Member for Vuntu=
t Gwitchin?
What are their beliefs; what are their philosophies? I know that they want =
to
not put stuff on the record, so they can change their minds later, so
it’s easier to flip-flop, depending which way the wind is blowing, but
where are their beliefs? Where are their visions? I don’t think they =
have
any.
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Mr. Nordick: The Member for Mayo-Tatchun wants t=
o know
who wrote that speech. Well, history wrote that speech because, remember in
2002, what happened to the Liberal government in this territory? History wr=
ote
the speech. They had no vision then and they have no vision now.
What do initia=
tives
like this — the commitments I made, the four commitments —cause=
to
happen in the
They create jo=
bs,
create economy, create a better quality of life and they protect the enviro=
nment.
When I say they create jobs, I did a quick search today on one job board, o=
ne
job posting, on YuWIN. I’=
ll
just list a couple that are there. It took me a 20-second search to see how
many jobs are available on one Internet site in the
The Liberals=
8217;
platform commitments, the Liberals’ track record, was to drive those =
jobs
away. When the Liberals were in power, there weren’t any jobs on these
sites. There were advertisements for U-Hauls to go south.
October 4: san=
dwich
makers; prep cooks; accounts payable clerk; line cooks; circulation assista=
nts;
office managers; full-time cashiers; full-time stylists; truck drivers;
traditional knowledge assistants; instructional designers; coordinator,
leadership courses; mobile technicians; carpenter maintenance service perso=
n;
mechanical parts person; accounts payable clerk — two accounts payable
clerks — language revitalization technician; entry-level carpenters;
kitchen prep cooks; fishing guides — the list goes on and on. Why does
the list go on? It is because we’ve introduced legislation that has a
balanced approach to create an economy in the
The Liberals=
8217;
approach to creating an economy was — I can’t even say it becau=
se
they didn’t even have an approach; they just drove people out.
Unemployment insurance, that’s the Liberals’ approach to econom=
y.
In our electio=
n platform,
we committed to creating a better quality of life — we’ve done
that. By doing that, we’ve created an economy. How do you create
economies? With legislation like this; with building schools, we’ve b=
uilt
schools; with building health care facilities, we’ve built health care
facilities, and we’re improving on health care facilities in this
territory. We’re building hospitals in
How do you get
businesses to move to the
I am pleased t=
o rise
today to speak to Bill No. 86, Act =
to
Amend the Business Corporations Act. This initiative began approximately=
two
years ago when we introduced the
Amendments to =
the Business Corporations Act put the =
The
Now, specifica=
lly to
this bill, the Act to Amend the Bus=
iness
Corporations Act, its purpose was to enable and regulate the creation of
local
They’re =
just
corrections of errors, omissions and updates of terminology. The securities
transfer law section deletes most of part 6 — security certificates, =
registers
and transfers, to the extent those topics are now covered by the Securities Transfer Act — and
making related changes to the other sections.
Under corporate
governance these changes are aimed at modernizing the act and include measu=
res
to facilitate communications and to enhance the effectiveness of audit requ=
irements
to financial structures and transactions. It improves record-keeping and
clarifies decision-making and responsibilities.
Some Business Corporations Act provisio=
ns
have their equivalence in other business legislation. Accordingly, changes =
to
the Partnership and Business Names =
Act,
the Societies Act and the Cooperative Associations Act are
necessary to maintain and improve consistency, and many of these acts will =
also
ensure that the extra-territorial organizations are registered under the
appropriate act. This means they would be subject to the same regulatory
process as local organizations.
To summarize, =
the
theme of the amendments update the sections dealing with corporate governan=
ce.
These amendments include measures designed to facilitate communications, to
enhance the effectiveness of the audit requirements, and balance privacy co=
ncerns
with public access to information.
The second the=
me of
amendments deals with securities transfer law, which involves security
certificates, registration and transfer of securities. Updating these topic=
s in
the proposed new Securities Transfe=
r Act
means deleting much of part 6 of the existing Business Corporations Act and making related changes in other
sections of the act.
The third them=
e of
amendments corrects errors and omissions. As a result of these proposed
changes,
This is another
example of how this Yukon Party government is making it more viable and more
economical for Yukoners and citizens of this territory to make a living, to
raise their families, to educate their families, and to live with a better
quality of life in
We have not on=
ly
changed legislation in this territory in a balanced approach, we have lower=
ed
taxes in this territory. As I said at the beginning, we care about Yukoners,
and we back up our thoughts, ideals, and beliefs with action. This is anoth=
er
example of one of those actions.
Mr. Speaker, I=
commend
this legislation to the Assembly, and I encourage the Liberal opposition to
stand up and give us their philosophy on business corporation legislation,
because they were briefed today. They can’t stand behind, “We
weren’t getting briefed.” So, please stand up and put your comm=
ents
on the record.
Speaker: If the member speaks, he will close
debate. Does any other member=
wish
to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I’d like to thank the Hou=
se for
the conversation we’ve had this afternoon on Bill No. 86, Act to Amend the Business Corporations=
Act.
There has been interest this afternoon in the Business Corporations Act, as other members have gone through it
very thoroughly, and the size of the act itself. So I would encourage all
members to vote, so we can move this forward into Committee of the Whole an=
d do
the good work that we’re assigned to do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and
thank you to the House.
Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible)
Division
Speaker:
Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree.
Mr. Nordick: Agree.
Mr. Mitchell:
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.
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Point of order
Speaker: On a point of order, Member for <=
st1:place>Klondike.
Mr. Nordick: <=
/span>On
a point of order, on previous counts, when the bells were ringing, we did c=
ount
numbers as they were close to their desk. I see we missed Mr. Edzerza.
Speaker’s ruling
Speaker: From the Chair’s perspective, if a
member isn’t here when his or her name is called, that vote won’=
;t
be recorded. In past circumstances, those members, although they have been
late, were here when their names were called. In this instance, the honoura=
ble
member wasn’t, so from the Chair’s perspective, his name
won’t be recorded in this vote. Mr. Clerk.
Clerk: The results are 13 yea, nil nay.
Speaker: The yeas have it. I declare the motion c=
arried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 86 =
agreed
to
Bill No. 87: Securities Transfer Act — Second Reading
Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 87, standing in=
the
name of the Hon. Mr. Lang.
Hon. Mr. Lang: I move that Bill No. 87, entitled Securities Transfer Act, be now re=
ad a
second time.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Com=
munity
Services that Bill No. 87, entitled Securities
Transfer Act, be now read a second time.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Mr. Speaker, I am
pleased to introduce Bill No. 87, the Securities
Transfer Act.
This act is almost identical to rec=
ent
legislation in other Canadian jurisdictions and is part of a national
securities harmonization project. =
span>
I want to be clear, Mr. Speaker, ab=
out the
difference between the Securities A=
ct
and the proposed Securities Transfe=
r Act. The
The Securities Transfer Act defines th=
e parties’
rights and responsibilities when ownership in
securities is transferred or used as collateral for lending. =
It
governs the transfer of property rights in all types of investment securiti=
es,
whether issued by a corporation or any other form or entity.
The act
does the following: defines and classifies different types of interests in
securities; provides rules governing how these interests may be acquired and
transferred; clarifies how different parties may obtain control and priority
over these interests; sets out obligations, warranties and restrictions that
apply to the various parties involved in the holding and transfer of securi=
ties;
and provides rules governing conflicts of laws, seizure of securities,
enforceability of contracts and evidence in legal proceedings.
The new
harmonized Securities Transfer Act<=
/i>
also includes consequential amendments to: the Personal Property Security Act, which allows lenders and seller=
s to
secure payment of a debt and establish priority over other creditors in the
debtor’s personal property, negotiable securities, stocks and bonds; =
the Executions Act, which coordinates =
how
sheriffs seize securities for judgement; and the Choses in Actions Act, where we clarify that property rights in
securities are not subject to that act.&nb=
sp;
Mr. Speaker, this new Securities Transfer Act is expected by the industry.
The stakeholders who will be direct=
ly
affected have provided significant input into the national process over the
last few years. These stakeholder=
s and
users include: issuers of securities; transfer agents; holders of securitie=
s; lenders;
clearing agents; members of the general public buying securities; brokers a=
nd
dealers; and investors that have accounts with clearing agencies.
As this
is harmonized legislation, all Canadian jurisdict=
ions
will have similar acts. The differences between the legislation are limited=
to
technical adjustments to align with other
Professionals who will be working w=
ith the
legislation have had time and opportunity to become familiar with the speci=
fic
language and requirements of the act and to initiate plans for compliance. =
When
implemented, the new act will improve protection for lenders who use securi=
ties
as collateral. In addition to
clarifying roles and supporting processes, it will put into place a modern =
system
for tracking and registering interests regarding securities transactions. <=
span
style=3D'mso-bidi-font-weight:bold'>Combined with amendments to the other f=
our
acts, this act is a part of the business legislation reform project. The re=
form
project’s goals are to update business-related legislation, recognize
modern business practices, and simplify procedures to reduce administrative
burden. The securities transfer rules will be removed from the Business Corporations Act, and rep=
laced
with modern day practices in a Secu=
rities
Transfer Act. This new act will ensure that Yukon
Mr. Mitchell:
The minister h=
as already
indicated that this will impact issues of securities, transfers agents, hol=
ders
of securities, brokers, lenders and other interested parties. It is part of=
the
process, and probably the largest aspect of this is that it is a separate,
stand-alone act now. It has been removed from the act that we discussed ear=
lier
— the Business Corporations A=
ct,
where it used to reside — and we look forward to debate in Committee
where we can get into the details of what these changes represent. Thank yo=
u,
Mr. Speaker.
Speaker: If the honourable member speaks, he will=
close
debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Mr. Speaker, again, I would like to=
thank
the House. I certainly look forward to moving this into Committee of the Wh=
ole
as we move forward in the sitting. I recommend that Bill No. 87 be moved
forward today, and I look forward to the vote.
Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible)
Division
Speaker: = 194; Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Hart: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree.
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: Agree.
Mr. Nordick: Agree.
Mr. Mitchell:
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: The results are 15 yea, nil nay.
Speaker: The yeas have it. I declare the motion ca=
rried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 87 =
agreed
to
Bill No. 88: Act to
Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act — Second Reading
Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 88, standing in =
the
name of the Hon. Mr. Lang.
Hon. Mr. Lang: I move that Bill No. 88, entitl=
ed Act to Amend the Partnership and Busin=
ess
Names Act, be now read a second time.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Comm=
unity
Services that Bill No. 88, entitled Act
to Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act, be now read a second t=
ime.
Hon. Mr. Lang: =
span>Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and speak to Bill 88, Act to Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act. This act contains the rules for partn=
ership
registration, regulation and renewal, and naming of partnerships and sole
proprietorships.
The Act to Amend the Partnership and Busin=
ess
Names Act contributes to the goals of the business legislation reform p=
roject,
which are to modernize
Under the
business legislation reform project, this act seeks to use terminology clearly and consistently, remove admi=
nistrative
barriers, recognize the use of technology to accommodate current practices,=
and
streamline procedures to reduce administrative burden and cost. As is the c=
ase
with the other legislation under the reform project, some of the amendments=
to
the Partnership and Business Names =
Act
are driven by the amendments to the Business
Corporations Act. These changes involve streamlining definitions and te=
rms
and improving the clarity and flexibility of the naming process.
When
introducing the amendments to the B=
usiness
Corporations Act, I mentioned the contribution that the
We seek
to deliver specific amendments that will create a more inviting economic
climate for both existing and new entities to register and operate. The cha=
nges
are in keeping with other Canadian jurisdictions and show our commitment to=
ensuring
While
introducing the Act to Amend the Bu=
siness
Corporations Act, I noted that
Unlike
other businesses, most professions, such as accountants, lawyers and medical
professionals, take the form of partnerships, rather than corporations. This means that each partner’=
;s
personal assets are at risk to satisfy the obligations of the partnership.
Should one of the partners be sued for professional malpractice, the other
partners are personally liable. Under the proposed legislation, this is no
longer the case. The proposed option to operate as a limited liability
partnership will provide these professions with an additional business
structure under which to operate. =
span>
Our
proposed amendments provide greater flexibility to those professions that w=
ish
to operate as a limited liability partnership, while still protecting the
interests of the general public. Limited liability partnerships are the most
substantial amendment we are proposing in this bill. They offer distinct ad=
vantages
to professionals who prefer the tax laws of partnerships and the limited li=
ability
provisions of corporations.
Limited
liability partnerships are common in many other jurisdictions but there are=
some
variations in what kinds of partnerships can register. Most jurisdictions limit these to =
professions,
which is also our approach. To be eligible for registration as a limited li=
ability
partnership, the partners must be of a profession governed by a
Amendments
to the Partnership and Business Nam=
es Act,
including the proposed limited liability partnership, formed part of a
consultation this summer with the amendments to the Societies Act and the C=
ooperative
Associations Act. Members of regulated professions support the flexibil=
ity
offered by the limited liability partnership option and welcome the more mo=
dern
act.
Combined
with amendments to the other acts that are part of the business legislation=
reform
project, the amendments that form the Act
to Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act will improve
Mr. Mitchell:  =
; I thank the minister for his opening rema=
rks.
As the minister related and as was explained this morning during the briefi=
ng,
this is part of this suite of changes that begins with the Business Corporations Act amendments. The minister has cited the
fact that this will allow for the registration and regulation of sole
proprietorships and partnerships, and many
The largest ch=
ange, as
has been noted by the minister, is the creation of a regulation for limited
liability partnerships, which is common in other jurisdictions and generally
preferred by professionals such as doctors, lawyers, accountants and engine=
ers.
The minister has pointed out that this would be limited in
There are tax
advantages for those professionals to operate in a partnership; however, the
current situation does expose any and all partners to being subject to
liability that has really been caused by another partner, unlike a corporate
structure, and this will remedy that. This is a modernization and it brings=
us
more in line with other jurisdictions and helps to restore competitive
advantage and, for those purposes, we certainly will support this legislati=
on.
&nb=
sp; Speaker: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> If the honourable member speaks, he will=
close
debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Again, I appreciate the dialogue th=
is
afternoon in the House, and I do look forward to moving Bill No. 88 forward
into Committee, and discussing it further. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker=
.
Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: =
b> (Inaudible)
Division
Speaker: Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Hart: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree.
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: Agree.
Mr. Nordick: Agree.
Mr. Mitchell:
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 15 yea, nil=
nay.
Speaker: The yeas have it. I declare the motion c=
arried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 88 =
agreed
to
Bill No. 89: Act to
Amend the Societies Act —
Second
Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 89, standing in=
the
name of the Hon. Mr. Lang.
Hon. Mr. Lang: I move that Bill No. 89, entitled Act to Amend the Societies Act, be=
now
read a second time.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Com=
munity
Services that Bill No. 89, entitled Act
to Amend the Societies Act, be now read a second time.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Mr. Speak=
er, I am
pleased to speak today about Bill 89, Act
to Amend the Societies Act=
.
Amendments
proposed to the Societies
Act are p=
art of the
business legislation reform project.
The
project includes: amendments to the Business Corporations Ac=
t, which is the primary piece of legisla=
tion
in the project; the new Securities
Transfer Act, which is harmonized legislation with other Canadian juris=
dictions
and bridges both the business legislation reform initiative and the securit=
ies
passport harmonization project; the Act
to Amend the Partnership and Business Names Act, which provides certain
professions the opportunity to register as a limited liability partnership;
amendments to the Cooperative
Associations Act and the act before us, Act
to Amend the Societies Act.
Like the
legislation already introduced and debated, the Act to Amend the Societies Act furthers the goals of the busin=
ess
legislation reform project in that the amendments seek to: use terminology
clearly and consistently; remove impediments due to outdated technology; re=
cognize
the use of technology to accommodate current practices; and clarify and
streamline procedures to reduce compliance costs and administrative burdens=
.
The
amendments before us arise from the changes to the Business Corporations Act. These changes include clarifying def=
initions
and terms and the operation of societies, clarifying the rules around
dissolving societies, and the options for reviving them after they have been
dissolved.
Naming
requirements that have been clarified and made more flexible in the Business Corporations Act are also=
extended
to societies by the amendments before us today.
Amendments
proposed to the Societies Act w=
ill
allow for the registration of societies formed outside of
&=
nbsp; As
a result, Outside societies will be subject to the same regulatory processe=
s as
local societies and will be able to offer the same services in
Combined
with amendments to the other acts that are part of the business legislation=
reform
project, the proposed changes that form the Act
to Amend the Societies Act will modernize the existing regulatory frame=
work.
This will
contribute to making
Once
fully implemented, the revised legislation will better serve societies and
those who administer them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Mitchell:
Speaker: If the mem=
ber
speaks, he will close debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I would like to thank the Leader of=
the
Official Opposition and the other members of the House, and I look forward =
to
moving this forward this afternoon into Committee so that we can discuss it
further. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: =
b> (Inaudible)
Division
Speaker:
Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Hart: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree
Hon Mr. Edzerza: Agree.
Mr. Nordick: Agree.
Mr. Mitchell:
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 15 yea, nil =
nay.
Speaker: The yeas have it. I declare the motion ca=
rried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 89 =
agreed
to
Bill No. 90: Act to
Amend the Cooperative Associations Act — Second
Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 90, standing in =
the
name of the Hon. Mr. Lang.
Hon. Mr. Lang: I move that Bill No. 90, entitl=
ed Act to Amend the Cooperative Associati=
ons
Act, be now read a second time.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Comm= unity Services that Bill No. 90, entitled Act to Amend the Cooperative Associations Act, be now read a second time. <= o:p>
Hon. Mr. Lang: Mr. Speaker, I a=
m pleased
to speak today about Bill No. 90, A=
ct to
Amend the Cooperative Associations Act.
Amendments
proposed to the Cooperative
Associations Act
are part of a larger initiative by this government, the business legislation
reform project.
The
reform project’s goals are to update business-related legislation,
recognize modern business practices, and simplify procedures to reduce admi=
nistrative
burden.
Amendments
proposed to the Cooperative
Associations Act clarify, ensure consisten=
cy,
remove administrative obstructions, recognize the use of technology in curr=
ent
practices, and reduce compliance costs to societies.
We have
before us today amendments to the Cooperative Associations Act that result from changes =
proposed
to the Business Corporations Act. The
rules around liquidation, dissolution and revival of cooperatives are the m=
ain
focus.
The purpose
of a cooperative association is to provide services to members rather than =
to
generate corporate profits. T=
he purpose
of the Cooperative Associations Act=
is
to allow for the creation and registration of local
Amendments
will move registration of Outside cooperatives from the Business Corporations Act to the Cooperative Associations Act.
The
amendments will allow them to operate without changing the nature or struct=
ure
of their organization. Amendments will ensure that cooperatives from outsid=
e
The principle
behind this proposed amendment is to promote the freedom of movement for
businesses and organizations among Canadian jurisdictions provided for in t=
he Agreement on Internal Trade.
Amendments
to the Cooperative Associations Act=
form part of a public consultation this past summer, along with the Societies Act and the Partnership and Business Names Act=
.
The users
and stakeholders of this legislation include lawyers, accountants, director=
s of
cooperatives, creditors and the general public. No concerns were raised in the
consultation.
The Act to Amend the Cooperative Associati=
ons
Act will improve
It will
contribute to making
Mr. Mitchell:
It allows for =
the
creation of local
Speaker: If the honourable member speaks, he will=
close
debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I’d like to take a moment=
with
the five bills that we’ve put on the floor this afternoon. I’d =
like
to thank the staff and the extensive work that was done by the individuals =
who
have worked on these bills. I certainly look forward to moving Bill No. 90 =
into
Committee of the Whole, so that we can have more discussions.
&nb=
sp; Speaker: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members:
(Inaudible)
Division
&nb=
sp; Speaker:
Division has been called=
.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Hart: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: Agree.
Mr. Nordick: Agree.
Mr. Mitchell: Agree.
Mr. McRobb: Agree.
Mr. Fairclough: Agree.
Mr. Inverarity: Agree.
Mr. Cardiff: Agree.
Mr. Cathers: Agree.
Clerk: Mr. = Speaker, the results are 15 yea, nil nay.
Speaker: The yeas have it. I declare the motion carried.
Motion
for second reading of Bill No. 90 agreed to
Bill No. 93: Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act — Second Reading
Clerk:&nb=
sp; Second reading, Bill No. 93, standing in =
the
name of the Hon. Ms. Horne.
Hon. Ms. Horne: Mr. Speaker, I move that Bill No. 93, entitled Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act, 2010, be now read a se=
cond
time.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Hon. Minister of
Justice that Bill No. 93, entitled =
Miscellaneous
Statute Law Amendment Act, 2010, be now read a second time.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Mr. Speaker, I am here today to pre=
sent
the second reading of the Miscellan=
eous
Statute Law Amendment Act, 2010=
.
This set of amendments does not make substantive changes to the statutes. T=
his
legislation makes technical corrections to seven
Section 1 corr=
ects a
cross-reference to the Assessment a=
nd
Taxation Act. Section 2 corrects a reference to the minister — fr=
om
the Minister of Justice to the Minister of Community Services — in th=
e Engineering Profession Act. Sectio=
n 3
corrects a cross-reference in the E=
nvironment
Act. Section 4 renumbers a section. Section 5 corrects a typographical
error in the Interpretation Act=
. Section
6 corrects a typographical error of the Occupational
Health and Safety Act. Section 7 corrects various errors in the Workers’ Compensation Act,
starting with a correction under subsection 2, to a cross-reference.
Under section =
7,
subsection 3, there is an editorial correction replacing “and” =
with
an “or”. Subsection 4 corrects an editorial error, adding the w=
ord
“past” that should have been in the original draft. Subsection 5
corrects terminology. Subsection 6 adds the words “established under =
part
10” for clarity. Subsection 7 makes corrections to the provision that
currently refers to an appeal panel decision, which is incorrect. Subsectio=
n 8
is a correction for clarity. Subsection 9 is amended by amending paragraph =
(b)
to refer to “worker organizations”, rather than organized labou=
r,
and amending paragraph (c) to refer to “employer and worker organizat=
ions”
— rather than employers and workers — to be consistent with oth=
er
provisions in the act. Subsection 10 removes outdated references. Subsectio=
n 11
provides clarifications to be consistent with other sections of the act.
Subsection 12, again, provides clarification to be consistent with other
sections of the act. Subsection 13 corrects a cross-reference. And finally,
subsection 14 removes outdated provisions under subsections 127(2) and (3) =
that
deal with reviews and appeals begun before
Mr. Speaker, t=
hese are
housekeeping amendments. These errors are very minor, but the public expects
that the government will keep the statutes in good order. This act will do
that. The correction of errors in legislation enables greater clarity in =
span>
Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Fairclough: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> I’ll be brief in my comments to Bi=
ll No.
93. I understand there are a number of amendments taking place here today. =
What
we would like to have, and ask the minister if she can provide this for us,=
is
a briefing on the Miscellaneous Sta=
tute
Law Amendment Act, 2010. We have some questions and issues about it.
I know the min=
ister
said that this was housekeeping, but there are several places in this act t=
hat
we would like to have clarified, so we’re asking that a briefing does
take place before we discuss it in more detail in general debate and Commit=
tee
of the Whole. Some of the sections that we have issues with are sections 6 =
and
7. We would like to ask questions in general debate, but it would make thin=
gs a
lot quicker if we have a briefing on this to clarify these issues before we
even go into general debate, so I would ask that of the minister.
Mr. Cardiff: I’m pleased to be here today to talk about and m=
ake
comments about Bill No. 93, the Mis=
cellaneous
Statute Law Amendment Act. Indeed, I would concur with the Member for
Mayo-Tatchun that it would be helpful to have a technical briefing about so=
me
of the changes that are in this act.
We too would l=
ike some
clarification, specifically around sections 6 and 7. If indeed the explanat=
ory
notes are correct — that they are minor changes to ensure that the ac=
ts
operate as they were intended to — I don’t think we’ll ha=
ve
any problem with this, but if there are changes to the way that these acts =
were
intended to operate, we would like to know about them in advance of entering
into debate in Committee of the Whole.
If that briefi=
ng could
be provided — and I believe it is on the schedule for Wednesday at 11=
:00
am — I look forward to that; it’s just a matter of ensuring that
this bill does not get called prior to that.
With that, I h=
ave no
further comments. I look forward to the briefing and to discussing it here =
in
the Legislature with the minister.
Speaker: If the honourable member speaks, she will
close debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> <=
/span>I
thank the members opposite for their comments and I believe the briefing has
been set, and I look forward to moving Bill No. 93 into Committee.
Speaker: Are you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: =
b> (Inaudible)
Division
Speaker: Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr. Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Hart: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: =
Agree.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Agree.
Hon. Ms. Horne: <=
span
style=3D'mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Agree.
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: Agree.
Mr. Nordick: Agree.
Mr. Mitchell:
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 15 yea, nil=
nay.
Speaker: The yeas have it. I declare the motion c=
arried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 93 =
agreed
to
Hon. Ms. Taylor: =
<=
/span>I
move the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into
Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Government House
Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve i=
nto
Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
COM=
MITTEE OF
THE WHOLE
Chair (Mr. Nordick): =
Order please. Committee of the Whole wil=
l now
come to order. The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 22, Second Appropriation Act, 2010-11.=
We
will now continue with general debate. Do members wish a brief recess?
All
Hon. Members: Agreed.
Chair: Committee of the Whole will recess for 15
minutes.
Recess
Chair: Order please. Committee of the Whole wil=
l now
come to order.
Bill No. 22 — Second Appropriation Act, 2010-11 — contin= ued
Chair: The matter before the Committee is Bill =
No.
22, Second Appropriation Act, 2010-=
11.
We will now continue with general debate.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Mr. Chair, we left off yesterday in gene=
ral
debate on the Supplementary Estimat=
es No.
1 for fiscal year 2010-11, Bill No. 22. As I was saying, there is a sig=
nificant
investment in the supplementary. The additional $65.3 million brings our bu=
dget
for the fiscal year, 2010-11 to $1,141,000,000.
To put that in
perspective, these are investments providing programs and service — a=
nd
indeed infrastructure — to some 34,000 Yukoners.
The other real=
ly
significant part of the investment is the fact that once again we have
significantly high capital investment in the budget and, with the investmen=
ts
of the supplementary, it will take our capital investment to a total of $29=
7 million.
So, one can quickly see that it is an extensive increase in terms of meeting
our requirements in the public interest, in terms of making our investments
strategically to ensure that infrastructure needs are being met, and also to
ensure that program and service delivery for Yukoners is being met in the
manner that Yukoners deserve.
I think that I=
have
about covered all the elements of the supplementary Bill No. 22 in general
discussion, and will now turn it over to the opposition.
Mr. Mitchell:
We do know tha=
t some
$9.9 million of the new expenditures to be approved in this budget have to =
do
with the collective agreements that have been signed; $39.5 million are
revotes; $8.5 million is THSSI spending, which is the successor to the THAF
program; $2.7 million to the Watson Lake hospital O&M; $1.9 million to =
the
Thomson Centre equipment O&M; $1.5 million has to do with MRIF
expenditures; and $1.5 million is for the interim electrical rebate.
Again, if you =
look at
the $35.7 million that was showing up from last year’s adjustments, we
have $29.7 million, I believe, in truly new spending. Another $4.9 million =
has
been drawn down against the net financial resources, which now leaves us wi=
th a
projected net financial resources for the end of the year — if nothing
changes — of $33.6 million.
I think we can=
agree
to much of that because the facts are, as the Premier likes to say, what the
facts are.
When the Premi=
er was
last on his feet he talked about how we have spent the last two years in =
span>United States
It’s kin=
d of
interesting that the Premier didn’t see it coming even when others tr=
ied
to wake him up and apprise him of the situation around the world, and he
thought we lived on an island — the island of Yukon — and in fa=
ct
we don’t. The overall trend is that, if we look at the budget together
with the main estimates from the spring — as the Premier likes to rem=
ind
us we should do — this is the Finance minister’s fourth consecu=
tive
budget that anticipates spending more money than we will take in as revenue.
That includes all transfers from
I guess that w=
e would
ask the Premier when he thinks that he is going to have to ream that in, or=
is he
going to wait until that $33-million line in net financial resources goes d=
own
to zero or appears in brackets. That’s one question that the Premier =
can
answer when he’s next on his feet, because he has clearly released his
inner big-spender. That resulted in the reality of a $25-million deficit for
the 2009-10 fiscal year, a number we expect will be confirmed within the co=
ming
few weeks by the Auditor General of Canada, when she does her good work.
We don’t=
know
why the Premier still can’t recognize a current year deficit when he
tables one, but apparently he can’t do that. We did say, in the past,
that we expected that health expenditures would go up. We didn’t thin=
k we
could hold the line where the amounts were when the main estimates were tab=
led
in the spring and, in fact, the largest change in this budget before us is,
once again, an additional $15.16 million for the Department of Health and
Social Services.
We’re not
challenging whether the expenditures are necessary; we’re only sugges=
ting
that the Premier and his Health and Social Services minister should be more
realistic with what’s likely to happen in the spring of each year, wh=
en
they table the main estimates, because we didn’t think that tabling a
budget in the spring, indicating that health care expenses would be flat or
down from the year before was — we thought that was overly optimistic
and, in fact, it has proven to be so.
So the net res=
ult is
that here we are, into a second year in a row where we’re showing a
deficit for the year. The first year it’s too hard to change because =
that
year is complete, and we’ll have the final accounting in the public
accounts for the Auditor General in just three weeks’ time, when she =
will
no doubt confirm that the 2009-2010 ended in a $25-million deficit. I can s=
ee
that there is a very concerned look on the face of my colleague, the Member=
for
Mayo-Tatchun, because he too saw this coming in the spring and now we see t=
hat
the chickens have come home to roost. I know that he too is concerned about
this inner big-spender that the Premier has finally released. The Premier t=
old
us told us he was a conservative — he is a Yukon Party member, but he
spends like an NDPer. Apparently, that inner NDPer has been released, and t=
he
Premier is now trying to spend his way to some kind of glorious legacy, so =
that
he can go out on the campaign trail and tell one and all, “Look at all
the projects we’ve begun.”
We have a lot =
of
questions as to how these projects will be completed. The Education ministe=
r,
who has spent some money in the budgets this past year on planning for a new
high school to replace the aging facility at F.H. Collins, indicates
that’s the next school we’ll be building. We look forward to
hearing how we’re going to pay to build the school. We agree the scho=
ol
needs to be built, but —
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Mr. Mitchell:
That’s y=
et to be
decided, although the Health minister did say that there would be no money =
in
this coming spring’s main estimates, should they be tabling a budget =
this
spring. Should they still be in office, there will be no money for those ne=
cessary
improvements at
We also know t=
hat we
haven’t been able to get very complete answers from the Minister of
Finance, the Health minister or the CEO of the hospital regarding the future
O&M for the new health care facilities that the Premier has undertaken =
in
That’s n=
ot so
and we’ve said it many times. We agree that aging facilities need to =
be
replaced. We would have thought the government would have undertaken a revi=
ew
and consultation to determine what level of health care facilities they wou=
ld require
to replace the Watson Lake Cottage Hospital and the nursing station in
In fact, they =
started
some five or six years ago — five years ago, at least — by
announcing two multi-level health care facilities and then, over time, they
morphed those into hospitals. I do recall the day when we asked this Premier
how much the hospitals would take — how much they would cost in Watson
Lake and Dawson, particularly in Watson Lake where we were getting to the $=
5-million
mark and nothing had been opened that was treating any Watson Lakers. At the
time, the Premier stood proudly in this House and said, “I don’t
know; whatever it takes.”
That was the p=
lanning
that went into that announcement — an announcement by the Premier that
whatever it takes and whatever it costs, he would build it. If he builds it
they will come, was the approach. It was a Field
of Dreams approach. That’s what we were looking at.
We know that t=
here are
a lot of questions that we have and we know we won’t get answers to t=
hem.
What we’ll get is the Premier’s view of opposition members, of =
the
Liberal Party, and we won’t get answers to the questions, but we will=
put
some of them out there anyway. We’re curious. The Premier talks about=
how
much debt existed, net debt, under the Liberal Party when they were last in
office. The public accounts show a different tale from what the Premier say=
s,
but we do know that the Penikett government was $64 million in debt at one
point. We know that we have investments in notes —
We are curious=
just
how the bonds that have been issued by the Development Corporation and the
borrowing that has been done by the hospital will reflect back. I guess it
would be in the public accounts, in the consolidated public accounts —=
; and
we will ask the Premier to give us a definitive number in terms of the
borrowing limit that has been raised to $300 million and just how far to th=
at
limit the government is with the borrowings that are going on.
Perhaps the Pr=
emier
can give us a more definitive answer, since he quarterbacks the team, than =
the
wide receiver of the Health minister, who ranged pretty wide just a few days
back into new tax excursions for recreational and tourism users in the Peel
region when the Health minister suggested that they would have to tax those
users. Perhaps the Minister of Finance can tell us when they are going to m=
ake
a planning decision about the $50 million that is going to be required for =
the
expansion of the Hospital Corporation, whether that will be borrowed, wheth=
er
the Premier sees doing that over a period of time out of government’s=
own
revenues in terms of capital expansion there, or replacement.
I see that I o=
nly have
a couple of minutes left, Mr. Chair, and it’s amazing how fast the ti=
me
has flown — just beginning to touch the surface of the issues in fron=
t of
us.
Again, we are
wondering, since as the Premier has said this is a period 5 variance, wheth=
er
the Premier has even further updates for us about the deficit position of t=
he
government since then.
We do have oth=
er
questions that we would ask this Premier in terms of how spending is carryi=
ng
forward on the Whitehorse Correctional Centre, whether that is still on tra=
ck
and on budget — if he can give us an update on that, that will certai=
nly
be appreciated.
The Premier ha=
d a lot
to say when he was last on his feet. He said we were maintaining that
they’re increasing taxes for such areas as tourism, and that’s =
not
the case, that we should be factual. Our concerns, and the concerns we were
hearing from many Yukoners, were the concerns about the statements that had
been made by the Member for Riverdale South, that if you’re going to
protect an area within the Peel watershed planning region, you’re goi=
ng
to have to charge taxes to finance it. He said that; he had to stand up tod=
ay
and answer for that in the Assembly. Last week he said new taxes; this week=
he
said, “I didn’t mean that”. We’ll have to let Yukon=
ers
decide whether that’s in the plans or not.
These are just=
some of
the questions that we’ll have to look for answers to. The Premier said
when he was on his feet that the supplementary estimates speak for themselv=
es
and the deficit certainly does.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: =
Well, I am to assume that that was all a
constructive, productive input into the fiscal position of the
At the year-en=
d of
2002, they were in an overdraft position at banks in the
Now, the Leade=
r of the
Liberal Party is suggesting that the Yukon Party is on a wild spending spre=
e,
yet we have somewhere between $100 million and $200 million cash in the ban=
k.
We are not in an overdraft position. I think that really demonstrates who h=
ad
the wild spending spree. The Liberals had to be in an overdraft position to
meet the program and service requirements of the
The member sug=
gested
that I needed more briefings — well, I endeavour to do that. Of cours=
e,
the briefings show clearly that at year-end the net financial resource posi=
tion
of the
Of course, we =
are
making investments across the territory in programs, services and
infrastructure, and we still have a savings account, and we are meeting our=
liabilities,
and we continue to demonstrate — the member asked about money for
Now, let’=
;s look
at some of the measures the Liberals have undertaken — and these are
Liberal measures — and how they dealt with fiscal problems. Instead of
creating a savings account, and instead of having the options available to =
them
to meet the needs of Yukoners by investing the money necessary, here’s
how they handled those challenges in the
By the way, th=
e Yukon
Party, with their so-called wild spending spree, has reinstated all those f=
unds
because they are all part of building a quality life for Yukoners. Funding =
cuts
to childcare services is how they were trying to meet that fiscal challenge=
and
they were still in an overdraft position. And the Leader of the Liberal Par=
ty
talked about stimulus.
Well, the Libe=
ral
stimulus was a
This is about =
stimulus
and addressing the financial situation of the
Chair: Order please. Seeing the time, the Chair =
will
rise and report progress.
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 considered Bi=
ll No.
22, Second Appropriation Act, 2010-=
11,
and has directed me to report progress on it.
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.
The
time being
The House adjourned at
|
&n=
bsp; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; HANSARD &n=
bsp;  =
; &n=
bsp;  =
; &n=
bsp;
|