MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_01CFF3B8.538411D0" This document is a Single File Web Page, also known as a Web Archive file. If you are seeing this message, your browser or editor doesn't support Web Archive files. Please download a browser that supports Web Archive, such as Windows® Internet Explorer®. ------=_NextPart_01CFF3B8.538411D0 Content-Location: file:///C:/B1334AF2/162.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Yukon Legislative Assembly
Whitehorse, Yukon
Tuesday, October 28, 2014 — 1:00 p.m.
Speaker: I wi= ll now call the House to order. We will proceed at this time with prayers. =
Prayers
Daily Routine
Speaker: We w= ill proceed at this time with the Order Paper.
Tribut= es.
TRIBUTES
In recognition of Mental Illness Awareness Week
Mr. Elias:
In the= past year, a concerted effort has been made to de‑stigmatize mental illnes= s. Government agencies, non-governmental organizations and private citizens ha= ve taken on the task of talking about mental illness and how it affects each a= nd every one of us. Almost one in five Canadians will suffer from mental illne= ss at one point in their lives. For far too long society has treated mental illness as an invisible illness, forcing sufferers to avoid seeking help for fear of stigma. It is time to bring it all out in the open and help our friends, our family members and work colleagues to obtain the help they nee= d.
In Can= ada, public personalities like Rick Mercer and Clara Hughes have lent their fame= and public goodwill to the cause by publicly talking about mental illness and encouraging others to talk about it too. Yukon has set aside the week of October 27 to 31 this year to focus attention on mental illness and how it affects all of us. Health and Social Services is working with the Second Opinion Society, the Mental Health Association of Yukon and Yukon College to increase awareness about mental illness. Activities include opportunities f= or the public to get screened for mental wellness, depression, anxiety and ris= ky drinking. In addition, a mental health professional will be on hand to disc= uss the screening results. There will also be a panel discussion and a showing = of the movie It’s Kind of a Funny Story — a lighthearted movie that focuses on depression.= p>
I woul= d like to take this opportunity to thank Yukon’s mental health professionals and advocates for their dedication, compassion and determination to help improve the mental health of all Yukoners. The Mental Health Association of Yukon i= s a voluntary association that exists to promote the mental health of all Yukon= ers. In order to carry out its vision — to be an effective contributor to a positive mental health environment throughout the Yukon — the Mental Health Association of Yukon works to empower people with mental health issu= es to make informed choices regarding the management of their lives; to focus = on community education, awareness, advocacy and support services to reduce the stigma toward people labelled mentally ill; to increase positive attitudes toward mental health; and, to engage in partnerships and collaborative activities with other agencies and organizations concerned with mental heal= th.
The Me= ntal Health Association of Yukon has assisted with the delivery of educational programs like Clara’s Big Ride, Not Myself Today, Yukon State of Mind, and most recently, Mental Illness Awareness Week. The community TV show, Yukon = State of Mind, debuted this week with an intimate look at stigma and how it affects all of those affected by mental illness.
This w= as another example of the collaboration of several community organizations and busines= ses coming together to build on each other’s strengths to educate the Yuk= on about the facts around mental illness. The Canadian Mental Health Associati= on of Yukon believes in supporting the individual, the family and the communit= y. One way of doing this is the caregiver support group, which educates, advoc= ates for and supports the family, who are most often the primary caregiver for someone experiencing mental health challenges.
In clo= sing, I would like to give the last word to Zelda Williams, daughter of comedian Ro= bin Williams who suffered from depression and committed suicide earlier this ye= ar. Zelda Williams’ messages paint a clear picture of how mental illness affects not only an individual but also their family. To quote her, “Mental illness is often misunderstood and misrepresented, but that's starting to change.” “Mental health is as important as physical health, and whether there are visible signs or not, the suffering is real.” “It is not cowardly to suffer or seek help.”
Ms. Stick:
Again,= we are reminded of the need to talk about and discuss openly mental illness and me= ntal health in an open and respectful way. It’s not just the individual wi= th mental illness who is impacted by their mental health difficulties or crises but, as is true for so many health concerns, families, friends, coworkers, neighbours and even our communities are impacted.
By lea= rning more, by talking openly and by listening and educating ourselves about ment= al illness and mental health, we can bring this out of the shadows and encoura= ge and call for and support a national action plan and a territorial action pl= an to address mental illness and mental health.
A than= k you needs to be sent out to all those who promote mental health and to the many individuals, both in government departments and non-government organization= s, who support individuals with mental illness and those around them. I would = be remiss if I did not thank the Yukon division of the Canadian Mental Health Association, the Second Opinion Society, Many Rivers and many mental health professionals within government departments and within our communities. They are reaching out and trying to support individuals and their families.
There = are too many to name, but a thanks should be offered to them all. Mental illness impacts us all. Let’s keep talking.
Mr. Silver: Today I rise on behalf of the
Liberal caucus to also pay tribute to Mental Illness Awareness Week, which =
is
an annual national public education campaign designed to help open the eyes=
of
Canadians to the realities of mental illness. The week was established in 1=
992
by the Canadian Psychiatric Association and is now coordinated by the Canad=
ian
Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health in cooperation with all of its
members, organizations and other supporters across Canada.
One of MIAW’s major initiatives is the Faces of Mental Illness campaign, a national outreach campaign featuring the stories of Canadians living in recovery from mental illness. Thousands of pieces of MIAW posters, brochures and bookmarks featuring the faces are dissimilated to hundreds of organizat= ions across Canada in an effort to raise awareness and to end the stigma that’s attached to mental illness.
Locall= y, this week is being marked with events tonight at the Beringia Centre and later t= his week at the Yukon College. There is also a caregiver support group open hou= se at 4 Hospital Road on October 30 at 7:00 p.m. to support families and frien= ds of those who live with mental illness.
Speaker: Are = there any visitors to be introduced?
Introduction of Visitors
Hon. Mr. Graham: Mr. Speaker= , I would request all members of the Legislature to join me in welcoming two representatives of mental health organizations here in Whitehorse: Hailey <= span class=3DSpellE>Hechtman and Kim Solonick= are both here. Hailey is from the Second Opinion Society and Kim is with the Me= ntal Health Association of Yukon. Welcome.
Applause
TRIBUTES
In recognition of Dawson teaching and working farm
Mr. Silver: Mr. Speaker, I rise on =
behalf
of the Legislative Assembly to congratulate the TrR=
17;ondëk
Hwëch’in First Nation and the Yukon
College on signing their memorandum of understanding for the teaching and
working farm in Dawson.
This m= emorandum of understanding builds on already great partnerships that we have seen with the Yukon College and the Tr’ondëk <= span class=3DSpellE>Hwëch’in, which is producing great results= like the one that we saw this spring with the graduates of the first class of the mobile trades training trailer program.
I woul=
d also
like to acknowledge outgoing Chief Eddie Taylor and his team for their work=
and
also executive director Jackie Olson. Tr’ond&eum=
l;k
Hwëch’in stands as a standard bearer=
of
what we can achieve in the Yukon when we let our educational institutions w=
ork
with many partners toward those paths of traditional knowledge. This project
will help preserve and maintain indigenous plants and shrubs important to <=
span
class=3DSpellE>Tr’ondëk Hwëch=
8217;in
healing traditions, as well as preserving a way of life that is based upon =
an
economic and a spiritual relationship with the land, providing an on-the-la=
nd
working environment for Tr’ondëk
Yukon = College is leading the way in working with Yukon’s First Nations to showcase wha= t we can achieve in the Yukon when our education system is evolved to meet the n= eeds of its students. Dr. Karen Barnes and her team at the college have worked v= ery hard over the last number of years to build a unique and northern education= al experience for northern residents. The new research opportunities at the teaching and working farm can only help further our understanding of our un= ique climate and landscape.
This i= s a great opportunity for all of Yukon, and I wish both partners the best of luck as = they move the project into the next stages of development.
Speaker: Are t= here any returns or documents for tabling?
Are th= ere any reports of committees?
Are th= ere any petitions to be presented?
Are th= ere any bills to be introduced?
Introdu= ction of bills
Bill No. 82: Act to Amend the Motor Vehi= cles Act —Introduction and First Reading
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; I move that Bill No. 82, entitled A= ct to Amend the Motor Vehicles Act, be now introduced and read a first time.<= /span>
Speaker: It h= as been moved by the Minister of Highways and Public Works that Bill No. 82, entitled Act to Amend the Motor Veh= icles Act, be now introduced and read a first time.
Motion for introduction and first reading of Bil= l No. 82 agreed to
Speaker: Are t= here any further bills to be introduced?
Are th= ere any notices of motions?
Notices of Motions
Mr. Hassard: =
I rise to give notice of the following motion:
THAT this House urges the Government of
Yukon to continue to collect data on every sheep harvested in the territory,
continue to build its unique data set and provide that information to the
public through publications such as Yukon
Thinhorn Sheep: Horn Growth, Genetics and Clima=
te
Change.
Ms. Ha=
nson:
I rise to give notice of following motion:
THAT this House urges the Government of
Yukon to review the use of auxiliary-on-call staffing positions to ensure t=
hat
auxiliary-on-call employees who are working on a full-time, ongoing basis a=
re
hired as permanent employees and receive the benefit of a full-time, perman=
ent
Government of Yukon employee.
Mr. Si=
lver:
I rise to give notice of the following motion:
THAT this House urges the Government of
Yukon to adequately fund Raven Recycling.
I also give notice of the following mo=
tion:
THAT this House congratulates the Tr’ondëk Hwëch=
8217;in
First Nation and Yukon College on their recent memorandum of understanding =
for
the Teaching and Working Farm program in Dawson.
I also give notice of the following mo=
tion:
THAT this House urges the Government of
Yukon to explore new options to replace early childhood development program=
s no
longer supported by Many Rivers Counselling and Support Services to ensure
that:
=
(a)
mothers have a safe and supportive environment to help them through postpar=
tum
depression and stresses to being a
new parent; and
=
(b)
program capacity in the territory is sufficient to match the number of chil=
dren
born each year.
Speaker: Is t= here a statement by a minister?
Seeing= none, this then brings us to Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Intergo= vernmental relations
Ms. Hanson: This government’s “my way or =
the
highway” approach to governing has gone on for far too long. Last nig=
ht
the City of Whitehorse passed a unanimous resolution calling on the Premier=
to
reassign the Minister of Community Services because of his uncooperative and
disrespectful approach to, for one instance, the affordable housing file.=
span>
The Ci= ty of Whitehorse has broken the cone of silence and fear that has covered the divisive tactics of this government. The call by the city to reassign a sen= ior minister speaks volumes to the serious erosion of trust and respect that underlies the Yukon Party approach to other levels of government. Unfortuna= tely this is another chapter in a book of broken relationships that stretches ba= ck over a decade.
What i= mmediate action is the Premier taking to mend the Yukon Party’s broken relationships with the City of Whitehorse?
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: This government = works hard on a daily basis with all governments on many fronts. In fact, this Friday, the Minister of Community Services and the Minister of Environment, along with their officials, are meeting with the City of Whitehorse to talk about many different topics on an agenda that was fully agreed upon by both parties. Some things, such as the new sports complex that this government w= ill build for the citizens of Yukon, and specifically for the citizens of Whitehorse — they’re going to be talking about recycling; they’re going to be talking about the Municipal Act review; they’re going to be talking about the Arctic X Games = and they’re going to be talking about building consolidation, because we = know that this is a priority for the city as well and of course we’ll be talking about land devolution as well.
We con= tinue to work on a daily basis with all levels of government.
Ms. Hanson: The track record of this government is c=
lear.
They have broken or undermined almost every important relationship with the=
ir
partners. This government alienated its government partners and the Yukon
public in the land use planning process to a point where it has ground to a
halt. It has broken its relationship with teachers by muzzling them. It has
broken the trust of the public service by delaying the passage of
whistler-blower legislation and it continues to try to undercut land claims
agreements at the expense of its relationship with First Nation governments=
.
The fi= rst step toward fixing relationships is admitting you have a problem. When will the Premier acknowledge that his divisive approach isn’t working and what concrete steps will he take as leader of his caucus and as Premier to turn = his sinking ship around?
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: It’s disappointing to listen to the Leader of the Official Opposition — an= d in fact on a regular basis, the Leader of the Liberal Party as well — as they condemn and criticize the actions of the public servants. I started ma= king a list a while ago, but essentially all departments have been impacted or criticized by opposition members from both parties criticizing the work they do. This government will continue to stand up for the professional work for= our professional public service and will continue to work with governments R= 12; all levels of governments — throughout the territory. We don’t = live in a fairy tale world though. We will disagree on some issues sometimes, but that’s how it is in the real world.
Ms. Hanson: Mr. Speaker, the first step is
acknowledging you have a problem. Clearly, the Premier cannot do that.
Nowher= e is this government’s inability to maintain a relationship with its Yukon part= ners more apparent than its treatment of First Nations. I don’t need to re= mind Yukoners that this government is in court with several First Nation governm= ents over its inability or unwillingness to adequately consult with them.
Now th= e Premier is in lockstep with the federal Conservatives on the proposed YESAA, which = are fundamentally a back-door approach to undermine the final agreements that undermine the certainty necessary for a vibrant economy. I don’t know= if the Premier doesn’t understand the importance of the final agreements= and Yukon’s relationship with First Nations or if he doesn’t care. = The result is the same: broken trust and broken relationships.
Why is= the Premier taking a page out of the federal Conservative playbook by alienating its partners? Is he truly trying to run his sinking ship into the ground?
Speaker: Orde= r. The member’s time has elapsed.
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: As I already articulated, both in this House and in fact, in the media, through a five-y= ear review of YESAA, there were 76 recommendations that went forward. Seventy-t= hree of 76 recommendations were agreed upon by everybody. That is outstanding. <= /span>
Throug= hout those processes of almost seven years of consultation, Yukon government shared al= l of its comments with all of the parties that were involved in the consultation process. Bottom line for this government is that we are committed to ensuri= ng that all assessment processes are consistent with other jurisdictions across this country. It allows us to remain competitive so that we can bid for and= see that projects come to this jurisdiction, because that means good jobs for Yukoners and that means good jobs for Yukon families.
Question re: Affordable
housing strategy
Ms. White:
The pr= evious minister of housing, the Member for Riverdale North, promised to work with private developers to build affordable rental housing on Lot 262. The promi= se was broken and the project was cancelled. When the Member for Lake Laberge took over the housing file, he too promised t= o work with private developers to build affordable rental housing for Yukoners. Th= at promise was again broken after the 75 units promised to Whitehorse were cancelled. Even before these two ministers dropped the affordable housing b= all, the previous Yukon Party government couldn’t even set aside lots for development in the midst of an affordable housing crisis.
This government’s track record on affordable housing is nothing short of shameful. Mr. Speaker, when will this government recognize that histor= y is repeating itself yet again and create the affordable rental housing that Yukoners desperately need?
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = What I should note first of all to the members is that it is unfortunate th= e member chooses to frame things the way she does. The government has invested since 2007 well in excess of $100 million — not even counting investments in this current fiscal year in 207 Alexander Street and in the 48-unit seniors complex that $12 million was allocated for in this budget.
In fac= t, contrary to the member’s assertions, the RFQ/RFP process developed by= the Yukon Housing Corporation did not target any specific number of units in any municipality, including Whitehorse. Government, as I noted, because of a significant shift in the market, did recognize that the situation had chang= ed and that, when the vacancy rate in rentals has jumped from 1.5 percent to 7= .1 percent, and 13.9 percent in duplexes, we have to be very mindful that government action does not undermine people’s investments in what is = for most people their largest single investment — their home.
Ms. White:
How ca= n Yukoners trust a minister who takes such a selective view of government statistics?<= /span>
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = In fact, the question the member should be asking is how can the public tru= st an opposition that takes such a selective and uninformed view of statistics? What the member is referring to — the vacancy rate — prior to t= his year when statistics captured all units, used to only count buildings with three or more units, missing over half of the rental market. We changed that through better data collection. On three units and above, the vacancy rate = in those units has more than tripled to 4.7 percent when one considers the lit= tle landlords — the people with one and two rental units who make up most= of the market and depend on the income from those rental units to pay their mortgage in many cases. The vacancy rate climbs to 7.1 percent and 13.9 per= cent for people who own duplexes.
This g= overnment will continue to invest in Housing and targeting those areas most in need, = but we will also recognize the importance of not undermining people’s lar= gest investment — their home — through multi-million-dollar grants t= o large developers.
Ms. White:
The mi= nister is speaking winners and losers when it comes to housing and he doesn’t understand that affordable rental housing is a tenant’s issue. This government’s poor track record on affordable rental housing predates = the minister. As we sit here and listen to his excuses again and again for his government’s inactions past and present, Yukoners who are struggling = to make ends meet are paying the price. Imagine having to set aside 50 percent= or 60 percent of your paycheck for rent, Mr. Speaker. These are people who can’t afford the $1,500-a-month duplex that the minister suggests that they rent.
When w= ill the government’s minister of housing — whoever it may be tomorrow — commit to creating the affordable rental units that Yukoners need? =
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = This minister — tomorrow — will continue to do the same thing t= hat I and my caucus colleagues have done, which is to work with partners in the= se areas and to work with and invest in NGOs.
I woul= d remind the member that our track record in investing and increasing support for NG= Os that provide services to those most in need is a record second to none in w= hich the NDP’s record when in government is — well, frankly, they sh= ould be ashamed of their lack of support for NGOs. We have continued to work with NGOs.
We wil= l continue to work with all levels of government and in fact, through the Housing Action Plan, we have invol= ved multiple stakeholders and have had a series of meetings that has led to the draft Housing Action Plan which= will identify next steps, not just for government, but identifying the needs and opportunities that everyone — from private sector businesses to individuals, First Nation governments, development corporations and municipalities — could all use to help guide our work together.
We aga= in will continue to do what we have done, which is to take the next steps while wor= king and engaging with partners at all levels of government.
Question re: Raven
Recycling Centre funding
Mr. Silver: I would like to go back to t=
his
government’s commitments on recycling that were clearly outlined in t=
heir
election platform. The Premier told Yukoners before this session started th=
at
the government has fulfilled many of its commitments it has made to Yukoner=
s. I
would like to remind the Premier that there is still more work to be done.<=
/span>
Let= 217;s go to page 15 of his platform and see what was promised for recycling: “…develop a goal of zero waste with a target of 50% waste diver= sion by 2015.” It has become clear that the minister responsible doesnR= 17;t even support that goal. He told Yukoners on October 1 that recycling was a personal responsibility and really had nothing to do with his government.= span>
Will t= he Premier admit that his government’s commitment to 50-percent waste diversion = by 2015 will not be met, especially now that our largest recycler has been seriously marginalized by a lack of funding?
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Whether intentionally or unintentionally, the Member for Klondike, the Libe= ral leader, is not accurately representing my comments on October 1. In fact, w= hat I was attempting to convey at that point in the interview was the fact that recycling requires not just government investment, which it does require, b= ut it also requires people making a personal commitment to changing their own behaviours, to choose not to throw recyclables in the trash but, instead, to separate them out.
Again,= we have continued to work in this area. When it comes to Raven Recycling, we are working with partners, including the City of Whitehorse, to identify sustainable, long-term and cost-effective solutions for processing recyclab= les.
With R= aven, specifically — last month they requested that the diversion credit we implemented last year at their request be more than doubled to $330 per ton= ne. We’ve asked them to give us a cost breakdown on that, and we’re still waiting for that. In fact, I asked my deputy minister this morning to= send Raven a reminder that we are looking forward to receiving that information.=
Mr. Silver: What he says and what he mea=
ns
— we’ve heard this before from the minister responsible. Given =
the
minister’s attitude, it’s no wonder that Yukoners don’t t=
rust
the government on when they are going to make good on this commitment or no=
t.
The minister believes that recycling is a personal responsibility, as cited
from his words in the paper, and that’s — I’ll let those
words speak for themselves.
Let= 217;s go to the actual issue. The government is sitting on the sidelines and is lett= ing Raven Recycling stay closed to all but refundables, so it’s clear that a cash injection is needed for this reopening immediately while some longer-term issues get resolved.
The qu= estion would be: How does the minister plan to meet his own target of 50-percent waste diversion by 2015 when Raven Recycling is all but closed?
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Again, what I should point out to the member is that last year Raven Recycl= ing and the other processor jointly approached government and asked us to imple= ment a diversion credit matching the $75 per tonne the city pays for a combined credit of $150 per tonne, and we did exactly that.
Last m= onth Raven requested the combined diversion credit be more than doubled to $330 a tonn= e. We’ve asked them for more information and, as I noted in my previous response, I asked my deputy minister this morning to remind them that we are still waiting for that information. We are continuing to work with the city= on identifying sustainable long-term and cost-effective solutions for processi= ng recyclables in the Yukon. We have jointly funded a consultant’s study that they have commissioned. Officials have been in discussion and the Mini= ster of Environment and I are scheduled to meet with the mayor and city council = on Friday of this week, along with our senior officials, to talk about issues including recycling, and to talk about next steps for both the City of Whitehorse and the Yukon government.
Mr. Silver: We’re looking for a
leadership role here from a senior level of government. It’s very cle=
ar
that this government is not going to meet its commitment of 50-percent waste
diversion by 2015 without Raven being completely open. It seems there has b=
een
a complete 180-degree turn in policy here and it begs the question: Does the
Yukon Party no longer support the previous environmental and social princip=
les
that led to the original investments into a public good? If the government =
no
longer supports a 50-percent target, or Raven, then what is the new policy
objective that is being sought here? You don’t take away an integral
service or public good without an alternative plan or objective. So, what a=
re
these? Or, are we witnessing here just a complete absence of forethought on
this particular file?
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Again, as I noted to the member, in fact we are continuing to work on this issue jointly with the City of Whitehorse. They are in fact a larger player= in waste management then we are, because most of the Yukon population is within the City.
We mad= e it clear that the Yukon government is committed to continuing to do more in this are= a. In fact, when it comes to Raven Recycling, it was just last month that they asked us to more than double the combined diversion credit to $330 per tonne from the $150 per tonne it was put at, at their request, last year. We̵= 7;ve asked them for more information to clarify what those increased costs are m= ade up of. We have yet to receive it. We are working jointly with the city in considering options and identifying long-term solutions to ensure that Yuko= ners continue to have access to the recycling processes and capacity that they n= eed. That includes a meeting that the Minister of Environment and I have schedul= ed this Friday with the mayor and city council, as well as work that has been going on, on a weekly basis at the officials’ level.
Again,= we will work jointly with the city on this and identify what needs to be done to en= sure that Yukoners have access to the recycling services they need.
Question re: Coroner’s
report re death at Watson Lake Hospital
Ms. Stick:
Last w= eek, I asked the minister if he would publicly report on the implementation of the coroner’s recommendations and the minister said — and I quote: “I don’t know which parts of the assessment that will be conduc= ted by the Hospital Corporation will be confidential ...” But these recommendations, Mr. Speaker, are about policies and procedures of the Hospital Corporation — not about individuals. Can the minister commit= to providing a public report on the implementation of the coroner’s recommendations on behalf of the Yukon Hospital Corporation?
Hon. Mr. Graham: This morning the= chair of the Yukon Hospital Corporation and I had a long discussion on this very subject. What we will be doing, once the hospital has completed their revie= w, is providing to the Yukon public and to this Legislature a list of all of t= he recommendations — or a list of all of the actions — being taken= by the Yukon Hospital Corporation in relation to improving their services at t= he various facilities in the territory. That I will commit to. We will be maki= ng those actions public once the Hospital Corporation’s review has been completed.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: Not at this time= .
Question re: Alaska
Highway corridor functional plan
Ms. Moorcroft: For years, I’ve been a= sking the Highways and Public Works minister about the Alaska Highway corridor functional plan. Each time, my questions have been deflected with assurances that the Yukon government intended to make the plan public. The months and years continue to pass and the accident rate along this corridor remains tragically high. The number of accidents and traffic fatalities in recent y= ears demonstrate how critical this issue is.
My que= stion today is simple: Will the minister tell the House when the draft Alaska Hig= hway corridor report will be made available to the public?
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; I do thank the member opposite for the question. My ADM of Transportation s= poke this morning on the radio and articulated quite clearly exactly what we are doing. By spending tax dollars on improving our roads, this government is making sure that Yukoners get to work each day. That’s our school bus= es; that’s our emergency personnel; and that’s the food and fuel and everything else we require in the Yukon.
The Wh= itehorse corridor of the Alaska Highway is one of the most important roads, of course — I’ve said this in this House over and over and over — a= nd it’s used by just about everyone who lives or visits Whitehorse and the Yukon. U= p front, we’ve put a lot of time and effort into working with the City of Whitehorse, working with our local First Nations at the first level of consultation, because the City of Whitehorse is a key player in this, with accesses.
Right = now, we’re out looking at the high level and — you know what? We’ll have the functional plan come forward and this government will = look at what we’re going to do for next steps, moving forward.
Ms. Moorcroft: I’m glad the minister = thinks it’s important. It’s important enough that he should answer the question. In the Highways and Public Works debate last spring, the Minister= of Highways and Public Works told this House — and I quote: “A pub= lic participation component will be used to refine the plan once we’ve decided which construction will be moving forward.” It’s hard to refine a document that the government refuses to let you see.
This c= ontinues to be a textbook example of the Yukon Party’s approach to consultatio= n. They do the planning, make the decisions, and then invite the public to participate in a so-called public consultation phase. Will the public input during the consultation phase be used to guide and prioritize the upgrades = and construction along the Alaska Highway corridor? Or is it simply an exercise= to make the public feel included?
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; Yes.
Ms. Moorcroft: Well, I’m not sure if it’s yes, the public input will be used, or the public will just be m= ade to feel included, Mr. Speaker.
The fa= ct is — and the minister should be seriously concerned about this — t= hat many of the intersections along the Alaska Highway corridor are not designe= d to modern-day standards that can safely accommodate the amount and type of tra= ffic now using this route. Most of the people living in the country residential subdivisions surrounding Whitehorse drive this road every day. They are reminded of the safety issues by the number of memorials and crosses visible along the route.
This m= orning, a Highways and Public Works official said that the corridor might be four lan= es if not necessary but not necessarily four lanes, yet the minister has not provided the House or the public with any updates.
What i= s the minister waiting for before sharing the draft report with the public? Will = he release the draft Alaska Highway report?
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; When I answered my last question, it was, yes, we’re going to take in= to consideration the consultation. I’ve actually been out there talking = to local businesses myself, looking at this.
The lo= ng-term vision of this government — the reason that we’re doing this is because this government does have a long-term vision. We have to address the fact that the Yukon is growing. Good economic development, sustainable econ= omic development, diversified economic development still grows. We saw with the washouts how important the stretch of road is in getting goods and services= to the community. We’re doing our due diligence. We’re out there at the high-range level of consultation and, again, when we identify each individual project, we will go and consult with those directly affected. Basically, we’ve already consulted with the First Nations and the Cit= y of Whitehorse. We’re going to continue doing that. We’re at a high-level consultation right now, looking at listening to some of the indu= stry players and everybody else who uses the road — bus drivers and so on = and so on — and then, when we identify a location where we will do work, we’ll consult again with the immediate residents and those people aro= und there. We’re doing our due diligence. This stuff takes time, and I’m proud to say that we’re working hard on this.
Question re: Family
education programs
Ms. Stick:
He als= o stated that he did not receive a request to jump in and fund that program. I wonder when the minister stopped considering the call of Yukoners a request. As of this morning, 118 Yukoners have signed a petition calling on the minister to include family education as part of the core funding agreement and to reins= tate the position of family educator and to continue to offer family education programs.
This i= s a clear request for funding from Yukoners. Will the minister commit to reopening its 2012 contribution agreement and offering core funding for family education programs and staff?
Hon. Mr. Graham: What the member opposite seems to not realize is that Many Rivers is a non-government organization with an independent board of governors who are fully capable of approaching and requesting additional funding from this government, if they= so desire. Many Rivers, to date, has not come forward and said, “We wish= to continue running this program and we don’t have enough funding, so we would appreciate some funding from the territorial government.”
I have= n’t received that request, Mr. Speaker. Even if they did, there is a proce= ss that has to be followed and we would follow that process. We don’t necessarily just hand out money because 108 people have requested it. We wi= ll consider it carefully and we will look at the pros and cons, but we donR= 17;t jump into things without first of all considering the ramifications.=
Ms. Stick:
In fac= t, research shows effective ways to improve child well-being include quality e= arly learning and care programs in places where families can meet, socialize, sw= ap ideas, support each other, play and have fun.
Sound = familiar? It should. The Wellness Plan cl= early states that Many Rivers offers services and programs to increase parents= 217; knowledge, skill and confidence. It’s in the Wellness Plan.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, can the minister explain to Yukoners why Many Rivers’ long-standing commitment to family education doesn’t merit this core funding when it’s in the Wellness Plan= ?
Hon. Mr. Graham: Mr. Speaker, I’m perhaps a little slow, but I don’t understand what part of = the first answer the member opposite didn’t understand. Many Rivers is an independent organization. We negotiate a three-year agreement with them, wh= ich we did last year, and we will follow that three-year agreement. If they req= uest a change to that agreement, we would follow the same process. We would sit down, consult with them, and determine if the programs and services that th= ey wish to offer — first of all, whether or not they are offered by anot= her organization or by the government itself — were cost-effective. We wo= uld look at a number of different areas. If we didn’t do our due diligenc= e in this area, the member opposite would be the first one who would stand up and yell at me and say — I’m sorry, Mr. Speaker, that may be inappropriate language. The member opposite would be the first one to point= out to me that we didn’t do due diligence before we went ahead and spent a lot of money.
There&= #8217;s a process in place and we’ll follow that process. If I receive a request for funding, that will be considered and shared with my Cabinet colleagues.=
Ms. Stick:
Can th= e minister explain why he would not include core funding to a program that clearly mee= ts objectives set out by his department, presumably with good information?
Hon. Mr. Graham: I wasn’t t= here at the negotiations; however, what I will tell you is that obviously the funding of these programs did not come up during the signing of a new contribution agreement with Many Rivers. Had the subject come up, I’m sure my department would have brought that back to me and said that X numbe= r of dollars is being requested for core funding for a specific program. I would have asked the department to evaluate that request, give me an opinion about whether or not the request was legitimate and real, and I would have brough= t that information back to my Cabinet and said that I would like to add X number of dollars to my budget in order to continue running this program.
None o= f that occurred. So hopefully, at some point in the future, it will occur but, unt= il it does, I’m afraid that what could have happened or what did happen = is of no consequence, because it didn’t happen.
Speaker: The = time for Question Period has now elapsed.
Introduction of Visitors
Ms. White:
Applause
Notice of government priv=
ate
members’ business
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Pursuant to Standing Order 14.2(7), I would like to identify the items stan= ding in the name of the government private members to be called for debate on Wednesday, October 29, 2014. They are: Motion No. 724, standing in the name= of the Member for Watson Lake and Motion No. 723, standing in the name of the Member for Watson Lake.
Speaker: We w= ill now proceed to Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
GOVERNMENT MOTIONS
Motion No. 710
Clerk: Motion No. 710, standi= ng in the name of the Hon. Mr. Pasloski.
Speaker: It is moved by the Hon. Premier
THAT t= his House:
(1) ur= ges the Government of Yukon to show national unity and Yukon’s support for the Government of Canada’s decision to participate in the broad internati= onal coalition of nations working together to combat the Islamic State of Iraq a= nd the Levant (ISIL), and to provide humanitarian aid to innocent people suffe= ring from ISIL’s atrocities;
(2) recognizes the personal contrib= ution of Canadians serving in the Armed Forces and that the experience of war has profound and ongoing consequences for veterans by supporting our troops dur= ing combat missions, and after they return home; and
THAT t= he Speaker of the Yukon Legislative Assembly transmit the decision of this House to the Parliament of Canada and to the provincial and territorial assemblies of Canada.
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: My caucus collea= gues and I have brought this motion forward because we believe that it is import= ant that we show national unity and Yukon support for the Government of Canada’s decision to participate in the broad international coalition= of nations working together to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant= , or ISIL. We also believe it is important to provide humanitarian aid to innoce= nt people suffering from ISIL’s atrocities.
In Can= ada we enjoy tremendous rights and freedoms. Canada has a long tradition of standi= ng with our allies and of standing up to tyranny and violence. Our forces participated in the Afghanistan mission because we were asked to do so. Can= ada has alliances and with these come benefits and responsibilities.
I was = impressed by a recent letter to the editor that makes an important point about honour= ing our commitments to our allies. The author stated the following: “Cana= da is not, and never has been, a neutral country. We have interests abroad, and alliances to maintain. We desire peace and stability in the world, but the world is a dangerous place. We must be prepared to defend our country and o= ur way of life. These alliances, which have kept us safe for many years, come = with obligations.” The author of that is Darcy Grossi= nger, who is a veteran of our country and the current president of the Royal Cana= dian Legion No. 254 in the Whitehorse St= ar on October 20, 2014.
Over t= he course of the summer, each one of us was appalled by the media reports of barbarism that emerged from this conflict. It seemed as if each week contained a fresh report of a new level of savagery. We have seen the brutal murders of aid workers and journalists, professional women, doctors, lawyers and politicia= ns singled out to be executed. There are well-documented reports of crucifying, beheading and the chopping off of arms and legs.
We kno= w the names of James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Alan Henning and David Haines, two American journalists and two UK aid workers who were captured, imprisoned a= nd murdered by ISIL. Although the names of slaughtered western hostages are well-known, at least 17 Iraqi journalists have been executed by ISIS. Many = more have been abducted. On October 10, an Iraqi cameraman — a 37-year old father of three — was publicly beheaded.
All mi= norities are targeted by ISIL. Yazidi men have been slaughtered and the women used as slaves by the thousands. They claim that their religion justifies this. The harrowing tales recounted to us by fortu= nate survivors demonstrate the evils being perpetrated by ISIL.
One of=
the UK
aid workers is reported to have believed that he was going home because he =
had
done nothing wrong. He was simply helping Syrian children and refugees. He
cried for his fellow captives when ISIL took him away because he thought he=
was
being freed. Instead, he was taken deeper into the ISIL prison network and
beheaded. These and other atrocities, committed by ISIL, offend the whole w=
orld
from north to south, from east to west. The UN Special Representative of the
Secretary General in Iraq, Mr. Nickolay Mladenov, is a Bulgarian and Mr. Zeid
Ra’ad Al Hussein, the High Commissioner f=
or
Human Rights is a Jordanian and a Muslim.
I ment= ion their nationalities because this is not a West-against-Middle-East battle, nor is= it a modern-day crusade against Muslims, as some have suggested. They jointly issued a report on protection of civilians in armed conflict in Iraq, July = 6 to September 10, 2014. The report found corroborated evidence of rapes and sex= ual violence against women and children; forced conversions or death; the compl= ete repudiation of basic human rights, and systematic genocide. We have seen th= eir brutality and their violence overseas and we see it very close to home. Two main attacks — one on Monday in Quebec and the other on Tuesday in Ot= tawa — claimed the life of Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent and Corporal Na= than Cirillo.
Canada= has joined the international community in saying that this tyranny, this oppression, this bondage cannot be tolerated. Mr. Speaker, the Governm= ent of Canada has determined that the cause of freedom is once again in peril. = Just as we stood with our allies in France a century ago, the Government of Cana= da has declared that we will stand with our allies. We will stand for our principles, and that means that we will stand up to this tyranny. = p>
As our= Prime Minister stated in his address to the nation on Wednesday evening following= the attack on our nation, we are also reminded that attacks on our security personnel and our institutions of governance are, by their very nature, att= acks on our country, on our values, on our society, and on us, Canadians, as a f= ree and democratic people who embrace human dignity for all, just as it will le= ad us to strengthen our resolve and redouble our efforts to work with our alli= es around the world and fight against the terrorist organizations that brutali= ze those in other countries with the hope of bringing their savagery to our shores. This motion represents an opportunity for Yukon to express our supp= ort for the Government of Canada’s decision to participate in the broad international coalition of nations working together to combat the Islamic S= tate of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL, and to provide humanitarian aid to innocent people suffering from ISIL’s atrocities.
Of cou= rse, as a compassionate and a democratic society, Canada sees suffering and wants to alleviate it. Our intent is to deliver humanitarian aid. As we have learned time and time again, there can be no delivery of humanitarian aid without security. We want to help heal the wounds, feed the hungry, and give shelter and sanctuary to those who are suffering. We cannot deliver this aid without safe passage, and the perpetrators here have shown no indication of providi= ng safe passage. To the contrary, they have no regard for civilians. They make= no such distinctions for ISIL — either to convert to their way or you are executed as a non-believer. We will deliver aid, but first we must take the knives from the throats of those who are currently being threatened.=
Having= been a long-time member of the Legion, I have spent many years listening to member= s of the armed services and their families relate their experiences of the recep= tion they received when they returned from duty. In speaking with members of this Assembly, such as yourself, and with Yukoners who have served, I understand= the importance of supporting our forces. We can recognize the personal contribu= tion of Canadians by showing respect and recognizing that military service is a difficult and challenging job. Not everyone wants or is willing to perform = the tasks and to undertake the missions that governments ask of their military. Indeed, some countries compel their citizens to participate in military ser= vice.
Canada= ’s Armed Forces are entirely voluntary. These women and men have willingly agr= eed to serve their nation. If for no other reason, that alone is reason enough = to deserve our respect. Many have shared with me the feeling that, having done what our nation asked of them, their contributions be recognized as valuable and important. This is something that we need to do, not just when they ret= urn or for a week or during November — we need to support them throughout= the year and in the years following.
The ex= perience of war has profound and ongoing consequences for veterans. Some veterans re= turn with injuries — some visible, some invisible. Our society is developi= ng a better understanding of responding to the invisible wounds. Decisions to de= ploy domestically or internationally are not taken lightly. We recognize the importance of understanding the dangers involved, not just to life and limb, but to each soldier’s spirit and their moral compass. In his book, What It Is Like to Go to War, Karl= Marlantes writes in his preface the following: “= ;The violence of combat assaults psyches, confuses ethics and tests souls. This = is not only a result of the violence suffered. It is also a result of the viol= ence inflicted. Warriors suffer from wounds to their bodies, to be sure, but bec= ause they were involved in killing people, they also suffer from their compromis= es with, or outright violations of, the moral norms of society and religion.”
We und= erstand that injuries, seen and unseen, caused by conflicts can have long-lasting effects on members, their families and their friends. Some organizations provide a place for members to discuss their challenges with others having similar experiences. Through sharing experiences, they find healing. Each o= ne of us can play a role in supporting our troops. They deserve our respect and our honour. We believe that it is important that we recognize the personal contribution of Canadians serving in the Armed Forces and that the experien= ce of war has profound and ongoing consequences to veterans by supporting our troops during combat missions and after they return home.
In his= address to the nation, the Prime Minister reaffirmed that we will not be intimidate= d. Canada will never be intimidated.
The th= ird point of this motion requests that the Speaker of the Yukon Legislative Assembly communicate to other assemblies in Canada the decision of this House. Canad= ians enjoy tremendous rights and freedoms, including the right to free speech. I= t is my hope that other assemblies across Canada will join us in expressing their solidarity with Canada.
Now th= at the decision to engage has been made, I believe we need to voice our support and encourage others to do the same. In response to the assault on our nation, = the Prime Minister has stated that he has every confidence that Canadians will = pull together with the kind of firm solidarity that we have seen our country thr= ough many challenges.
By end= orsing this motion today, we can express Yukon’s solidarity with Canada. As I stated in this Assembly on Thursday, Canada is a free and democratic country where we agree to disagree civilly. We can protect our democracy by diligen= tly carrying on with the daily work of democracy.
Our democratically elected Assembly using the tools of democracy to pass a moti= on that affirms our support for the Government of Canada and affirms our suppo= rt for our forces and their families and shares that support with other democratically elected assemblies across our nation is a great way to show = that our democratic institutions continue to function.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, let us show the contrast between ISIL’s wanton disregard for democrat= ic rights by using the tools of democracy in our response.
In lig= ht of the tragic events that have unfolded in the Levant, in Canada and, indeed, in o= ur nation’s capital, let us be clear with the symbolism — that was= an attack on our entire nation.
We fac= e choices on how to respond. It can be said that we are being attacked because we cho= ose to stand with our allies against oppression and against violence. As I contemplated the situation in the Middle East that precipitated our motion = and the events that have unfolded on our soil since then, I am reminded that wh= at matters is our values. We remain committed to our fundamental freedoms. We remain committed to our democratic rights and responsibilities. We remain committed to human rights. We remain committed to the rule of law. We have stood up for those values time and time again. We have a duty to defend wha= t we cherish. I urge all members of this Assembly to support this motion.=
Ms. Hanson: At the outset, I want to be clear that t=
he
Yukon New Democratic Party unequivocally condemns the murder of Canadian
soldiers. I spoke at length on the first day of this session with respect to
the sadness that I and the rest of my caucus felt on hearing of their death=
s.
I̵= 7;m sorry Mr. Speaker. I have to leave for a second.
Speaker: We w= ill take a five-minute recess while the member retires for a second.
Recess
Ms. Hanson: It’s a good lesson on keeping your=
head up.
I will endeavour to do that for the balance.
As I w= as saying, the Official Opposition, the NDP, has been clear in our unequivocal condemnation of the murder of Canadian soldiers. I spoke on the opening day= of this Fall Session about the sadness that we felt, that Canadians felt, on hearing about the deaths of the soldiers in Quebec and in Ottawa.
In app= roaching and discussing the motion that is before us this afternoon, we gave careful thought to what is being proposed and what is being put before us. As it is with all matters that come before the Legislative Assembly, we feel it is important to ask: what is the outcome that we’re seeking, and does the motion that is being put for= ward do anything? There have been and there will be many, many words spoken over= the last number of days about issues associated with the notions of terrorism, = the reality of terrorism, with the horrors of war, with the evil that comes from hate.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, the challenge that we face is being able to separate out the importance of = the day-to-day reality of those people who are living and have been living with= the horrors of either state terrorism or individually based terrorism for many, many years, in particular in the regions from Afghanistan across the Middle East. We need to ask ourselves what the government’s motion will actu= ally accomplish.
The fe= deral government in Ottawa has already committed elements of the Canadian Armed Forces to the latest conflict in the Middle East. That is a done deal. Where Canada has fallen short is really on the humanitarian front. Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced by state terrorism, and our governm= ent watched thousands fleeing, watched thousands having their homes destroyed a= nd children being murdered. We’ve watched and we’ve not responded = with the openness and the compassion that we speak about as one of the underlying values of Canadian society. We have not opened our doors to allow refugees = in here. We sit as observers on the sidelines as countries like Turkey, which = can ill afford it, take in a million refugees.
There = has been a lot of emphasis and heightened rhetoric, I would suggest, over the last wee= k in particular about military action. We are about so much more.
I want= to speak a little bit about what it means when you take on and engage, and we ask — and yet again invoke that sacred covenant that Canada speaks of whe= n it speaks of its military, and we call upon them to act and to serve on our be= half in lands far away. I want to speak to that a bit. I want to speak to some of the issues that are associated with the fundamental values and principles t= hat we talk about as we ask these troops — when we talk about them defend= ing and we ask them to go forward.
I want= to spend a brief time on that, Mr. Speaker, because, at the core of this is our resolve and our belief that, as a Legislative Assembly, we have a very limi= ted amount of time during each session to debate matters of great importance to Yukon. I, as Leader of the Official Opposition, question that this is the P= remier’s top priority, and we need to ask ourselves whether this is a government that has any vision left for the territory or if this is simply an attempt to run the clock.
At tim= es when there are many issues — humanitarian issues in our own neighbourhood,= issues that affect our relationships and really speak to how we treat each other w= ith respect — it’s one thing to talk about the horrors and the lack= of respect elsewhere, but we have a lack of respect in this country, in this territory.
One of= the things that strikes poorest in the reaction to the events and the issues th= at have gone on — not just last week, Mr. Speaker, but have been go= ing on for years where we played small parts and larger parts — there is a very serious temptation at times to rise to a level of rhetoric as opposed = to reflecting on what the core values and core issues are here.
As I w= as thinking about how we would address this issue, I was reminded that we were called upon in your opening prayer to conduct ourselves with dignity, tempe= rance and honour and, in my view, that means that government needs to make sure t= hat it takes the time to reflect and not react. There is an element of both the actions that have been taken at the federal level and that are being echoed here that are reacting and not reacting in terms of what will be a substant= ive effort — what will be the substantive effect of what we do on a lasti= ng basis as a nation, as a territory.
It rea= ffirms the importance of reaffirming our belief in our common values and the foundatio= ns of our identity, our democracy and our compassion. In times of crisis, we a= re often tempted to sacrifice our civil liberties for the benefit of an abstra= ct sense of security offered by higher security, more restrictions and greater access to our lives. I don’t think it has to be that way.
You kn= ow, Mr. Speaker, there has been reference to the shootings in Ottawa last week. We know that that shooter was not on the RCMP’s radar. We need to reflect and to remember the struggles that we as a country have fought to ensure — t= hat our civil liberties are as strong as they are today — and we have to = work to ensure that we do not sacrifice the now in panic.
We as = a country, as part of our Constitution, have reaffirmed certain values, rights and freedoms in our Charter of Rights a= nd Freedoms. Who among us would be the first to deny that everyone has the fundamental freedom of conscience and religion? Who among us would suggest = that there are those in our society who don’t have the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression? Who among us would suggest that somebody el= se — not you — does not have the freedom of peaceful assembly or t= he freedom of association? Those are fundamental values that we as Canadians h= ave affirmed and reaffirmed.
We als= o have affirmed that everyone as a Canadian has the right to life, liberty and security of person. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search procedures. As we react and as we think about what we’re going= to do as a society in response to our natural reactions of horror to the immed= iate events — because they touched us personally, because it’s on our soil — we can’t distance that from the reality that that is the everyday existence of so many people in so many parts of this world.
We, as= a Canadian society, have chosen to try to do things differently. We reaffirm = it on a daily basis in our law.
The tr= uth is that terror attacks cannot always be prevented, especially when individuals= act alone. Sometimes there just aren’t any clues that somebody’s go= ing to act. They call them a lone wolf. The path from joining, supporting and embracing radical ideas to actually committing terrorist violence is not a = path that can be easily charted, which is why it’s so important to remembe= r to respect — that respect that we have for our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I, lik= e the speaker before me, have also spent time reflecting and reading, because when we’re in a perplexed state about what’s going on, we try to look for ideas and understanding from those who have expertise in these areas. Wesley Wark, who’s an expert and a visiti= ng scholar in Toronto, said it quite clearly when he talked about terrorism. He said there is no standard profile for a terrorist. What we need to remember= is that there’s no such thing as perfect security and there is no such t= hing as easy prevention, at least in a democracy.
We hav= e to avoid what has been called the fog of historical and cultural amnesia that preven= ts us from learning from the mistakes of the past. It’s not me who is sa= ying that. Yesterday, I tuned in and watched parts of the Senate hearing on security, chaired by our senator. At that Senate hearing, the RCMP Commissioner, Bob Paulson, was speaking. He told the assembled lawmakers th= at the best way to prevent terrorism is to prevent radicalization in the first place. That is a much more profound challenge than simply saying, oh yes, we’ll wave the flag and we’ll send troops over there. We don’t know what we’re dealing with. What he is suggesting to us= is that we need to spend the time finding out, Mr. Speaker.
We can= ’t afford another round of wars justifying — categorizing — simply= by saying it’s a war on terror. As I said, there is a tendency to forget history and there is cultural amnesia. We have been in a war on terror. The= re is something that needs to suggest to us we have failed. As we consider = 212; and as we have already sent Canadian pilots and ground troops into yet anot= her arena, an undefined arena with an undefined objective — we need to consider and we need to recognize that terrorism is not new. For many years, centuries even, terrorism was largely something that happened within a coun= try. You know, we haven’t been immune from these domestic crimes of terror= ism. Most of us have been in Ottawa. We have seen the placard where D’Arcy McGee, a Member of Parliament, was assassinated on Sparks Street. Some of us are old enough to have been around during the Front de libération du Québec. Some of us — and it’s recently, this is not g= oing back in history, but in recent times — the Ku Klux Klan re-emerged in= the Prairies and domestic terrorism that included the bombing of abortion clini= cs and doctors in their homes by anti-choice activists.
These = are sad examples of Canadians who resorted to violence when they could not persuade= others to join their cause, and they couldn’t overpower them, so they blew themselves up in washrooms in the Parliament buildings or killed unarmed hostages like Pierre Laporte and James Cross. T= he fact of the matter is that we know that while we have much conjecture, we h= ave little to go on in terms of the assailants over the last week and a half. Regardless of how we feel about the terrorist regime and the terrorists wit= hin ISIL — and I expect that we all react with abhorrence to what they ha= ve done — the decision has already been made in Parliament. The mission = will go ahead as planned whether or not we pass the motion in this place. We have many pressing issues in our democracy to discuss. A decision has been made.=
We bel= ieve that Canada’s contribution to this mission would be best served with a foc= us on a humanitarian crisis that is rapidly unfolding. The rise of ISIL, just = like many conflicts in the Middle East, is an extremely complex geopolitical phenomenon, decades in the making. It is not going to be simply or quickly solved by boots and bombs.
We lea= rned as much over the past decade-plus of war in that region. What we can do immediately is try to help the tens of thousands of displaced people who ha= ve the upcoming winter to worry about — a serious worry in an area where winter is brutal — and support the logistical machine that will be ne= eded to transport goods and relief workers to the region. Our foreign policy has= to be deeper and more thoughtful than reacting to the spectre, as awful as it = is, of westerners being beheaded. In many ways, our refusal to acknowledge the history of the Middle East blinds us to the current troubles.
I will= remind you — as I said earlier — we have a tendency for cultural and historical amnesia. In the late stages of the Cold War the west funded, arm= ed and advised the Afghan mujahideen to drive the Russians from Afghanistan. In many ways, the history of Afghanistan over the past 25 years represents a political Frankenstein, one the west lost control over long ago and we’ve seen it spread and the residual impact. The h= ate of the outside, of us, is a result of those interventions.
The IS= IL is, like al-Qaeda, an international collection of fighters on the fringe of right-wing Islam who have exploited the political instability in Iraq and S= yria in order to advance their own agenda. The situation is so complex that we n= ow see old enemies like Iraq and Iran banding together in common cause.
How ca= n we begin to make sense of such a situation without a strong historical context? How = can we begin to suggest that a knee-jerk reaction is going to do anything but exacerbate the situation? We need to learn from our history and intervene in the most appropriate way and in a way that will produce an effective result= .
The ot= her aspect of this motion is something that we spoke to many times in this Legislative Assembly. My colleague for Takhini-Kopper King,= will, in fact, speak to it more, I’m sure, because she has been such a passionate advocate for the issues of how we deal with veterans.
Just a= s an aside, Mr. Speaker, I spent the weekend with relatives. On many parts = it was a very happy occasion, but part of it was reviewing with my 90-year-old aunt photos of my father, her husband and her brother-in-law during the Sec= ond World War before they went off to serve Canada. Before and after, the pride= was there and the difficulties were there after as well.
Canada= ’s veterans deserve our full support and we have tabled motions to that effect= in this House.
We hav=
e tabled
motions to that effect in this House. It will be interesting to see, in ter=
ms
of the actions and the resolve of my colleagues across the way — the
Yukon Party — and in terms of how they will actually give effect to t=
he
second part of this motion. As we’ve said before, we believe that this
party, this government, should call upon the federal Conservatives to stand
behind and with our veterans. That means that the federal government needs =
to
reopen the Veterans Affairs offices it closed this summer, invest in mental
health professionals who can help veterans through the traumatic experience=
s of
armed conflict, and reopen discussion on the controversial New Veterans Charter to=
deal with
a number of problems — the biggest one being the lump sum payments for
injured veterans. We haven’t seen from this government until today
— and I’m pleased to see that part of the motion is at least th=
ere.
But when we called upon this government to support the Public Service Allia=
nce,
the Legion and others — I guess actions speak better than words.
So whe= re do we find ourselves? The federal government has committed the Canadian Armed For= ces to an open-end combat mission against a non-state actor that is conducting operations in Iraq. The territorial government has tabled a motion in suppo= rt of that mission, the motion that we are debating today, on the third day of= the new Legislative Assembly, instead of issues that we can do something about.=
We can= deal with affordable housing. We can deal with repairing the relationships among and between governments in this territory. We can deal with the really serious issues of health care and climate change. Those are things that this govern= ment can do. The message is that the Premier doesn’t agree that he can do anything about climate change but, in fact, his refusal to deal with the recycling issues and the diversion programs — that’s a tangible effort that this government could do.
We can= not support a motion that is, in effect, structured as a cheerleading note, a commitment to combat. We cannot stand by while humanitarian support is critically needed to help displaced civilians in Iraq. We cannot allow this discussion to take place without calling for the federal government to chan= ge course — not just nice words about how we need to be good to veterans, but to change course from the cutbacks and the refusal to work with veteran= s, the shameful actions of a government that will dismiss somebody within mont= hs of their 10 years of service so that they don’t have to pay their benefits, to change course in its treatment of veterans at a time when a new generation have just come from a decade-long war, and we cannot allow ourse= lves to be goaded into surrendering hard-earned civil liberties due to an act of domestic terrorism, no matter how tragic or how awful the most recent act w= as.
We can= not support this motion.
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; I am pleased to rise in the House today to give a veteran’s perspecti= ve — me being a veteran — to this motion. I don’t have a who= le bunch to say but I definitely do support this motion, Mr. Speaker. Whe= n we talk about the priorities that the member opposite talked about — I t= hink about unity for our country — we need to look at the photo of Marcus,= the son of Corporal Nathan Cirillo today and how the country came together.
This d= oes hit close to home, and I do think and I wonder, if this had happened in Whiteho= rse or one of the communities that we represent, what our thoughts would be. The day that it happened in Ottawa — I do want to acknowledge our first responders, our security people in the building, all the staff who came together to make sure that we here, in the event of an issue, would be safe= .
Unity = for our country hits close to home and — in the motion, the Premier spoke to = it but I’m hearing a lot about the humanitarian aid. At our Remembrance = Day parade every year, we play a tribute video at the end of it and it is usual= ly a soldier who has compiled a bunch of footage from World War I, World War II — not much from the Boer War — but also from Afghanistan and so= me of the other conflicts that Canada has been a part of. You need only to watch = the videos, and in the videos it shows the Canadian soldiers rebuilding streets, helping with schools, a Canadian soldier with his hand out to a young Afghan boy, passing him a teddy bear — the humanitarian aid is there and it comes from this country.
As a s= ervice member, I appreciate how I am recognized as a veteran in the Yukon and in Canada. I have a veterans plate. I was very pleased when the first discussi= on with my fellow colleague, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, brou= ght forward — we had the opportunity to dedicate the Alaska Highway to our veterans.
As a C= anadian Ranger, I’m pleased to see how the federal government, with the Canad= ian Rangers across the north — which are sovereignty and security. We wear our red sweatshirts so we can be seen, to show that the north is ours. The support from the federal government is great. Not only do we have to just l= ook at how many times our Prime Minister has been here and how many times I’ve gotten to meet the Prime Minister and my fellow Rangers across t= he north — over 1,500 have had the chance to see the Prime Minister. Canadian soil, taking care of our Canadian soil — and supporting our troops and supporting our nation, moving forward with our allies in the com= bat mission is integral. I think it’s very important, along with the humanitarian aid.
One of= the things that I remember, as a soldier when I was released from the military,= is the support I got. When I signed out of the base at Comox, they had fixed my teeth and made sure I had a heartbeat, and I was gone. Is there more to be done? There’s always more to be done. There’s a lot that changes when you’re released from the military now.
Do I b= elieve that supporting our veterans is of the upmost importance? I think that̵= 7;s the primary importance. One thing that I thought about — and we’= ;ve had this conversation in the House, and I’m pleased to be able to get= up and speak in the House about this, because you know what? I think this is a priority for all Canadians.
I thin= k other jurisdictions, other governments and other municipalities have had this conversation at a municipal level or at a federal or provincial level. I th= ink it’s important that we stick together as Canadians.
But, M= r. Speaker, when it comes to taking care of those veterans when they come home — = you know, not only is it in Veterans Affairs. I have noticed something in my conversations with a lot of veterans, a lot of Afghan vets who have come ba= ck — that they also rely on our infrastructure, which is our nurses, our doctors and our mental health care workers, and that conversation comes up.= A few weeks ago, when the Minister of Health and Social Services was in my ri= ding talking to the nurses and some of the health care providers out there ̵= 2; mental health is a huge issue, and this government is committed and working= to that.
In the= big picture, we definitely need to support Canada, especially when it hits clos= e to home and hits on our soil. I am just remembering a couple of things that happened on the weekend. Corporal Chris Cassia from the Carcross patrol decided he thought it would be good to go stand at the memorial, and there were a lot of people who stopped by and gave him words of encourageme= nt. Mr. Speaker, some people brought him a coffee and showed support. Yesterday, I was there with you, Mr. Speaker, and others at the turnout for the first poppy. = It was great to see those people there, but you know what? We need to be vigil= ant. That is the motto of the Canadian Rangers. We have to be vigilant. We have = to be the watchers, but we also must remember them.
Mr. Silver: Nobody in this Legislature is
opposed to supporting Canadian troops. ISIL is obviously a threat to global
security — that is a known. They are responsible for countless murders
and beheadings — also known.
Canada= has never been a country that has ever sat on the sidelines. We are a great nation th= at has always risen to the challenge to protect the freedoms and the democracy that we cherish and we’ve earned and there is no doubt that this cris= is will require our Canadian participation — absolutely.
Howeve= r, I have spoken with several veterans who are confused by this motion. Furthermore, = in a letter to the editor published on October 20, a local veteran who I will not name criticized all parties by trying to politicize debate and score easy points. We had an opportunity to avoid that here. Last week, it was request= ed to the Premier, given the circumstances in Ottawa the day prior, in an effo= rt of good faith, to have the three different chiefs of staff of all parties to s= it down and construct a motion that everybody would be able to comfortably agr= ee upon. That request was ignored.
There = are more vital issues that this level of government is tasked to deal with in this Legislative Assembly — mental health, education, infrastructure, resources. The budget that we are supposed to be debating has no line items= for this debate. We don’t have a Department of Defence nor of Foreign Aff= airs in the Yukon Legislative Assembly. The Yukon Legislative Assembly and the Y= ukon government do not decide whether Canada takes on missions overseas. There a= re, however, a large number of issues for which we have authority that are much more urgent to Yukoners’ daily lives than focusing on a federal government foreign policy, which is currently being debated and which is currently moving forward.
I had = some lists of local issues that we should be talking about, but if the Yukon government really feels the need to get involved with federal affairs, well there are a lot more pressing issues that we could be bringing forward right now. The federal government’s cuts have hurt Yukoners, but the government does= not want to get involved with these federal issues.
Many o= ther topics could have been discussed here today that in my opinion are more valuable. Changes to YESAA are among issues that are very relevant to Yukoners, and t= he Premier has washed his hands of this, claiming it to be a federal issue. Tabling amendments here in the Legislature here for review would have been = much more beneficial to Yukoners than blocking them out of the process before ta= king it to Ottawa. In the spring, I warned the Yukon government that its unilate= ral approach to amending this legislation would further strain the relationships between the territory’s public and the First Nation governments. Now = its failure to cooperate with others brings the potential threat of more legal action. I will be calling on the Yukon government to wield its influence in Ottawa to see that these legislative changes are withdrawn and have more discussion with both the Yukon public and the Yukon First Nations. We could= be talking about that today, but we’re not.
Yukon = stands to lose $4.2 million a year because of changes to the employment insurance program. Where is the Yukon government’s position on these cuts? $4.2 million is a large amount of personal income to be taken out of the territo= ry. We could be talking about that here today, but we are not.
Up unt= il September of 2012, Whitehorse had a Canada Revenue Agency office. When the federal government announced that it would close it, the Whitehorse Chamber= of Commerce spoke out about it. This cut was seen as a huge loss to the territory’s small business community. We could be talking about the c= uts to the CRA office today, but we are not.
There = have been a number of opportunities to get involved in federal issues, ones where the Premier could have used his voice to directly benefit Yukoners. Now letR= 17;s get to the motion on the floor today.
I as a= Liberal, and as a Canadian, unequivocally support the Canadian troops, especially our veterans. I attended yesterday’s presentation for the first poppy. On November 11, I will once again have the honour and the privilege to present= a wreath in Dawson. I recognize the personal sacrifices that our military has made.
I also= feel Canada has an important role to play in world affairs, as we have since Wor= ld War I. Our troops are headed overseas and today’s debate will have no impact on that conclusion. But if the Premier wants to know where I stand on this issue, it’s very simple: Canada should take on a clearly mandate= d, non-combat role, focusing in on humanitarian efforts. I do not think the Pr= ime Minister has made the case to Canadians that stepping into a combat role is necessary for our country.
Now, I= do support the motion’s intention — and I quote, “to provide humanitarian aid to innocent people suffering from ISIL’s atrocities” — absolutely, Mr. Speaker. I will support recognizing — and I quote, “personal contribution of Canadians serving in the Armed Forces and that the experience of war has profound and ongoing consequences for veterans by supporting our troops during combat missions, and after they return home” — absolutely.
But as= the motion is worded in full, I cannot in good conscience support it. As we hear more details of the events that occurred last week it is important to keep things in perspective. The shooter in Ottawa was radicalized. He was a terrorist. But so far there is no evidence to support that he was an active member of ISIL. Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs has confirmed th= at.
We hav= e a responsibility as legislators to stick to the truth and to not draw false l= inks to justify outcomes. Canadians deserve more. Again, I am disappointed that = the government chose not to work with the opposition parties today to bring for= th a motion that we could all support. That was a very conscious decision.
I will= continue to support our troops. I am very proud of our military, I am very proud of = my family’s legacy and association with the Armed Forces and I am not pr= oud of what we are doing here today in the territory Legislative Assembly and I will not be supporting this motion.
Hon. Mr. Nixon: = I would like to begin by making some general comments and then address the elements of this motion.
There = is a clear philosophical difference here that I think we need to fully understand. In = some parts of the world, the belief is that individual freedoms have to be sacrificed for the collective good. In other parts of the world, the belief= is that the collective good is achieved through enabling individual success and accomplishment. We place a priority on individual rights and freedoms becau= se we understand that our collective rights are ensured at an individual level= .
One of= the hallmarks of Canada is that we have a sophisticated and modern human rights regime. It is part of what makes Canada a great place to live. We have the = Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom= s, but I’ll come back to that in a moment.
As I p= repared for today, I thought of our national anthem which speaks about “the T= rue North strong and free.” Canada is an incredible country in which to l= ive because we have certain fundamental freedoms: the freedom of conscience and religion; the freedom of thought; the freedom of the press; the freedom of peaceful assembly; and the freedom of association. These are our values and Canada has stood firm for them and has committed to defend them no matter t= he cost, even when that meant going to war.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, I know that both you and the Member for Kluane = have served in our nation’s Armed Forces because you believe these values = are worth defending and I thank you both for your years of service. As members = of this Assembly know, Canadians and Yukoners have been at the forefront of promoting and addressing human rights. Our legacy as a place of refuge has garnered Canada a worldwide reputation as being the best country in which to live. Whether slaves from the southern States seeking personal freedom, religious groups like the Mennonites from Europe fleeing persecution, or immigrants from Asia pursuing economic and personal success — Canada = was and is known as a place of safety and a place of opportunity. Personal free= doms are what allow us to achieve our personal success and in turn contribute to= our national success. Sadly, there are parts of the world where people do not e= njoy the benefits of basic human rights.
I can = think of examples where people are discriminated against because of their gender, th= eir skin colour, their religion or their physical disabilities. We live in a fr= ee and open democratic society. We live in a peaceful and prosperous society. Canada has partnered with others who are committed to freedom. We did it in World War I, in World War II, in Korea and Afghanistan. Today I stand in support of our nation joining the partnership to defend our values in Iraq. Canada has supported every UN peacekeeping mission because we want to ensure that oppression never finds a home, especially here in Canada. As I thought about the consequence of previous wars like World War I and World War II, I= am pleased that our opponents in these wars are now friends and allies. Our countries are at peace because each one enjoys liberty.
I was = in Germany this summer and I had the privilege of touring the German Naval Academy in Flensburg with Commanding Officer Admiral Carsten Staw= itzki. I can assure you that our German friends hold Canada in general and Yukon in particular in very high esteem.
Early = next year I will be heading to Asia to promote Yukon tourism there. Our nation and our territory is an attractive place to live and to visit, in large part becaus= e of the liberty and the security we enjoy. To me it is obvious that liberty = 212; that freedom — is a necessity for success and prosperity for individu= als, for communities and for nations. I mention this because some believe that w= ar just generates more war. I don’t believe that this is the case. I bel= ieve apathy causes violence and oppression needs to be confronted. I believe the best way for us to improve the future is to learn from our past.
Just a= few moments ago I mentioned Germany. On September 30, 1938, at the Heston Aerodrome, British Prime Minister Neville Cham= berlain spoke about the peace for our time. He was explaining the Munich agreement,= in which Britain and France abandoned their pact with Czechoslovakia and carve= d it up as part of their policy of appeasement toward Germany. He wanted peace; = he thought appeasement was the path to peace. It wasn’t. Pursuing peace = by abandoning allies and breaking treaty obligations didn’t work then, a= nd I don’t believe that it’ll work now.
Canadi= ans understand the difference between peace and appeasement. One is strength an= d the other is servitude. Millions of people around the world live in servitude. = They do not enjoy any of the democratic freedoms we have. We enjoy those rights because of the nearly 115,000 Canadians who laid down their lives to secure= and preserve our freedom. Canadians before us declared that oppression needed t= o be confronted and confront it they did — at a terrible cost. Given the horrors of World War I were still fresh in many people’s minds, the decision to go to war in 1939 was not taken lightly, but the decision was m= ade because oppression needs to be confronted.
We hav= e seen how extremists oppress people and their response to those who stand up against them. I think of women like Malala Yusufzai, wh= o has continued to show bravery and courage in spite of the violence done to her, because she thought girls should have an education too.
I have= talked in general terms about the need to confront oppression, but let’s look at the evidence before us as it relates to Iraq.
Earlie= r today, the Premier referenced the October 2 report by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq Human Rights Office. It detailed the staggering array of h= uman rights abuses in northern Iraq from July 6 to September 10. As of October 1= , at least 9,347 civilians have been killed so far in 2014, and 17,386 have been wounded, well over half of them since ISIL began over-running large parts of the north in early June.
The re= port enumerates a litany of serious violations of international humanitarian law= and gross abuses of human rights that have been perpetrated by ISIL and associa= ted with armed groups with an apparent systematic and widespread character: att= acks directly targeting civilians; executions of civilians; abductions; rape; se= xual and physical violence against women and children; forced recruitment of children; destruction of religious sites; malicious destruction; looting of property = and the denial of fundamental freedoms. Women and ethnic and religious minoriti= es have all been intentionally and systematically targeted by ISIL.
As the= Premier has already noted, Nickolay Mladenov of Bulgaria has called the report terrifying. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, who is a Jordanian Musli= m and Arab, has stated that, “The array of violations and abuses perpetrate= d by ISIL and associated armed groups is staggering, and many of their acts may amount to war crimes, or crimes against humanity.”
That t= ells me that the global community — not just the western world — is outraged by what is happening. As I read the reports, the Internet, the pap= ers and watch the news, I am profoundly disgusted by what I see from Levant. Report= ers and aid workers are being kidnapped and killed in barbaric ways. I see women being treated as property rather than people; being raped and enslaved; oth= ers killed. I see people being forced to convert or be killed. I see innocent people being kidnapped and killed. I believe that oppression needs to be confronted.
We are= faced with the same choice as Prime Minister Chamberlain: Do we pursue peace thro= ugh strength or do we pursue it through servitude? I know these are weighty decisions and ones that have very real, very permanent, and sometimes very painful consequences. We on this side of the House have made our position clear. Oppression needs to be confronted.
I thin= k we need to do more than feel outraged by what we saw on the TV news. Governments in= the region are requesting our assistance — our armed assistance. Allies a= re requesting our assistance — our armed assistance. I think we need to = act. We need to confront oppression. Some may view this along the partisan lines; however, I do not.
I woul= d like to share with this Assembly comments from some prominent Canadians. I read Bob Rae’s opinion piece of October 1 in the Globe and Mail. Bob Rae is a former NDP Premier of Ontario and= a former interim leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. He stated, “It = is now apparent that the forces of radical violence have metastasized, and that Islamic State represents a clear and present danger to the people over whom= it rules, to any minorities around the area, to the region and potentially to = the world.” He notes that both the Government of Iraq and the regional government of Iraqi Kurdistan have asked for military assistance. He writes, “This is about understanding the long term, enduring interest of our country in peace, order, and good government, for ourselves and for the wor= ld as well.”
I woul= d also note that Bruce Hyer, currently of the Green Pa= rty and previously of the New Democratic Party, supported the motion. In commen= ts reported on October 7, 2014, on the netnewsledger.com, Mr. Hyer states that he is generally against “forei= gn military intervention, unless the atrocities are so terrible as to merit it.” He states that “people on the ground are calling for our h= elp …. So are our friends in the international communities. Canada must n= ot refuse that call.”
Then h= e goes on to state, “We’ve watched in horror as this group has slaughtered anyone that stands in their way, including innocent women and children, has beheaded journalists and humanitarian workers, has committed horrendous act= s of sexual violence, and has persecuted religious minorities. ISIL will not res= pond to anything but force.”
Mr.&nb= sp;Hyer concludes that “Canada should not stand on= the sidelines in this, and has a moral duty to save lives when it can. I think = the plusses of this mission outweigh the risks. ISIL must be stopped.” = span>
As a p= roud Canadian and as a proud Yukoner, I am pleased that Canada has taken a stand against this discrimination. I applaud those bringing the Canadian ideals of peace, order and good government to that region.
I ment= ioned at the start that I had spent some time thinking about what it means to be Canadian. As I prepared for today’s motion, I thought about what responsibilities we have as Canadians to our world. As Yukoners, we live in= the best part of the best country in the world. I thought about the contrast between Canada and Iraq. As I said earlier, just reading the Internet, watc= hing TV and feeling upset really doesn’t accomplish anything. Oppression n= eeds to be confronted.
I̵= 7;ve asked myself, what can I do to influence the situation in Iraq? As I said at the beginning, I thought about the words of our national anthem — “= we stand on guard for thee”. I thought to myself, there’s definite= ly something I can do. I can stand shoulder to shoulder in determined support = for our military and RCMP members in all the tasks they undertake, but right no= w, here in this Assembly, I can stand in support of this motion. Today I can s= tand in support of our nation joining the partnership to defend our values in Ir= aq.
I stan= d on guard for our women and children; I stand on guard for victims of genocide; I sta= nd on guard for freedom of association. I am in full support of this motion an= d I thank the leader of our great territory, the Premier, for bringing such an important motion forward at such a crucial time in our lives. I encourage a= ll members to support this motion.
Ms. White:
I̵= 7;ve spoken at length in this House of the challenges facing Canadian veterans, challenges that most of us in this House can’t fully understand, beca= use we haven’t taken the oath of service and because we don’t have = the experiences of a service member. The oath reads as follows: “I do swe= ar that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second, Q= ueen of Canada, Her heirs and successors, according to law, and the Canadian For= ces until lawfully released, that I will resist Her Majesty’s enemies and cause Her Majesty’s peace be kept and maintained and that I will, in = all manners pertaining to my service, faithfully discharge my duty, so help me God.”
This o= ath of service is never taken lightly by members of the Canadian Forces. They know that it not only affects their careers, but it also sets the standards for = the rest of their lives. Can a layperson truly understand that to serve others = for the greater good of all, you must be prepared to sacrifice? Can we understa= nd that the mission, above all else, comes first? Do we understand that service members in the course of their duties are often called upon to make signifi= cant personal sacrifices?
Do we = understand the emotional impact that service members face when confronting known and unknown dangers and countless hardships? Do we fully understand the impacts= of being separated from the families that they love; missing the birth of children; the death of loved ones and the everyday nuances that we at home = take for granted? Can we begin to understand the stress caused by facing the dai= ly threat of permanent or life-altering injuries? Do we understand that these brave men and women, through their oath of service, will on occasion make t= he ultimate sacrifice and give their own lives for a mission that is beyond themselves?
Aware = of this, they still choose to take this oath — they still choose to serve R= 12; the ultimate public service. The faces of today’s veterans are very different from the stereotypes of old. Youthful faces now outnumber those formerly graced by older generations. In Canada, recent stats tell us that = one person out of 35 is a veteran — one out of 35. It is currently estima= ted that 15 to 30 percent of returning soldiers develop PTSD. This means that 4= ,000 to 6,000 soldiers returning home need support and services to deal with post-traumatic stress disorder.
With i= ts changes to the veterans charter, the federal Government of Canada has created a two-tiered support system for veterans. This New Veterans Charter places the most severely wounded newly-returned veterans at risk of hardship and poverty. It was never easy = to be a veteran, but never before have we seen the number of veterans suing the Canadian government like we do today. Never before have we seen this happen= in Canada.
For ye= ars, veterans have raised concerns about the programs and compensation under the= ir veterans charter. Under this new legislation, ex-soldiers saw the decades-o= ld pension-for-life system replaced with a workers’ compensation style approach of lump-sum awards and allowances. Imagine being told, upon your return home, that the life sacrifice you made for your country is only wort= h a one-time payout. I can’t even begin to imagine how betrayed I would f= eel.
Worse = yet, since February of this year, nine Veterans Affairs offices have closed their door= s to veterans. This means that those veterans in those nine Canadian jurisdictio= ns no longer have the face-to-face access with the staff that understood their needs and histories. These veterans now have access to phone services, or t= hese veterans can now stand in the lines at Service Canada counters. That is the very same lines where you would go to get your passport.
These = cuts in service not only add to the current environment Canada’s veterans are finding themselves in — this environment that can only be categorized= as demoralizing. Today it still continues to be a daunting process for veterans and their families to navigate through various departmental layers. Once in= the system, trying to seek benefits, the amount of paperwork and the processes involved to obtain benefits is extremely complex and often overwhelming for= the people who need the help the most.
There = are two federal government departments involved, two rehabilitation programs and an applica= tion process that is 18 pages long. This is not like applying for a passport. Th= is paperwork decides your future; it decides your fate.
Many v= eterans left struggling in this new system feel betrayed by the very country to whi= ch they swore the oath of service — the same country to which they swore= the oath of service.
Those = feeling betrayed are the very men and women who chose to serve and protect us, our communities, our country and our values. These are the men and women who are sent to foreign lands and upon their return home, are often forgotten and ignored by the very country, by the very government, whose values they went= to defend. Given the daily reporting of their concerns about these sweeping changes and challenges, how can every Canadian politician and how can every Canadian citizen not be aware of issues facing our veterans when they arrive home? How can we not be aware of their reality? How can we not be up in arm= s for their defence when they come back and they need our help?
Whethe= r or not you are for or against Canada’s involvement in the fight against ISIL, let one thing be clear in this discussion: active members, veterans and the= ir families deserve our full and complete support. They deserve more than words because words are just that — they’re just words. Let us show o= ur support in meaningful actions. Let’s encourage the Canadian governmen= t to show their support in meaningful actions.
Wearin= g a poppy is not enough. I ask you to ponder: Has the Canadian government lived up to this promise it made in 1917, just prior to the Battle of Vimy Ridge, when the then Conservative Prime Minister of Canada Robert Borden said this to servicemen ready to be deployed: “You can go into this action feeling assured of this, and as the head of the government I give you this assurance: That you need not fear that the government and the country will fail to show just appreciation of your service to the country and Empire in what you are abou= t to do and what you have already done. The government and the country will cons= ider it their first duty to see that a proper appreciation of your effort and of your courage is brought to the notice of the people at home, that no man, whether he goes back or whether he remains in Flanders will have just cause= to reproach the government for having broken faith with the men who won and the men who died. Lest we forget.”
Speaker: If t= he member now speaks, he will close debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: I was proud last
Thursday to rise and to table this motion and to lead the debate on it toda=
y:
“THAT this House:
“(1)
urges the Government of Yukon to show national unity and Yukon’s supp=
ort
for the Government of Canada’s decision to participate in the broad
international coalition of nations working together to combat the Islamic S=
tate
of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and to provide humanitarian aid to innocent
people suffering from ISIL’s atrocities;
“(2) recognizes the personal contribution of Canadians serving in the Armed Forc= es and that the experience of war has profound and ongoing consequences for veterans by supporting our troops during combat missions, and after they re= turn home; and
“THAT the Speaker of the Yukon Legislative Assembly transmit the decision of this House to the Parliament of Canada and to the prov= incial and territorial assemblies of Canada.”
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, I have listened to the debate today. I want to acknowledge the comments that were made. I want to thank, for their comments, the Minister of Justice and= the Minister of Tourism and Minister of Highways and Public Works, who himself = is a proud veteran.
The co= re value — what are the core values? Are we willing to defend those core values that we cherish, and which most of us take for granted on a daily basis? I believe, and history has shown us, that we have a responsibility as global citizens, because we have seen that peace through servitude has not worked = in the past. There are many sad atrocities and aggressions that have shown us that.
It is disappointing to think that we could sit back and ponder what our role shou= ld be and what the role for Canada should be. What I heard was support for humanitarian efforts; however, as I spoke to in the debate, you cannot prov= ide humanitarian efforts without security. Without security, you cannot have pe= ople on the ground providing those efforts — food, medicine — to peo= ple in need. There needs to be security in place.
We hav= e an obligation. We live in the greatest country of this world and we are thankf= ul for that. For us to say, well, you know what? We’ll let somebody else worry about that — that’s not our problem. I believe that’= ;s not the role of this country. We have a very proud role of peacekeeping. We= have a very proud role of our military action in defence of those rights, freedo= ms and values that all of us cherish every day.
I think it’s also very important to note that this coalition of countries includes a number of Middle East Arab nations. This is not the west against= the Middle East; this is into north, south, east and west as I had articulated. This has been identified by the United Nations. This has been identified as being so atrocious that we have all of these countries doing what they can = to provide their efforts. I think, again to state Darcy Grossinge= r’s article just recently in the paper where he said that we have responsibilit= ies — we have freedoms, but we have responsibilities, and we have responsibilities to these alliances as well.
I do b= elieve that it’s not the role of the rest of the world to defend those rights and freedoms that we enjoy ourselves. We believe that all citizens of this world should be able to agree and to achieve and to be able to live under t= hem on a daily basis.
Certai= nly for the record, when we were notifying you, Mr. Speaker, of the House going back into session, at that point we also notified everyone — the part= ies opposite and the public — that we intended to move forward with a mot= ion to support the Government of Canada’s decision. Since that time, we h= ad the tragic events that did occur in Quebec and in Ottawa, Ontario — in our nation’s capital.
As for= the motion itself, we did share that motion with the House Leaders. We asked and solicited important support in terms of possible amendments for that motion= . We did receive comments and feedback from the New Democratic Party, some of wh= ich we incorporated, but also the Liberal Party and the Liberal leader refused = to provide any comment to that motion, for the record.
Again,= I would like to thank those members who have supported this motion. We believe that= we have a duty to support our nation’s troops. We have a duty and a responsibility as global citizens to allow people the same basic human righ= ts that should be achieved across this entire world, and I urge all members of this House to show the unity that is required, to show the support that we = are seeing from countries across this world from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds, who have all united in the stand against ISIL.
At thi= s point, I will sit down and hopefully the members opposite will reconsider their posi= tion on this important issue that I believe is important to Yukoners. I have hea= rd many conversations on street corners and stores about what is going on in t= his world, and I believe that Canadians stand tall and proud with their military and with the government’s support of something that we know is necess= ary because we will not achieve peace through servitude.
Speaker: Are = you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members:= Division.
Division
Speaker:
Division has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr.&= nbsp;Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Graham: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kent: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Nixon: = Agree.
Ms. McLeod: Agre=
e.
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; Agree.
Hon. Mr. Dixon: = Agree.
Mr. Hassard: = Agree.
Mr. Elias:
Ms. Hanson: Disagree.
Ms. Stick:
Ms. Moorcroft: Disagree.
Ms. White:
Mr. Tredger:<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> Disa= gree.
Mr. Barr: Disagree.=
Mr. Silver: Disagree.
Clerk: Mr. Speaker, the results are 11 yea, seven nay.
Speaker: The = yeas have it. I declare the motion carried.
Motion No. 710 agreed to
Government Bills
Bill No. 78: Act to Amend the Marriage A= ct — Second Reading
Clerk: Second reading, Bill N= o. 78, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Graham.
Hon. Mr. Graham: I move that Bill= No. 78, entitled Act to Amend the Marri= age Act, be now read a second time.
Speaker: It h= as been moved by the Minister of Health and Social Services that that Bill No.= 78, entitled Act to Amend the Marriage = Act, be now read a second time.
Hon. Mr. Graham: I am very please= d to speak to these amendments to the Ma= rriage Act today. As you know, marriage is a vital institution here in the Yuk= on and elsewhere around the world. Like most institutions, it’s adapting= to our times. Our Marriage Act was passed in 2002 and was not amended since then. We are now introducing amendments that will streamline administration of the act and modernize the language.
Civil = marriage ceremonies in Yukon are solemnized by our marriage commissioners. These peo= ple perform a very valuable function in our society and should be recognized for it, but the system of appointing marriage commissioners needs modernizing. Marriage commissioners are appointed by the Cabinet and the number of these appointments increases every year. Because of this, we are introducing an amendment that will allow the Minister of Health and Social Services, rather than the Cabinet, to appoint marriage commissioners by ministerial order.= span>
This w= ill enable Cabinet to spend more of its valuable time on other matters, while still ensuring public transparency. Appointments by ministerial order will contin= ue to be listed in the Yukon Gazette. This change aligns Yukon with the general practice in other provinces and territories across the country.
WeR= 17;re also modernizing the application process and eligibility criteria for marriage commissioners. Right now, candidates do not need any qualifications to perf= orm civil marriages. With the new criteria proposed, marriage commissioner applicants will have to meet minimum standards. Specifically, marriage commissioners will have to be at least 19 years of age; they’ll have = to be a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident; and they will have to be proficient in English or French. Having such minimum standards is consistent with the fact that marriage commissioners perform a very significant legal function.
WeR= 17;ve also introduced term limits with expiry dates for the appointments. Currently, t= he Marriage Act is silent on time fra= mes associated with marriage commissioner appointments. By implementing either a one-day or a three-year term with a set expiry date, both the public and the department will know clearly who Yukon’s active appointees are. This = will also assist us with maintaining accurate administration of records.<= /p>
As par= t of the modernization of the appointment of marriage commissioners, we will also be introducing an application fee. The fee schedule will be set out in regulat= ion currently under development and the fee schedule will be set out in its des= ign to encourage serious applications for appointments and will provide revenue= s to cover the increased administrative cost of processing and administering appointments. The fees charged will differentiate between individuals apply= ing for one day or a three-year appointment. The renewal fee for marriage commissioners will also be less than a new appointment. Fees will be in lin= e or smaller than many of the other jurisdictions in Canada.
Under the proposed amendments, marr= iage commissioners appointed under the current legislation will be grandfathered= in for a set period of time determined under the act. The minimum will be three years for marriage commissioners appointed under the current act. Allowing existing marriage commissioners to continue their appointments for a set pe= riod of time creates certainty for them and it also recognizes that they were appointed in good faith under the existing legislation.
In sho= rt, all these proposed changes will streamline appointments while creating mechanis= ms to ensure eligibility, modest administrative remuneration and accurate list= ing of marriage commissioners in the Yukon Gazette.
Finall= y, we’ve updated the Marriage Ac= t to include gender-neutral language. Since the act was proclaimed 12 years a= go, the definition of marriage has changed in Canada to include same-sex marria= ges. Because of this, the act’s language needed to be modernized. In sever= al provisions, references to husband and wife will be changed to spouse or spouses, and this proposed language change promotes the Yukon government’s stated aim to introduce gender-neutral language into legislation whenever possible. The times have changed and the language in o= ur laws must change along with them.
In sum= mary, the changes to the Marriage Act are primarily administrative in nature, but they are important. By modernizing = the appointment of marriage commissioners and changing some outdated language in the act, we ensure that we are meeting our government’s stated goal of practising open, accountable and fiscally responsible government. I look forward to taking members through this new bill in detail during Committee = of the Whole, and I look forward to any questions that may be asked in respons= e to this bill.
Ms. Stick:
ItR= 17;s encouraging to see this updated legislation with regard to marriage commissioners. The legislation appears to be clear and straightforward, but= I have some questions, which I will save for Committee of the Whole and look = for answers at that time — but we are pleased to see this come forward. <= /span>
Speaker: If t= he member now speaks, he will close debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Graham: I look forward to answering any of the questions that I possibly can. In addition, while read= ing through the bill, I noticed one part that may require a correction as we go through, but we can discuss that in Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: Are = you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members:= Division.
Division
Speaker: Divi= sion has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr.&n= bsp;Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Pasloski: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Agree.
Hon. Ms. Taylor: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Graham: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Kent: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Nixon: = Agree.
Ms. McLeod: Agre=
e.
Hon. Mr. Istchenko: &= nbsp; Agree.
Hon. Mr. Dixon: = Agree.
Mr. Hassard: = Agree.
Mr. Elias:
Ms. Hanson: Agree.
Ms. Stick:
Ms. Moorcroft: Agree.
Ms. White:
Mr. Tredger:<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> Agre= e.
Mr. Barr: Agree.
Mr. Silver: Agree.
Clerk: Mr. Speaker, the results are 18 yea, nil nay.
Speaker: The = yeas have it. I declare the motion carried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 78 agreed = to
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve i= nto Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: It h= as been moved by the Government House Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
Committee of the Whole
Chair (Ms. McLeod): I now call Committee of the Whole to ord=
er.
We wil= l be discussing Bill No. 78, Act to Amen= d the Marriage Act.
Do mem= bers wish to take a brief recess?
All Hon. Members:<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> Agreed.
Chair: We will take a 15-minute break.
Recess
Chair: Committee of the Whole= will now come to order.
Bill No. 78: Act to Amend the Marriage Act
Chair: The matter before the Committee is general debate in Bill No. 78, entitled Act to Amend the Marriage Act.
Hon. Mr. Graham: I think I said m= ost of what I wanted to say in my second reading speech. However, it has come to my attention via the good graces of a couple of opposition members that there = was a small error, so we will be proceeding to make or to suggest an amendment, with y= our indulgence, at some point in the future.
Chair: Mr. Graham, I am = going to suggest that you make that amendment at the appropriate time while we ar= e in clause-by-clause debate and after clause 2. Does any other member wish to speak?
Ms. Stick:
The qu= estions I have are just more technical and certainly ones I expect to show up in the regulations. The first one would be about the prescribed application fee and whether the minister could inform us what that would be for a person applyi= ng for one day or a person applying for the three-year term as a marriage commissioner.
Hon. Mr. Graham: The dollar value= s that we are going to suggest in regulation is a $50 fee for a one-day licence and $350 for a three-year permit and, after that three-year permit licence is completed, only a $50 renewal fee for each three years after that. Those wo= uld be the fees.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: That’s cor= rect. The reason behind that is quite simple. Folks who are current marriage commissioners have already gone through the process so the administrative f= ee shouldn’t apply. Therefore anyone who is currently a marriage commissioner for longer than one day will not be required to pay the $350 a= nd their fee for every three-year period after this will be $50.
Ms. Stick:
I wond= er if the minister can just give an example for each one so that it is clear. The per= son I was working with found that it wasn’t said in the simplest terms, o= r it was not clear, especially the first person. The day on which the person is appointed under section 5(1) of the Marriage Act, as amended by this act — I’ll ask the minister to expl= ain who that would be.
Hon. Mr. Graham: That would be pe= ople who were signing up after this act has been proclaimed. So they would be pa= ying the $350 fee. Under (b) “the day on which the appointment would, but = for this Act, have expired” — would only be those persons who actua= lly had a marriage certificate for the day that this act, the current act, expi= res.
The th= ird anniversary would be people who are current marriage commissioners for long= er than one day and theirs will expire in three years.
Ms. Stick:
Chair: Does any other member = wish to speak in general debate?
We are= going to move forward then with clause by clause.
On Clause 1
Clause 1 agreed to
On Clause 2
Amendment proposed
Hon. Mr. Graham: Madam Chair, I m= ove:
THAT B= ill No. 78, entitled Act to Amend the Marri= age Act, be amended at page 2 by inserting the following clause:
“= ;Section 6 repealed
3. Sec= tion 6 of the Act is repealed.”
And by renumbering the remaining clauses accordingly.
Chair: It has been moved by M= r. Graham:
THAT B= ill No. 78, entitled Act to Amend the Marri= age Act, be amended at page 2 by inserting the following clause:
“= ;Section 6 repealed
3. Sec= tion 6 of the Act is repealed.”
And by renumbering the remaining clauses accordingly.
Hon. Mr. Graham: The amendment is= quite simple. Section 6 sets a maximum price that marriage commissioners may char= ge for performing a marriage ceremony. We had no intention of leaving that in = and, through my own negligence, it stayed and I really appreciate the assistance= of the Clerk in assisting me to correct my error.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: We know at the p= resent time that many marriage commissioners do perform ceremonies for free, but we also realize that because we are upping the fee substantially — in fa= ct, they were zero before. So because we are implementing a fee schedule, we sh= ould also allow marriage commissioners to at least be able to charge the cost of their licence, and that’s what is intended. There will be no minimum,= no maximum. It won’t be regulated at all.
We sti= ll would encourage marriage commissioners to do it for free, of course.
Chair: Is there any further d= ebate on the amendment — inclusion of section 3?
Amendment to Clause 3 agreed to
Clause 3, as amended, agreed to
Chair: The remaining sections= of course are going to be renumbered but I’m going to carry on in the numbering that is in the bill at the time.
On Clause 3
Clause 3 agreed to
On Clause 4
Clause 4 agreed to
On Clause 5
Clause 5 agreed to
On Clause 6
Clause 6 agreed to
On Title
Title agreed to
Hon. Mr. Graham: Madam Chair, I m= ove that Bill No. 78, entitled Act= to Amend the Marriage Act, be reported with amendment.
Chair: It has been moved by M= r. Graham that Bill No. 78, entitled Act to A= mend the Marriage Act, be reported with amendment.
Motion agreed to
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Madam Chair, I move that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Chair: It has been moved by M= r. Cathers that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Motion agreed to
Speaker resumes the Chair
Speaker: I wi= ll now call the House to order.
May th= e House have a report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole?
Chair’s report
Ms. McLeod: Mr.&=
nbsp;Speaker,
Committee of the Whole has considered Bill No. 78, entitled Act to Amend the Marriage Act, and directed me to report the bil=
l with
amendment.
Speaker: You = have heard the report from the Chair of the Committee of the Whole. Are you agre= ed?
Some Hon. Members:= Agreed.
Speaker: I de= clare the report carried.
Government Bills
Bill No. 79: Pioneer Util= ity Grant Act — Second Reading
Clerk: Second reading, Bill N= o. 79, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. Graham.
Hon. Mr. Graham: I move that Bill= No. 79, entitled Pioneer Utility Grant = Act, be now read a second time.=
Speaker: It h= as been moved by the Minister of Health and Social Services that Bill No. 79, entitled Pioneer Utility Grant Act<= /i>, be now read a second time.
Hon. Mr. Graham: I am very pleased= to speak to this new bill and I am very proud also of the work that is being d= one to bring us to this point here today.
I aske= d the department some time ago to begin a review of the act with a view to increa= se the flexibility, fairness and — very importantly — the sustainability of the pioneer utility grant. After careful consideration of various approaches and the scope of the changes that were involved, we deci= ded that a replacement would be more appropriate than an amended act. = p>
The ac= t was silent in many different areas, such as providing clarity on what is requir= ed to apply and become eligible for the pioneer utility grant, including autho= rity for the administrators to approve applications, request documentations and, where appropriate, deny the benefit to those applicants who did not meet the eligibility requirements.
The pi= oneer utility grant was first introduced in Yukon in 1978 and I think, Mr. S= peaker, if we look back, you will find that I was a member of that Legislature; in fact, I may have even introduced the bill in 1978. It was in response to recommendations from the Yukon Council on Aging. The grant was intended to provide financial assistance to seniors to assist or to partially offset hi= gher home heating costs during the winter months. Eligibility was restricted to those seniors who can establish that they lived in the Yukon for 183 days of each year, of which 90 days were in the winter months defined as January to March and October to December.
The pi= oneer utility grant was initially introduced at a rate of $300 per year and has b= een increased a number of times over the past several years. In 2003, the grant= was increased by 25 percent, rising from the then grant of $600 to $750 with fu= ture increases indexed to the annual rate of inflation thereafter. In 2005, it w= as once again raised by another 10 percent in addition to the annual indexed increases. In 2014 — this year — the pioneer utility grant rate= is $1,030 per year and we expect that approximately 2,100 seniors will apply a= nd receive the pioneer utility grant, totalling approximately $2.163 million.<= /span>
The pi= oneer utility grant was introduced as a universal benefit that was provided to all eligible applicants at a flat rate, regardless of their income or the geographic location of their principal residence. The grant was provided directly to the applicant, and there were no other requirements to remit receipts or otherwise demonstrate proof of fuel or utility payments. The administration of the pioneer utility grant is directed by the act and rela= ted regulations. The act outlines provisions regarding eligibility, time of application and benefit restrictions among others, and the regulations outl= ine provisions regarding the benefit amount.
Yukon = is one of three jurisdictions that provide heating subsidies to senior residents. Both Northwest Territories and Nunavut have programs, but that is where the similarities end. Our pioneer utility grant is provided to homeowners as we= ll as those seniors who rent and it is a universal benefit. The other two jurisdictions only provide the benefit to homeowners and both are income-te= sted programs. Yukon’s program is provided to a significantly greater numb= er of people, both because it is a universal benefit and also because of the higher number of seniors who remain living in the Yukon.
Over t= he next few years, it’s expected that the number of seniors in Yukon aged 65 = or older will increase substantially as the baby-boomer generation ages. This demographic shift will have several service delivery and cost implications.=
Popula= tion projections developed by the Yukon Bureau of Statistics estimate that the number of seniors will increase from approximately 3,500 in 2011 to well ov= er 6,000 by 2031. It is further estimated that based on these projections, the pioneer utility grant expenditures would more than double, rising from the = current or what it was in 2011 — $1.6 million — to over $3.7 million in 2021. I’m sorry; I may have misstated the previous date. It’s 3= ,500 in 2011 to well over 6,000 by 2021. I should have said that instead of 2031= .
In any= event, this will place increasing pressure on the sustainability of the program. T= he majority of this future generation of seniors will have higher incomes, more retirement benefits, and/or savings and assets than previous seniors. Those seniors are not a homogeneous group and many older seniors are and will lik= ely still be less financially well off. They will represent a minority among all seniors over the age of 65. Given the future increase and the number of sen= iors over the age of 65, the higher relative income and wealth among this cohort= and the anticipated cost increases due to the pioneer utility grant being a universal benefit, it was time to assess whether the program was financially sustainable in the medium- and long-term. It was also time to review the act with a view to identify gaps in the administration of the program and enhancements that could be made to ensure that the pioneer utility grant remained a program that assisted seniors, while being fiscally and administratively responsible.
There = were several different ways to deliver on the government’s commitment to increase the flexibility of the pioneer utility grant while also addressing issues of fairness and sustainability. We have arrived at an approach we believe is straightforward and will reflect the original intent of the prog= ram, which is to help low-income seniors who require it with the cost of increasingly expensive fuel and utility cost.
To beg= in with, the act expands on the requirements that a person must meet in order to be eligible for a grant including a new requirement to declare net income and = the responsibility for payment of utilities. The act also provides for the abil= ity to waive the eligibility criteria in the case of exceptional medical circumstances, understanding that there may be occasions when seniors are n= ot able to meet the residence requirements due to exceptional medical circumstances.
Changi= ng the application date to July from October was also something requested by senio= rs groups, which will provide for additional time for seniors to complete their application and if all documentation is provided, to receive the grant at an earlier time in the year.
All ap= plicants must now be 65 years or older to be considered to be eligible for the grant. Those applicants who received a pioneer utility grant in 2014 who are under= the age of 65, but qualified under the old act, will be grandfathered into the program. In other words, nobody will be left out of the program. Those peop= le between 55 and 65 who are currently receiving their pioneer utility grant w= ill not lose their pioneer utility grant. We will continue to pay it even though they are under the age of 65. It has been determined that there will be approximately 11 applicants who fall into that category. All 11 will contin= ue to receive the grant.
Establ= ishing a 12-month residency requirement before applying for the pioneer utility grant will provide consistency with other programs. It will reinforce the intenti= on of the benefit to assist those seniors who have made Yukon their home and w= ho may require help in the winter to meet the high cost of heating their home.=
Income= testing is a process that allows for the adjustment of the benefit based on the net income of an individual or of a family. This means that as the income of the individual or the family increases, the amount of the benefit paid out by t= he government decreases. Income testing can help ensure that the benefits are received by those who have the greatest need. Income testing can also incre= ase the sustainability of a program as benefits are reduced or no longer provid= ed to those with sufficient incomes.
Health= and Social Services has other programs that are income tested, including the childcare subsidy program, child drug and optical program and social assistance. The income-test model for the pioneer utility grant has been developed and is based on a middle-income range for testing. The middle-inc= ome range is based on the estimated middle 60 percent of incomes among all Yukon couple families, and then the middle range has been applied to senior coupl= es and converted to apply to individuals. Individuals and couples with incomes below the middle range will receive the full amount of the grant, while tho= se with incomes above the middle range will receive no grant.
Indivi= duals and couples with net incomes in the middle range will receive some of the grant, but less than the full amount. Very few seniors will be cut off altogether.= The detail of the income test will come later in regulation, but I would be hap= py to discuss it during the discussions about the bill.
Given = that the number of applicants has increased — and we believe it will continue = to increase as the population ages — it was determined that the administration of the program required some modernization. This is best described under the act and will increase transparency to the applicants on= the application and eligibility requirements, and also clearly spells out the r= oles and responsibility of the program administrator, the circumstances where a grant may not be paid and the ability to recover money where appropriate.= span>
Most m= odern acts that support financial programming include a section on offences and penalt= ies. The pioneer utility grant is no different and it identifies that a person w= ho applies for a grant that they know they are not eligible to receive, or who includes false information in an application, can be subject to a fine.
Ideall= y, the package of regulations would come forward at the same time as the new act. = The department has fast-tracked the final review of the Pioneer Utility Grant Act and regulations, along with Justice, = and have ensured that the new act was ready for tabling this fall. The regulati= ons will follow shortly, but I can tell you that the new act provides much of t= he needed clarity on the administration of the pioneer utility grant. <= /p>
I can = speak generally about the regulations that will follow. The regulation-making pow= ers have expanded to support the implementation of the act. The current regulat= ion is silent in many different areas that provide the seniors who apply for the pioneer utility grant with the clarity to know what is required to apply an= d be deemed eligible for the pioneer utility grant.
The re= gulation is also silent on the review procedure for applications undertaken by the administrators and the process necessary to determine eligibility. The regulation will also identify roles and responsibilities of both the applic= ant and the administrator, and clearly defines the timing that will be required= to determine eligibility and authorize payments.
During= our review, it was found that the cost of fuel and utilities in rural areas = 212; to no one’s surprise — was much higher than it is in Whitehorse= . So implementing a rural rate in the regulation for those seniors who live outs= ide the City of Whitehorse acknowledges that the cost of heating homes and utilities — or heating and utility costs — in rural Yukon is mo= re expensive than in Whitehorse. Details on the amount of the increase will al= so be found in the new regulation, but I’ll be happy to share it with members at that point in the act. The details of the income test and the formula will also be included in the regulation.
During= our meetings with organizations that provide support and assistance to seniors = in the Yukon, an example of the income test was provided — without the details, as this had yet to be approved by Cabinet. Understandably, Mr.&nbs= p;Speaker, a new application form is under development for the 2015 year, and the form will definitely include the applicant and, where appropriate, spousal infor= mation on net income, primary residence and requirement to pay utilities in that residence.
Signat= ures from the applicant and, in the case of a couple, the applicant’s spouse, w= ill be required. Applications will continue to be mailed out to seniors who received the grant in the previous year and will be included in other communications to seniors throughout the year.
We kno= w that these are significant changes to the pioneer utility grant. Our administrat= ors already provide support to many seniors who require extra help to complete = the application process for the pioneer utility grant. The changes to the act p= lace additional requirements on these seniors and my department will continue to work with them to provide the help they need. However, we are pleased to modernize the pioneer utility grant and to ensure its sustainability as we = move forward.
Once o= ur consultations were completed and the draft act had received tentative appro= val from Cabinet, I had the opportunity to gather together many of these groups= and talk with them about the changes to the act. Once the seniors gathered there truly understood the act and what we intended to do, they universally suppo= rted it.
We thi= nk it’s a good replacement. We look forward to debating it here in the House. As I said, even though we tried to get the regulations ready for the Legislature, they are not yet, but I’ll be happy to share whatever information I can.
Ms. Stick:
This is different from the last bill that we passed, in terms of regulations, becau= se this does impact many individuals and seniors throughout the Yukon. To me, = that is important. I’m pleased that the minister met with various groups. I’ve talked to some of them and heard their opinions on it, and many = of them are in support of this.
At the= same time, I’ve also started to receive phone calls from individuals who do not belong to the Golden Age Society or the Yukon Council on Aging — = and there are many who don’t. They are hearing information second-hand, a= nd they have many questions and concerns. Many of these people are ones who fe= el, because they don’t know what is going on, that possibly they are goin= g to not receive as much or not be eligible. So there is still a lot of communication that needs to be done around this pioneer utility grant with individuals who are not aware of what these changes are.
The mi= nister mentioned that they’ll be sending out the new applications to people = who have applied before. Maybe they could use that same mailing list to send out information to individuals, saying that these are what the changes are, bef= ore July of next year when it’s time to apply.
If the= minister could send out enough information to individuals already receiving it, that might appease some of their worries and concerns. Like I said, already the phone calls and the emails are coming in. Some of it is misinformation, som= e of them think they’re going to have to go in every month and show what t= heir income in. I’m trying to say that that’s not what is intended h= ere, but I do believe that a better communication plan needs to happen for senio= rs around the territory, especially in the communities where they might not ha= ve contact with the Yukon Council on Aging or the Golden Age Society.= p>
I am l= ooking forward to discussing this in Committee of the Whole and I do have a number= of questions. A lot of it will pertain to the regulations. I’m looking forward to hearing from the minister and from his officials on this information.
Speaker: If t= he member now speaks, he will close debate. Does any other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Graham: I did make a commitment to provide as much information as I possibly can on the regulati= ons that will be coming forward.
I gues= s one of the difficulties we always face in these circumstances is that I can’t send out application forms and information to seniors around the territory until the bill actually goes through the Legislature. That’s one of t= he things.
What w= e did ask all of the groups — and, by the way, we did have groups from outside = of Whitehorse. I think the senio= rs association in Haines Junction was on-line, ElderActiv= e was there and I believe the Watson Lake seniors group was consulted as well= . We did have a fairly good cross-section of seniors there.
We ask= ed all of them to make sure that they sent out this information with respect to the n= ew pioneer utility grant in their newsletters. Many of them have monthly or quarterly newsletters, and we provided as much information at those consultation meetings as we could and asked them to then pass on that information. All of them did. My group in Health and Social Services — the folks in the seniors area are only too happy to assist. I know that whe= n we talked with all of the people in Continuing Care some time ago about the pensions that they were receiving, we were astounded at how many were eligi= ble for pensions who had never applied for them. We’ll make sure that we continue that work in terms of the pioneer utility grant. We think that, in= the long run, this will be a real benefit to seniors, especially those seniors = in lower income brackets all around the territory.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 79 agreed =
to
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = Mr. Speaker, I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that t= he House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: It ha= s been moved by the Government House Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
Committee of the Whole
Chair (Ms. McLeod): Order. Committee of the Whole will now c= ome to order. The matter before the Committee is general debate on Bill No. 79, Pioneer Utility Grant Act. Do memb= ers wish a brief recess for about 10 minutes?
All Hon. Members:<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> Agreed.
Chair: Committee of the Whole= will recess for 10 minutes.
Recess
Chair: Committee of the Whole= will now come to order.
Bill No. 79: Pioneer Utility Grant Act
Chair: The matter before the Committee is general debate on Bill No. 79, Pioneer Utility Grant Act.
Hon. Mr. Graham: I think most of = what I had to say about this act was covered in my second reading, but I think it’s really important that people understand where we’ve come w= ith the pioneer utility grant.
Introd= uced in 1978 at a rate of $300 a year, in 2003 it was increased up to $750 — = at that time it was indexed as well. In 2005, it was raised by another 10 perc= ent, in addition to the annual indexed increase, so it resulted in this year, 20= 14 — the pioneer utility grant is $1,030 per year. As I said, we expect 2,100 seniors will apply for and receive the pioneer utility grant — approximately $2.163 million.
We exp= ect that, by the year 2021, we will have over 6,000 seniors in this territory, and we expect that the pioneer utility grant would more than double at that point.= It could put huge pressure on the sustainability of the program. It was interesting too that, in 1978, we never anticipated the number of seniors w= ho would remain in the territory, as is happening at this time. You will proba= bly remember — no, you won’t remember back in 1970; a lot of members won’t. In fact, I think one over there wasn’t even born. In 197= 8, we really didn’t anticipate — people in 1978 either moved to Vancouver Island, Kelowna, Westbank or southern Alberta. The vast majority did not stay in the territory. That has been a h= uge change and that has been a real positive change that people see the benefit= of remaining in this territory.
I will= run through a few of the things that I know will come up in questions. <= /p>
We ant= icipate, with the modelling that we have done in terms of income testing, that the benefit will — seniors below $39,000 — and we’re talking = net income. It’s line 236 on your income tax form. It’s not gross income; it’s net income. Individuals with income of around $39,000 to $40,000 will receive a full pioneer utility grant. Senior couples with inco= me in the $55,000 to $56,000 range would also receive the full income. Anything between those numbers and individuals with incomes — this is a single individual with a net income around $110,000 to $115,000 and couples with a combined net income of around $165,000 — would receive no grant. The people between the $39,000 to $40,000 low income and $114,000 high income w= ould receive a graduated pioneer utility grant, decreasing as you approach the $114,000.
From my experience, speaking as someone who does income tax for a number of seniors= and knowing what my income would be as a senior, those numbers are actually qui= te good. I have a number of siblings who are also in the seniors category and I checked with them and found that the numbers do apply. If you’re maki= ng $39,000 as a single income senior, you need the pioneer utility grant. We’re really looking forward. The high-income threshold is exactly th= at. Truly it’s a high-income threshold. If you are making, as a couple, $165,000 a year, you probably don’t need a thousand-dollar pioneer utility grant.
It giv= es you a rough idea anyway of our numbers and, as I said, we intend to increase the grant for people living outside the Whitehorse area immediately for the 2015 year.
There = was something else I was going to add, and I cannot for the life of me remember — oh, what we also have decided as a matter of policy, and this I tol= d to my Cabinet as well, is that what we intend to do is ensure that there will = not be a reduction in the overall package of funding for the pioneer utility gr= ant. So if the applications for the pioneer utility grant in 2015 are lower than= the budgeted amount, what we would intend to do is use that surplus amount to a= dd to the pot and therefore be able to bring up the base amount of the pioneer utility grant for all seniors.
The in= tent is not to save money. I think it’s really important, and I made sure tha= t I emphasized that part with the seniors groups when we met. The intent is not= for the government to save money on the backs of seniors; it’s to redistribute the money so those who need it most will receive it. = p>
I think that’s all I have to say, Madam Chair. Thank you for your indulgence.=
Ms. Stick:
I̵= 7;m going to start right where the minister started in talking about income testing. I’m glad he clarified that it’s net income, because that was not clear in the act itself. It talks about income= but it did not say “gross” or “net” and so that was a g= ood thing to hear. My understanding — and I’m just looking for clarification on this — if an individual — a single person R= 12; earns a net income which is on their income tax of $39,000 or less, they wi= ll receive the full pioneer utility grant. Their next-door neighbour is another single person. They are at $114,000 and $115,000 would be the cut-off where they do not receive it. The person receiving $114,000 will still receive something, but certainly not the full amount so there will be a sliding sca= le between the $39,000 and the $115,000.
Anythi= ng under $39,000 — they are guaranteed the full amount. The same goes for coup= les and I wasn’t sure if you said $55,000 or $56,000 — anything und= er that would receive the full pioneer utility grant for one person. I mean, t= hey are a couple, but for the household they would receive one pioneer utility grant. Next door there is a couple and they make $165,000 or more, so they receive nothing. If they make less than that, it will again be on the slidi= ng scale for the household.
So if = I can just get confirmation from the minister that that is correct.
Hon. Mr. Graham: Madam Chair, tha= t is correct. Don’t hold me to those exact numbers, because they havenR= 17;t been established yet, but they are very, very close. The $39,000 to $40,000; the $55,000 to $56,000; the $114,000 — all of those numbers are rough. What we have to remember is that it would be graduated. So if a person made $112,000 net — remember it is always net because that is a real impor= tant distinction — but if they made $112,000 net income as an individual, their grant would be almost nothing. Again, it would be on a graduated scal= e.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: The rate for sen= iors outside of the Whitehorse area has not yet been set, but it will be higher.= We set one rate for all rural areas in the Yukon because what we’ve also committed to do is to have no administrative increase for the administratio= n of this new act. That means that the people who are currently working in Health and Social Services will be handling this new act. To do it by community and vary it all over the territory, we thought at this time simply was not something that we really wanted to do. We expect that the grant for rural communities will be approximately eight percent of whatever the grant is. We see eight percent to as much as nine or 10, but eight percent is the genera= lly accepted range for utility costs outside of the City of Whitehorse. That’s what we’ll try to do but we will make it a one-cost thing for all rural communities.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: Because the gran= t is legislated, we pay it. The government sucks it up and puts it into the supplementaries. At this time of year, if we go over = in pioneer utility grant, that’s what would happen. What we anticipate is that we will roughly break even because there are a few seniors who wonR= 17;t get the total amount, but there are even more who will see an increase, not only because of the cost of living but because of the increase in rural communities. Those will be funded by the folks, the very few folks who will= be seeing their pioneer utility grant reduced.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: Madam Chair, if = we stayed the course where we are now, by 2021 the increase will double. I gave one number of approximately 6,000 seniors in the territory. The actual numb= ers given to us by the Yukon Bureau of Statistics, when they look at high, medi= um and low ranges, was that the number of seniors in Yukon will be between 6,1= 70 and 6,460 within the next 10 years. That’s a fairly substantial boost. Again, we’re not trying to save a whole lot of money by doing this. W= hat we’re trying to do is make sure that it’s sustainable for the longer term and that the lower income seniors get what they need to survive here in the territory.
Ms. Stick:
Will t= hey require proof of payment — electric bill or their fuel bill or propan= e bill — when making the application? The reason I ask that is because somet= imes there are many renters for whom those costs are included in their rent. It doesn’t mean that their rent is cheaper or more expensive, but itR= 17;s included. So those individuals do not pay directly for their electricity or fuel — their landlord does — but it’s included, so they a= re still paying those costs but they do not have that “I paid it myself — my landlord did, obviously. I’m living somewhere where I̵= 7;ve got power and heat.”
Will t= hose people who are still paying rent and still paying utilities and fuel indire= ctly be eligible for the pioneer utility grant?
Hon. Mr. Graham: The way the syst= em is intended to work is that we will receive an application, and attached to th= at application will be an income tax return with the name, address and box 236 — everything else can be redacted — because we’re really = not interested in anything else except that number.
As a p= art of their statutory declaration, they will sign that they did pay utilities. We’re going to take them at their word for it. It’s an honour system. It has been an honour system for years. We know there have been a f= ew abuses, but not that many. What we will do is continue to make spot checks = over the year to ensure — and we find too many times that people will phon= e us and say that, if such-and-such a person is getting a pioneer utility grant, they shouldn’t be because they don’t live in the Yukon over the winter at all.
We wil= l continue to do spot checks, but basically it is an honour system but we will require= a copy of their return with the box 236 highlighted and proof that they actua= lly are living in the territory — that’s for sure.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: This is one of t= hose issues that seniors were a bit concerned about. As a couple of the groups p= ut it — you mean to tell me that somebody who just moves into the Yukon should be eligible for the money even though they might not stay the whole = year. They might stay 183 days and that 183 days included some winter months and they’re going to get that money, and I’ve lived here most of my life and I get the exact same amount?
We agr= eed that a person should indicate — or should show — that they intend to l= ive in the Yukon by living here one year prior to receiving a pioneer utility grant. That was something that I took to my caucus and they agreed with me.= The seniors’ organizations — this was a fairly important part of the proposal that we made to the seniors’ organizations. As for the health care card, that is something that is across Canada. Everybody in Canada has agreed to the three-month period. That is why we do three months on the hea= lth care card, or we might want to do a year on that too — but that is be= side the point. As for paying income tax, of course they come up here to pay the= ir income tax because it is the lowest in Canada.
The wa= y I look at it is the one year was something that was of concern to the seniors. I agreed with them — our caucus agreed with them — so to us, it i= s a principle that we are willing to debate. If you disagree, that’s okay too. That is a principle that we believe in.
Ms. Stick:
Again,= the question is: Why a year? Why not something that would mirror other legislat= ion?
Hon. Mr. Graham: I’m not su= re I understand the question. You have to be in the Yukon for a year and the spo= use part would be a spouse under the Ma= rriage Act. If it’s common-law, it would have to be a year. We don’= ;t want to get too complicated on this because, as I said, we want to keep the administration as simple as we possibly can. It’s one of the reasons = that we just want one line — net income. We’re not going to request receipts for utility bills. That kind of stuff we’re not going to do. We’re going to trust people to tell us the truth, but we will carry o= ut spot checks too, to ensure that they’re at least aware that we’= re watching.
Ms. Stick:
My que= stion is: Where do First Nation governments fit into this, and where do First Nation seniors and elders fit into this? Because, certainly, many elders could rec= eive a housing subsidy, but we’re not hearing about that level of governme= nt in this document.
Hon. Mr. Graham: This was a hotly debated subject because many self-governing First Nations, if we had includ= ed the original wording in our draft, felt that their seniors were being unfai= rly targeted because, in some First Nations, the First Nation provides not only= the home, but they provide the firewood — shall we say — and electricity as well.
We als= o realize that, in Whitehorse, there is a grant paid to seniors and also in Dawson Ci= ty. We didn’t want to exclude those folks because they’ve received = it since 1978, so we specifically took out the wording that we had originally = put in that said, if you receive a grant such as you do at the City of Whitehor= se, we would deduct that from the total. We won’t do that. We have no intentions of excluding anyone who was formerly eligible for the grant. That means that First Nation elders or seniors will be eligible for the grant in= the same manner that it was previous to this new act. The only ones we’re taking out are people where we’re paying the full cost, or the Govern= ment of Canada is paying for the cost of their housing and utilities.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: The member oppos= ite was correct on all accounts. I have to tell you that it’s surprising = how much difference it makes. For the very first year, I received the tax grant from the Government of Yukon for a senior — it was only an extra $50,= but it felt really good.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: Yes, we would. It’s the household income, so it’s both spouses. Even though one may be ineligible for the grant, we consider the household income for this revised PUG.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: That’s cor= rect. There are 11 individuals in that circumstance. Those 11 individuals will continue to receive their pioneer utility grant, as they have, until they a= re 65 and eligible under their own. No one will be cut off.
It was= one of the things we really tried to do — make sure that anyone who needed t= he grant continues to receive it. What we’re trying to do is increase it= a little bit for the people at the bottom and in rural communities, at the expense of the people at the higher income level. As you know, under the current regulation, I would be eligible for the pioneer utility grant, but = once this one is in place and I remain in my current position, I would not be. I think that’s only fair because I think that, at the salaries we’= ;re talking about here, you don’t need that extra $1,000 a year that is provided through this system.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: That’s cor= rect.
Ms. Stick:
One of= the questions was about residency again, and the 90 days that you have to be he= re in the winter. It was a simple question from someone on whether it has to be consecutive. Could it be that they are here for October, gone in November a= nd back in December — you get the idea? They are away for 90 days but it’s not consecutive, and they are not here for 90 consecutive days either.
Hon. Mr. Graham: As long as they’re in the territory for 183 days, and during that time frame = 212; October to December, January to March — they live in the territory fo= r at least 90 days, they’re eligible. That part hasn’t changed as we= ll. We realize that people aren’t going to live here for 90 days over the winter exactly and then go for a holiday, so that’s perfectly okay wi= th us.
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: Madam Chair, we k= now that as citizens age, stuff happens. We wanted to make sure that we had an = out if somebody got hung up outside of the territory for medical reasons. As we= sat here talking about it, I can think of a couple of other instances where the= re is a possibility that a minister may wish to make an exception. I was just thinking about when the Alaska Highway went out and if somebody was trying = to get back into the territory — and if the highway was out for two weeks and they are a week and a half late. You know, something like that — maybe. What we really wanted to make sure of is that if people were out of = the territory for medical reasons, that was definitely an exception. You know, other things could be looked at, I guess, under the legislation, but it wou= ld have to be truly exceptional.
Maybe = another short one and then we report progress?
Ms. Stick:
Hon. Mr. Graham: I guess the simp= le answer is that we would like to keep it as limited as we possibly can becau= se there is really no way to check on many of these issues. It will be extreme= ly limited when the regulations come out.
Madam = Chair, seeing the time, I move that you report progress.
Chair: It has been moved by M= r. Graham that the Chair report progress.
Motion agreed to
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = I move that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Chair: It has been moved by M= r. Cathers that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Motion agreed to
Speaker resumes the Chair
Speaker: I wi= ll now call the House to order.
May th= e House have a report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole?
Chair’s report
Ms. McLeod: Mr.&=
nbsp;Speaker,
Committee of the Whole has considered Bill No. 79, entitled Pioneer Utility Grant Act, and dir=
ected
me to report progress.
Speaker: You = have heard the report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole. Are you agreed?<= /span>
Some Hon. Members:= Agreed.
Speaker: I de= clare the report carried.
Hon. Mr. Cathers: = I move that the House do now adjourn.
Speaker: It h= as been moved by the Government House Leader that the House do now adjourn. = span>
Motion agreed to
Speaker: This= House now stands adjourned until 1:00 p.m. tomorrow.
The House adjourned at 5:26 p.m.
= 48304857