MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_01D7C504.FD3837E0" 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. ------=_NextPart_01D7C504.FD3837E0 Content-Location: file:///C:/2EE93A56/36-1-16.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Yukon Legislative Assembly
Whitehorse, Yukon
Monday, October 18, 2021— 1:00 p.m.
Speaker: I w= ill now call the House to order.
We wil= l proceed at this time with prayers.
Prayers
Withdrawal
of motions
Speaker:=
195;The Chair wishes to infor=
m the
House of changes which have been made to the Order Paper. The following mot=
ions
have been removed from the Order Paper as the motions are outdated: Motion
No. 126, standing in the name of the Leader of the Third Party; and Mo=
tion
No. 90, standing in the name of the Member for Watson Lake.
Daily
Routine
Speaker: We will proceed at=
this
time with the Order Paper.
Introduction of visitors.
Introduction
of Visitors
Hon. M=
r. Pillai: Mr. Speaker, I would=
ask my
colleagues here in the Legislative Assembly to give a warm welcome to some
individuals who are here for the tribute today on national Small Business W=
eek. From the Department of Economic
Development and our policy and communications, we have Damian Topps, Jason
Seaton, Kim Brown, Lisa Eddy, Aparna Verma, and Bryce Aubrey. As well, from=
the
Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce, we have Susan Guatto=
span>,
Andrei Samson, and Bernie Hoeschele. I believe =
Albert Drapeau
from the Yukon First Nation Chamber of Commerce is also listening in today.
Please give them a warm welcome.
Applause
TRIBUTES
In recognition of Persons= Day
Hon. Ms. McPhee: I rise today on behalf of the Yukon Liberal government to speak about Persons Day. In August 1927, a group of five amazing and determi= ned women met in Edmonton to sign a letter petitioning the Supreme Court of Can= ada to determine whether the government could appoint a female senator. The mat= ter quickly became known as the “Persons Case” because, at that tim= e, only qualified “persons” could become senators, and the Canadian government interpreted that to be only men.
The Su= preme Court heard the case and upheld the government’s position; however, t= he five famous women who became known as “The Famous Five” were undaunted. They petitioned the Privy Council to rule on the matter. Off they went to London where the case was heard. On October 18, today, in 1929, Lord Sankey announced the court’s decision that the word “person” would, in fact, include women.
It see= ms like a common-sense approach prevailed. Sankey stated — and I quote: “= The exclusion of women from all public offices is a relic of days more barbarou= s than ours, and to those who ask why the word person should not include females, = the obvious answer is, why should it not?”
During= this Women’s History Month, it is essential that we speak and remember the names of these women and teach them to our children. The Famous Five were E= mily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Henrietta Muir Edwards, Louise McKinney, and I= rene Parlby. Each was a true leader in her own right= . One was the first female magistrate in the British Empire, one was the first wo= man elected to any legislature in the British Empire, and one was the first fem= ale Cabinet minister in Alberta and the second in the entire British Empire, and there are so many other examples of their leadership, including working to create legislation for the protection of women’s rights and property. They did this all before they were even considered a “person” u= nder British or Canadian law.
Separa= tely, Mr. Speaker, these five women were champions of the rights and welfare of women and children. They worked hard and changed our society courageously in the face= of prejudices and the resistance of the day. They identified a path forward for improvements, and it took their efforts and success to change the world for= us all.
Applause
Ms. Clarke:= 8195;I rise on behalf of the Yukon Party Official Opposition to recognize October&= nbsp;18 as Persons Day.
While = there are a number of milestones that women in Canada have reached with respect to th= eir participation in political and public life, Persons Day is one of the most regarded and recognized. The British North America Act of 1867 used “persons” to describe a grou= p of people, and “he” was used in reference to a singular person.
For th= is reason, it was argued for many years that a woman was, in fact, not considered a person. Only a man was a person and therefore only a man was afforded many rights. Governments, courts, businesses and more leaned heavily on this definition to keep women out of positions of importance. Only a man could qualify for many positions.
Many h= ave heard of the Famous Five but may not be aware of the lengths they went to in orde= r to challenge conventional views and effectively change Canadian history. These five women — Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Henrietta Muir Edward= s, Louise McKinney, and Irene Parlby — have = become prominent figures in our history by advancing their case through the Canadi= an courts to the highest court of appeal for Canada. That case was simple: for women to be considered “persons”, for women to be included in t= he legal definition of “persons”, thus giving women full rights and participation in all aspects of society.
Octobe= r 18 marks the date in 1929 that the British Privy Council pronounced women as “persons”.
I will= close with a quote by Emily Murphy in 1931: “We want leaders today as never before, leaders who are not afraid to be called names and who are willing t= o go out and fight. I think women ca= n save civilization. Women are persons.”
Applause
Ms. Tredger: Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Yukon NDP to acknowledge and celebrate Persons Day. Today marks an important and hard-won fight by the Famous Five: Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Irene Parlby, Louise&nb= sp;McKinney, and Henrietta Muir Edwards. These women fought for something that seems intuitive to us now, but every step toward women’s equality was fought for.
In 192= 7, the Persons case argued to include women in the definition of “personR= 21; in legislation. After two years in the highest level of court appeal, the c= ase was won. I’m a product of this case just by standing here and talking= to all of you about it in the House.
Of cou= rse, the work only benefited some Canadian women. It was not until 1960 that all indigenous women had the right to vote in Canada — 1960 — 33 ye= ars later. It’s a stark reminder that the experience of being a woman is = not universal and that we must explicitly consider all women in our activism. <= /span>
It has= been almost a century from that first court decision, and it’s not just inclusion that we’re after. In the third wave of progressive feminism= , we have to think beyond inclusion. These women laid the foundation and it̵= 7;s up to us to continue to build on it. At the end of the day, how we treat, s= peak about, and enact legislation that affects women is much more important than just saying a few words about Persons Day.
As peo= ple who serve the public, it’s our responsibility to not just include women b= ut to hear women — all women — to prioritize their stories, to unders= tand their experiences, to make actionable change when it is called for. It̵= 7;s also about our capacity to change. Progressive feminism is constantly evolv= ing. So, when we make the wrong choice, having the capacity to apologize and cha= nge course is also an act of feminism.
Thanks= to the Famous Five, these conversations will continue to grow and stretch into different parts of our lives. We look forward to continuing to uphold these values in this House and outside of it, alongside all of you.
Applause
In
recognition of Small Business Week
Hon. Mr. Pillai: Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Yukon Liberal government to pay tribute to Small Business Week, which is recognized across Canada from October 17 to October 23.
For mo= re than 42 years, the Business Development Bank of Canada has coordinated this national celebration of entrepreneurship and their significant contribution to our economy. I would also like to note, and thank, the Business Development Ban= k of Canada for providing one of their senior team leaders for this country, Mr.= Thomas Park, who is helping the Yukon to identify our priorities through our innovation strategy and our innovation work that’s ongoing right now.=
The pa= st 18 months of the pandemic have changed how we all live and do business. From growing labour shortages to supply-chain disruptions, Canadian entrepreneurs have needed to focus on innovation, inclusion, and sustainability to mainta= in their growth.
For a = small business working to recover from the COVID‑19 pandemic and its broad economic repercussions, supporting local has become more important than eve= r. Yukon businesses have demonstrated resilience and creativity in adapting to changing public health measures and finding new ways to go above and beyond= for their customers. Some pivoted their operations out of necessity, while othe= rs invested in reimagining their businesses. New ways of doing business were adopted, including curbside pickup options, deliveries, and e‑commerc= e.
Econom= ic activity in the Yukon remained strong in 2020 in part because of these efforts. Reta= il sales totalled $885 million, an increase of 2.3 percent compared = to 2019. In 2021, things look even better this year for the retail sector.
The co= nstruction industry — primarily residential construction, with its many small- a= nd medium-sized businesses — has been booming, with 657 new or converted dwellings built in 2020 and a further 579 in January through September= 2021.
Yukon&= #8217;s mining industry is also creating significant opportunities for small busine= sses in its supply chain.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, I would also like to take a moment to thank our chambers. Through the last = year and a half, folks like Susan, here with us today from the Whitehorse chambe= r, have been leaders. The Yukon Chamber of Commerce as well — the Yukon First Nation Chamber of Commerce and the Yukon Chamber of Mines have been intermediaries in many cases in helping us to communicate with business but also providing us with great direction.
These = are challenging times, and we all need to recognize the needs of small business= . We applaud the resilience and determination. In recognition of this week, we a= re working to create a business resiliency award to recognize those businesses that not just survived these turbulent times, but thrived — a great i= dea from the private sector to the department.
As the Yukon’s entrepreneurs continue to focus on recovery, I again encourage all Yukoners to look for opportunities to buy local, spend local, and suppo= rt local. I challenge Yukoners to go out to their community — whether it= be in Whitehorse or one of the other communities — in the Yukon and find= a business that you have not been into. Go in, and investigate and support. S= pend some money there and support local businesses.
Applause
Ms. Van Bibber: I rise on behalf of the Yukon Party Official Opposition to rec= ognize national Small Business Week, from October 17 to 23. The theme for 202= 1 is apt: “Seizing the opportunity to build the way forward”. Every = one of us has a favourite small business that they cater to and that they visit regularly — a coffee shop, a specialty shop, or a bakery. This year especially, our Yukon small business owners and staff deserve extra recogni= tion and thanks for the tremendous job that they have done adapting to an uncert= ain business landscape. Most have overcome obstacles that we never pictured hav= ing to face. They did it with a strong entrepreneurial spirit and acted with imagination and creativity to keep their doors open.
We kno= w that many of these changes that businesses have had are here to stay. All have b= een faced with adversities, such as having to rely heavily on technology in the digital world. A year and a half ago, who knew that Zoom meetings would be considered normal? Many have had to enforce new regulations, learn new ways, train staff, and also deal with repercussions.
As the= pandemic is still causing havoc, more difficulties will come but also opportunities.= A sincere thank you to all of our Yukon entrepreneurs and small businesses. If Yukoners would like to show their appreciation during this Small Business W= eek, visit a local business. We have all heard the phrase “Shop locally”. Well, I would add: “Please shop locally”. These small business owners are our neighbours, our supporters of charity and community. Whether it is your favourite shop or somewhere you have never be= en, we encourage you to purchase a gift, schedule a service, and just say hello= .
Applause
Ms. Tredger: I rise on behalf of the Yukon NDP to pay tribute to national Small Business W= eek. When I think of small businesses, the first thing that comes to mind is the Fireweed Market. If anyone doubts that Yukoners love their local businesses, they just need to come at 2:45 p.m. to look at the dozens of people lining = up to get in before the market has even opened. As the Member for Whitehorse Centre, I am so proud to tribute the many, many small businesses in my ridi= ng. With a quick walk through downtown, you can buy cheese, bagels, any number = of delicious meals, art, books, clothing, bicycles — I could go on. I lo= ve the unexpected partnerships like coffee shops and music stores together in = the same space.
I love= their community support, like the yarn store’s donation jars for local charities. I love knowing that this is a place where people can, with immen= se hard work, make their dream project into a reality, because behind every sm= all business is a dream.
It doe= sn’t stop at Whitehorse Centre. Across the territory, Yukoners are boldly taking risks to start and continue small businesses. Some have been in their famil= ies for generations; some are just taking their first steps. In our rural communities, businesses face unique opportunities and challenges. There is = no doubt that the last year and a half has been tough on small businesses like never before. We want to thank every business owner who has persevered thro= ugh these challenging times and thank every Yukoner who has and continues to support our local small businesses.
Applause
Speaker: Are= there any returns or documents for tabling?
Tabling
Returns and Documents
Hon. Mr. Clarke: I have for tabling Yukon Youth Panel on Climate Change 2021 — Our Recommendations, Our Future — 27 Programs and Policies to Embolden the Yukon's Climate Action.
Mr. Cathers: I have for tabling today a letter to the Minister of Health and Social Servic= es regarding Moderna and Pfizer booster shots for Yukoners 65 and older.
Ms. White: I have for tabling a letter dated August 31, 2021 to both the Premi= er and the acting chief medical officer of health entitled “COVID questi= ons from Yukoners”.
Speaker: Are= there any reports of committees?
Reports
of Committees
Mr. Dixon: Mr. Speaker, I have for presentation the first report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
Hon. Mr. Clarke: I am the Chair of the Standing Committee on Appointments to Ma= jor Government Boards and Committees, and I have for presentation the second re= port of the Standing Committee on Appointments to Major Government Boards and Committees.
Speaker: Are= there any further committee reports to be presented?
Are th= ere any petitions?
PETITIONS
Petition No. 3
Mr. Cathers: I have today for presentation the following petition — I would just note that, in keeping with the Standing Orders, I will be replacing the name of a member in it with her title.
This p= etition is to the Yukon Legislative Assembly.
This p= etition of the undersigned shows:
THAT i= t took the Government of Yukon 21 months to communicate to parents about a former teac= hing assistant charged and convicted of the 2019 sexual assault of a student at Hidden Valley Elementary School;
THAT t= he Government of Yukon did not communicate to parents about the sexual assault until after the media reported on it in July 2021;
THAT t= his failure to communicate meant that other alleged child victims of the sex offender who have since come forward, did not get the support they needed i= n a timely manner from their parents and health professionals;
THAT t= he Minister of Education at the time, the Deputy Premier, and the Department of Education knew about the sexual assault and did not communicate it publicly= , as demonstrated by documents acquired through the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act; and
THAT a= nyone not taking a child-centred approach to delivering education in the territory sh= ould face real-world consequences for their actions or inaction;
THEREF= ORE, the undersigned ask the Yukon Legislative Assembly to urge the Deputy Premier to clearly disclose to the public when she was made aware of the 2019 sexual assault at Hidden Valley Elementary School, and what direction she gave Department of Education officials — including any direction regarding communicating about this serious incident to parents.”
I shou= ld note, Mr. Speaker, that the petition has somewhere between 300 and 350 names on it.
Speaker: Are= there any bills to be introduced?
Introduction of Bills
Bill No. 10: Act = to Amend the Territorial Court Judiciary Pension Plan Act (2021)
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, I move that Bill No. 10, entitled Act to Amend the Territorial Court Jud= iciary Pension Plan Act (2021), be introduced and read a first time.
Speaker: It = has been moved by the Minister of Justice that Bill No. 10, entitled Act to Amend the Territorial Court Jud= iciary Pension Plan Act (2021), be now introduced and read a first time.
Motion for introduction and first reading of Bill No. 10 agreed to
Bill
No. 9: Act to Amend the Cannab=
is
Control and Regulation Act (2021) — Introduction and First Readin=
g
Hon. Mr. Pillai: Mr. Speaker, I move that Bill No. 9, Act to Amend the Cannabis Control and Regulation Act (2021), be now introduced and read a = first time.
Speaker: It = has been moved by the minister responsible for the Yukon Liquor Corporation and the Yukon Lotteries Commission that Bill No. 9, entitled Act to Amend the Cannabis Control and Regulation Act (2021), be now introduced and read a = first time.
Motion for introduction and first reading of Bill
No. 9 agreed to
Speaker: Are= there any further bills for introduction?
Are th= ere any notices of motions?
Notices
of Motions
Mr. Cathers: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give notice of the following motion:
THAT t= his House urges the Yukon government to recognize that the use of third doses of Mode= rna for people 65 and up is expected to be granted approval by Canadian regulat= ors soon by taking the following actions:
(1) mo= ving quickly to make third doses available to Yukoners aged 65 and up who wish to receive them as soon as that use has been approved; and
(2) pr= oviding Yukoners with a timeline for when they can expect to be able to receive a t= hird shot, if they wish to do so.
Ms. McLeod: = ;Mr. Speaker, I rise to give notice of the following motio= n:
THAT this House urges the Government of Yukon to recognize that a key part of be= ing able to heat homes with wood and reduce fossil fuel emissions by converting= to biomass heat is the ability of local woodcutters and haulers to operate wit= hout government erecting barriers that prevent them from harvesting wood in the Yukon and from hauling wood on our highways.
Ms. Van Bibber: I rise today to give notice of = the following motion:
THAT this House urges the Minister = of Education and the Minister of Highways and Public Works to report on which woodworking shops in Yukon secondary schools are currently shut down because they lack functioning dust-collector systems and provide a definitive timel= ine on when they will be reopened.
Ms. White: Mr. Speaker, I rise to give notice of the following motio= n:
THAT this House urges the Yukon gov= ernment to offer emergency support to the Government of Nunavut and the City of Iqa= luit in dealing with their state of emergency due to contaminated water.<= /p>
I also= give notice of the following motion:
THAT t= his House urges the Government of Yukon to address the impending shortage of firewood= by working with the Yukon Wood Products Association to:
(1) re= lieve the backlog of commercial permits; and
(2) re=
view the Forestry Act.
Speaker: Is = there a statement by a minister?
Ministerial
Statement
COVID‑19 vaccine an= d safety measures
Hon. Ms. McPhee: On Friday, our government announced important new measures to address the COVID‑19 situation. These are coming forward now in light= of the changing landscape that is all around us. The Northwest Territories and= the State of Alaska have each dealt with a widespread resurgence of COVID‑= ;19. Schools throughout the country have been impacted by cases, including here = in the territory, and our case count has been increasing in recent weeks. Vaccination remains our best protection against all forms of COVID‑19= . It is about protecting all Yukoners, including our children and youth who are = not yet eligible to be vaccinated.
The Yukon’s acting chief medical officer of health has provided new recommendations to address the current situation that will increase vaccina= tion rates while ensuring that we can continue to protect all Yukoners. Our government is planning the logistics around how we implement these recommendations, which will introduce major changes to ensure our territory remains healthy, safe, and protected against the current risks associated w= ith COVID‑19.
The Go= vernment of Yukon will soon require all Yukon government employees and all front-line health care workers in the territory to be fully vaccinated. Mandatory vaccination will apply to all public servants, including teachers, as well = as those who work in hospitals, long-term care homes, medical clinics, and all= ied health care settings. It will also apply to employees of our partners that = the government funds to provide services to vulnerable populations and those in congregate living situations such as group homes, shelters, and the Whiteho= rse Correctional Centre.
We nee= d to do everything we can to stop the spread of COVID‑19. As the territory’s largest employer, the Yukon government has a duty to lead= by example and do our part to keep Yukoners safe. This mandatory vaccine requirement will allow us to ensure a safe working environment for our employees, including our health care workers, while protecting the health a= nd safety of the members of the public whom we serve every day.
This r= equirement will come into effect on November 30. This will ensure that those who = have not yet been immunized will have enough time to receive both doses of vacci= ne before the requirement comes into force. Proof of vaccination will also soo= n be required to access non-essential services and attend events in the Yukon. T= his includes bars and restaurants, live music events, and theatre performances.=
Proof = of vaccination will also be required in order to participate in recreational activities for those who are over 12 years old, including all organized spo= rt leagues. This requirement will also come into place on November 30.
Proof = of vaccination will not be required to access essential services like a grocery store, pharmacies, libraries, or banks. Government officials are working with businesses, stakeholders, and those impacted by this requirement to address concerns and answer questions.
These = mandatory vaccine and proof of vaccine requirements are based on the recommendations = of the acting chief medical officer of health to limit the spread of COVIDR= 09;19.
Mr. Dixon: Mr. Speaker, let me say at the outset that I, and the Yukon Party caucus, firmly believe= in vaccination as the best tool to protect Yukoners from COVID‑19. I bel= ieve that the vaccines that are available to Yukoners are safe and effective and offer us the best opportunity to move forward and beyond COVID‑19. I strongly urge all Yukoners to get vaccinated.
I do n= ot, however, support making vaccines mandatory. I am also concerned that the pr= oof of vaccination system that the Liberals are planning is flawed. However, it= is clear that the announcement that was hastily made on Friday was not just ab= out the health of Yukoners or the rates of vaccination; it was a politically motivated attempt by the Liberal government to distract Yukoners from the mounting scandal related to the sexual abuse of children at the Hidden Vall= ey School. It is an attempt to distract from the role of the Deputy Premier in that scandal, as well as her refusal to answer any of the many questions th= at have been put to her by parents, media, and the opposition.
After a disastrous first week in the Legislature, where it became crystal clear that the Deputy Premier was aware of this abuse and made the decision not to tell parents, the Liberals were desperately seeking to change the channel. It was only last month that the Premier spoke publicly about vaccine mandates and denied that a vaccine mandate was coming. I will quote from a September&nbs= p;7 CBC article. I quote: “… the Yukon government has no plans to b= ring vaccine mandates to services, or for government staff.”
As rec= ently as October 8 — just 10 days ago — the Public Service Commissioner informed t= he YEU and the YTA that no d= ecision about vaccine mandates had been made, and yet, last Friday, the government = made a rushed announcement with no clear plans, no answers to any of the many questions that have been asked, and no consultation.
So, wh= at has changed since October 8? Well, I think that any Yukoner who has been following the Legislature or the news knows the answer to that question. It’s the growing scandal involving the Deputy Premier. It’s the lawsuits that have been launched against the Liberal government. It’s= the petitions with hundreds of signatures that have been tabled here. It’s the public letters that have been written and the growing number of parents= and families that have been insulted and offended by the shameful conduct of the Deputy Premier and the fact that the Deputy Premier has over and over refus= ed to answer even the most basic questions about what happened. She has hidden behind the current minister, even though the current minister admits that s= he had no knowledge of the matter. The Deputy Premier has tried to hide behind= the so-called “independent investigation” and even tried to foist b= lame on the RCMP. That’s what has changed, Mr. Speaker, and that̵= 7;s what prompted this announcement that was clearly rushed and not thought out= .
We hav= e many questions and concerns that we hope to raise about this announcement, but we will not stop asking the Deputy Premier about her role in the sexual abuse scandal until she answers the questions and takes responsibility. We will n= ot stop seeking answers and accountability. So, I urge the minister to use her response to start answering the many questions that have been put to her by parents, families, the media, and the opposition about when she found out a= bout sexual abuse at Hidden Valley school and why she did not inform parents. = span>
Ms. White: Mr. Speaker, I remember when news of the coronavirus was making its way into headlines in early 2020. Those headlines became worse as the days went on, and the reali= ty of the situation slowly but surely reached us. I feel like one of the lucky ones, as a friend who is far smarter than me told me to get ready for the l= ong haul — that this wouldn’t just be a matter of a few months but = for a much longer period of time.
Even w= ith that knowledge, the last 19 months have been hard. In the last 19 months, Yukone= rs have made sacrifices and changed their behaviour, but despite all of these sacrifices, we are grappling with another wave. Since the beginning, there = have been different schools of thought on how we should proceed. There are those= who urge for caution or those who say that it’s no worse than the flu. Th= ese perspectives are complicated, and they are rooted in different experiences = and understanding. But one thing is certain: If the Yukon government wants folk= s to understand and buy into the decisions that are being made, they need to get better at communicating.
When t= he government lifted the mask mandate and other measures back in August, folks were concerned. People reached out for more answers, and I shared three pages’ worth of questions from Yukoners in a letter sent to the government. I am still waiting for a reply six weeks later.
When
restrictions were lifted here, other jurisdictions were reinstating them. S=
ince
then, most provinces and territories have again mandated masks in public
spaces, but here it has only been strongly recommended. BC requires masks in
all public indoor settings for those ages five and up. Alberta requires mas=
ks
in all public indoor settings including students in grade 4 and up.
Saskat= chewan has an interim mask mandate for public indoor settings from September 17 u= ntil late October, until the vaccine has been in place for three weeks in that province. In Ontario, masks are required in all public indoor spaces for th= ose ages 2 and up. Québec too has a mask mandate, and both NWT and Nunav= ut require masks indoors. Yet in Yukon, where we have more cases per 100,000 t= han both British Columbia and Ontario combined, we’re just like Manitoba — still no mask mandate.
Is the Yukon’s Public Health and Saf= ety Act in line with other Canadian jurisdictions, or does it need to be reviewed and strengthened? The acting CMOH is t= elling us that the Delta variant is the main variant in the Yukon and that we need= to reach a higher rate of vaccination. So, we’re facing another outbreak= . On a weekly basis, we’ve now had outbreaks at schools where children are= not vaccinated and outbreaks in mine sites and workplaces where we know that at least a few people have been fully vaccinated, so folks have many questions= .
Accord= ing to the Health Canada website, 75.5 percent of eligible Yukoners have received= two doses of the vaccine, and yukon.ca says that 84 percent of Yukoners 18= and older have received them and that 76 percent of 12- to 17-year-olds are fully vaccinated. So, what is the true rate of vaccination for all eligible Yukoners? What is the calculated herd immunity threshold for Yukon? What is= the threshold for vaccination to achieve herd immunity in Yukon? How many more Yukoners need to be vaccinated to reach the herd immunity threshold? How lo= ng will vaccine passports be in effect? How will government support small businesses to enforce these requirements? Do childcare workers who work with children under 12 fall under this mandate? Will all childcare workers need a proof of vaccination? Has the Yukon government designed the city transit service as an essential service?
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, these last 19 months have been a lesson in learning on how to listen to each other, no matter which side of the argument we’re on. Ultimately, the Yukon NDP want us to keep each other safe, and we’ll work toward that goal.
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, these new vaccine requirements are based on = the recommendations of Yukon’s acting chief medical officer of health. Our government has been consistent in our response to the pandemic. We always follow the science.
When w= e get new recommendations from the office of the chief medical officer of health, we announce them so that people will know what she has said and what changes m= ight be coming that might impact their lives. Mr. Speaker, that is the responsible thing to do.
We have acknowledged that there are many logistical details to work out as we move toward November 30. Of course, our government is committed to undertak= ing that work with our partners. The chief medical officer of health makes recommendations and the government, in accepting those recommendations, proceeds to operationalize them.
These = measures will increase vaccine rates while ensuring that we can continue to protect = all Yukoners from the spread of COVID‑19 because the vaccine remains our = best protection against all forms of COVID‑19.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, we need to work together as a territory to protect the health and safety of= all Yukoners, including our children and youth who are not yet eligible to be vaccinated. I am pleased to hear that the other parties — the opposit= ion parties here in the House — seem to support vaccination but don’= ;t seem, unfortunately, to support this move. We need to do everything we can = to stop the spread of COVID‑19. As the territory’s largest employe= r, the Yukon government has a duty to lead by example and do our part to keep Yukoners safe.
The new mandatory vaccine requirement will allow us to ensure a safe working environment for our employees, including our health care workers, while protecting the health and safety of members of the public whom we serve everyday. Officials are currently working on these new requirements and how they can be implemented under the P= ublic Health and Safety Act. We will provide more information in the coming weeks.
This r= equirement will come into effect, as I have said, on November 30. This will ensure that those who have not yet been immunized will have enough time to do so. Proof of vaccination will also soon be required, as I have said, for non-essential services and to attend events in the Yukon where there have b= een many notifications, recently, of problems. This requirement will also be in place on November 30.
We rec= ognize that this requirement will impact many businesses, stakeholders, and organizations. Government officials are working with those impacted by this requirement to address concerns and answer questions. Officials have reached out to the business sector, the tourism sector, and the arts and heritage sectors last week. Meetings are happening this week to address questions and gather feedback. I should say that there is much support from those stakeholders for this decision.
We are= committed to working in partnership with the private sector to implement these new requirements. Again, the new vaccine requirements are based on the recommendations of the acting chief medical officer of health. These measur= es align with steps being taken in jurisdictions across the country — we have heard from the Leader of the Third Party — where they have had to deal with similar logistical considerations, but I note that the Yukon̵= 7;s management of COVID‑19 has not required us to go back and forth ̵= 2; to close schools and open schools and have mask mandates and remove them. T= he management has been steady and decisions have been based on science.
The si= mple fact is that we need to take action to increase vaccination rates and keep Yukon= ers healthy and safe, and that is what our government is doing. I urge the Memb= ers of the Legislative Assembly to see their way clear to work together.=
Speaker: Thi= s then brings us to Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Sexual= abuse within elementary school
Mr. Dixon: As we have discussed several times, in late 2019, the Department of Education became aware of sexual abuse of a student at Hidden Valley Elementary Schoo= l. At the time, the department and the school staff wanted to do the right thi= ng and notify parents. They even wrote a letter to notify parents. However, th= en the Deputy Premier got involved and the decision was made not to tell paren= ts. As a direct result of the Deputy Premier’s negligence in ensuring tha= t the parents were notified, several victims went unidentified for over a year an= d a half. That was over a year and a half that they went without justice or support.
So, Mr= . Speaker, can the Deputy Premier finally tell why she never ensured that parents were= notified?
Hon. Ms. McLean: I once again, for the fifth day, rise humbly to speak to the devastating matters that happened in 2019. I have been clear that when I sp= eak, I speak to the families, I speak to the children, and I speak to Yukoners a= bout the impacts of what has happened here, which is why, again, I will speak to= the steps that we are taking.
I have= launched an independent review of the Government of Yukon’s response to the situation at the Hidden Valley school, which again, is a commitment that I = made directly to the families of the children, particularly those who were impac= ted directly by this situation.
I am h= appy to say today that the independent reviewer, Amanda Rogers, is in the Yukon this week, starting the ground work on this review. I am very committed to ensur= ing that all of our departments work closely with her and that our families, our sch= ool community, and others who need to be part of the review are part of the rev= iew.
Mr. Dixon: What the minister forgot to mention is that the independent investigation does n= ot include interdepartmental discussions between the ministers. It doesn’= ;t include the Cabinet confidences and what was discussed between the former minister and the current minister.
So, he= re is what we know. Last week, the media asked the Deputy Premier if she was aware of = the sexual abuse of a child at an elementary school while she was minister. In response, she said, “Absolutely”. We also know that, in 2019, t= he department and school staff wanted to do the right thing and notify parents= , but when the draft letter got to the Deputy Premier, a decision was made not to send it. We also know that, in March 2020, the Deputy Premier received= a briefing note about the sexual abuse in an elementary school. Finally, we k= now that, despite being aware of this for over a year and a half, the Deputy Premier did not tell parents. She did not tell even the new Minister of Education, and now she won’t give any answers at all to the public. <= /span>
Does t= he Deputy Premier recognize that, as a direct result of her negligence, several child= ren who were victimized went unidentified and without supports for over a year = and a half?
Hon. Ms. McLean: I have been clear all along that this independent review will = look into our internal and interdepartmental processes related to these allegati= ons of child abuse and the response of the Department of Education staff. It wi= ll include a broad and comprehensive review of established government policies= and procedures around operations, reporting, and communications. That is particularly a very important key aspect — the communications —= to address serious incidents in Yukon schools. This will include reviewing how= the departments of Education, Health and Social Services, and Justice work toge= ther to respond to serious incidents in schools and interact with the RCMP.
I will= point, Mr. Speaker, to the terms of reference that I tabled in this House and that are guiding = the independent review. In item 4, there will be a finding of fact related to t= he responses of the Department of Health and Social Services, Department of Education, and Department of Justice to the incidents in 2019 at the Hidden Valley Elementary School. I have been clear to the investigator to go where= the investigation needs to go. That is what I am committed to.
Mr. Dixon: I think that all Yukoners know where this investigation needs to go; it needs= to go to the Deputy Premier.
ItR= 17;s clear that the Deputy Premier was aware of the sexual abuse that occurred in the elementary school, but then, instead of telling anyone about it — ins= tead of notifying parents so that they could talk to their children — the Deputy Premier did nothing. Instead of answering questions, the Liberals ha= ve hidden behind this so-called independent investigation and have even tried = to foist the blame on the RCMP. In fact, the so-called independent investigati= on is being conducted by an Outside lawyer who was hand-picked by the minister= and given a sole-source contract. It doesn’t include what happened in 202= 0. It doesn’t look at what the Liberal Cabinet or caucus did, nor why the Deputy Premier never told anyone.
By exc= luding what the Deputy Premier knew, and what she did and did not do, and by not including any review of why the Deputy Premier told no one about this in 20= 20, it’s clear that this so-called review is nothing more than a smokescr= een.
Will s= he stop hiding behind this sham of a review and start answering the questions that Yukoners have put to her?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Mr. Speaker, again, I made a commitment directly to famil= ies and the school community to do a comprehensive review, which is what we are doing.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, I have the utmost faith in the individual who has been hired and who comes = to us with a tremendous amount of experience. I have committed to ensuring that this review will go where it needs to go. Of course, it will include where = we are from 2019 to where we are today. That’s a commitment that I have made. There will be a finding of fact related to the responses of the Department of Health and Social Services, Department of Education, and Department of Justice to this incident — and bringing us to where we = are today. Yes, it focuses on 2019 and moves us along to where we are today. = span>
There = will also be recommendations for improving government-wide policies and procedures to better support Yukon — the Yukon school community. I have committed to having this review done by January 31. As I said here today, I’m pleased that the individual conducting this review is here in the Yukon this week.
Question
re: Sexual abuse in elementary school
Mr. Cathers:&= #8195;Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week, the Deputy Premier told media that parents and families from Hidden Valley school just want to move on and stop talking about this issue. Since then, we’ve heard an uproar of voices to the contrary. Parents have written open letters, some have gone to the media, a= nd now there is a petition signed by hundreds of Yukoners before the Legislatu= re urging the Deputy Premier to finally stand up, come clean, and start provid= ing answers about her role in this.
So, wi= ll the Deputy Premier respect the voices of parents and families and start answeri= ng the questions that have been put to her? Why did parents and families have = to learn about what happened on the news so long afterward instead of hearing directly and promptly about it from the minister and the Department of Education?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As the Minister of Educ= ation for the Yukon, I am taking the steps that we need to take to get to the bot= tom of what happened in 2019. I have launched an independent review, as I’= ;ve stated here today a number of times already.
I will= continue to talk about that review, because that is exactly where the answers are go= ing to come from. My commitment is to be transparent and to ensure that families and the school community receive the answers that they are seeking.<= /p>
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, I want to ensure that this will be a broad, comprehensive review that will bring forward the answers that folks need. In the meantime, I am committed = to working with the families to ensure that they have the supports they need r= ight now and to be respectful also that there are matters currently before the court. We have families navigating something very difficult in the court system. My focus will be on ensuring that they have the supports they need through all of our departments — through the departments of Education, Health and Social Services, and Justice.
Mr. Cathers: Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Premier’s refusal to answer even the most basic questions about what happened, when, and why is not going over well with Yukoners. Yukoners know that the questions we have been asking are reasonable questio= ns about why the Deputy Premier did not notify parents, and they are not legal questions. They are about what the minister knew and what actions she did or did not take. They are the kind of questions that we do not need the sham o= f an independent review to answer.
So, wi= ll the Deputy Premier stop hiding from accountability and start answering the important questions that have been put to her?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Mr. Speaker, I am very confident in the individual who ha= s been hired to do this independent review. I think that parents need to have the confidence in that as well, which is why I really take exception to the comments that the member opposite has brought forward in his preamble in th= is question. We have committed to finding the answers to the questions that fo= lks are asking. Casting a shadow over a process that is underway — we also have a process that includes the Child and Youth Advocate who is doing a re= view as well in terms of the Department of Education’s policies and proced= ures and actions taken in 2019. We also have an independent review that the RCMP= is conducting on the investigation that happened in 2019. The RCMP have been v= ery forthcoming in talking to Yukoners about what they didn’t do in 2019, which was to interview all of the potential victims in this case.
Mr. Cathers: Last week, the Deputy Premier told media that parents and families affected by t= his at Hidden Valley school just want to move on. Then she admitted that she had never actually even spoken to parents. The minister trying to put words in = the mouths of parents has not gone over well with anyone. A petition with hundr= eds of signatures from Yukoners has been tabled in the Legislature, calling on = the Deputy Premier to answer the questions that have been put to her.
Why di= d she not ensure that parents were notified? Why did the December 2019 letter not get sent? Why did the former Minister of Education keep this issue from the current Minister of Education? Will the minister respect the wishes of pare= nts and families and start answering the many questions that have been put to h= er — that only she can answer — questions that have been put to he= r by parents, by both opposition parties, and by the media?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Mr. Speaker, again, I think that it is really important to point out to Yukoners and, first and foremost, to the families of the child= ren and the school community that there are important steps being taken now. Th= ese steps include three reviews that I have talked about today. We have launched the independent review. We are working with the Child and Youth Advocate wi= th the review that she is conducting and there is an RCMP review into their investigation in 2019. These are, in fact, where the answers will come from= . I will release this report — the one that I am responsible for — = to the families and children of Hidden Valley school, the school community, an= d to Yukoners. I think that is where the answers will come from.
Again,= I want to focus on and point to the supports that are necessary right now for those w= ho have been directly impacted and those who are continuing to navigate the criminal court system, the civil court system, and other regards. I look forward to continuing to talk about those supports.
Question
re: Sexual abuse within elementary school
Ms. White: Last week, the Minister of Education responded to questions about Hidden Valley school saying that supports were in place and that physical changes were be= ing made to the school. The same day, I received e‑mails, texts, and phot= os saying that it wasn’t the case. I apologize for asserting that the minister had seen these photos. I have since forwarded these pictures to the minister, showing that these physical changes were in fact far from being completed. These changes need to happen not only in Hidden Valley but to all schools in the Yukon.
Will t= he minister confirm that the Department of Education has undertaken safety aud= its in all Yukon schools to ensure the safety of all Yukon students?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Mr. Speaker, I think that folks have heard me say repeate= dly — I have had a lot of opportunity to speak about safety in schools — there is nothing more important that the well-being and safety and protection of students when they are in our care.
We are= certainly focused on taking the needed steps to rebuild the trust. Thank you very much for the question brought forward and thank you also to the Leader of the Th= ird Party for forwarding the correspondence from the parent at Hidden Valley wi= th these important questions. I’ve forwarded that on to my department to ensure that it’s thoroughly investigated and reviewed. I will get bac= k to the member opposite, specifically about the safety audits in all schools, b= ut, again, I think that these steps — I know that there were immediate st= eps taken in the school and a number of changes and protocols that were made directly in 2019. I think that we’re always striving to do better. I = will report back on the findings from my department when I have them.
Ms. White: Mr. Speaker, it’s also about the need for systemic changes to Yukon education. Families and students are looking for real support. The minister has briefly mentioned wellness resources and education support on topics like sexual he= alth and reporting sexualized abuse. The minister also assured this House that t= here are other supports available, including an on-site social worker and the involvement of public health nurses. But parents are telling me that they l= ack the support they need for themselves and that their children still lack the support that they need in class and in school.
Can th= e minister confirm — yes or no — if these supports have been in place and = are easily accessible? If she chooses to answer yes, why do I still have parents telling me that they can’t access the supports that the minister is referencing?
Hon. Ms. McLean: I want to first start by saying that if there are any concerns particularly around safety practices in any schools and how staff are interacting with students, this should be brought to the attention of the school administration immediately. This helps to ensure a timely response. I just wanted to start by saying that part and then get into the supports. I = am told that the supports are available to families and staff, including on-si= te support coordinated by the school community consultant, who is a trained so= cial worker.
I have= gone over this a number of times in terms of supports. There are also referrals to ot= her support services that are being facilitated as needed, such as through Fami= ly and Children’s Services, Mental Wellness and Substance Use Services, = and Victim Services. Particularly under Victim Services, we have had a lot of referrals to project Lynx, which works directly with children of sexual abu= se. In terms of child and family, we have also had access to counselling as wel= l as long-term individual and group counselling. I would like to continue on to finish my response to the member opposite. Thank you.
Ms. White: Mr. Speaker, maybe the minister and the department can reach out to parents with those concerns.
We hav= e heard from the minister over and over again about how the independent review, including the review that will be commissioned by the Yukon government, will look at the policies and procedures of the Department of Education. LetR= 17;s be clear about one thing: This whole ugly situation has been mishandled from the start. To make it worse, the government keeps hiding behind reviews ins= tead of taking responsibility for all of its actions now.
The fo= rmer Minister of Education told the press that questions about who knew what and when will be answered by the independent reviews. Can the Minister of Educa= tion explain why she thinks it is appropriate to ask for Yukoners to pay for an independent review of the facts when her government could start sharing that information now, instead of making families wait for months to get the answ= ers?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Mr. Speaker, I am very committed to the independent revie= w and, of course, supporting the Child and Youth Advocate and supporting the RCMP review. I think that this is where we will get all of the questions answered and not have any fragmented information going out to Yukoners. I want to en= sure that the whole view is given through this review, which is why I think that= it is important to launch an independent review that will ensure that all of t= he questions that we have had leading up to this legislative Sitting and beyond are answered and answered thoroughly.
I will= continue working with the school community, the families, and the children around whatever supports they need, and I am committed to that.
I have= been following up directly with my department to ensure that those supports are = in place. I really do want to know, Mr. Speaker, if there are family members who= are feeling unsupported. That is not something that I support. I want to see th= em get what they need to move through this.
Question
re: Affordable housing
Ms. Tredger:&= #8195;There are currently hundreds of Yukoners on the wait-list for housing. There are hundreds more Yukoners who go uncounted — from couch surfing to campi= ng. This issue is so much bigger than this government is willing to admit. While there are units being developed for the future, the people who don’t = have housing need it right now, especially in the midst of a fourth wave of COVI= D.
What i= s this government doing to house Yukoners right now?
Hon. Mr. Pillai: Mr. Speaker, first I would just like to clarify — t= his government is not taking the situation lightly. As it was in the preamble to the question — it touched on the fact that we are not understanding t= he magnitude of this — it couldn’t be further from the truth. Actually, we are very committed to dealing with a very significant problem = that is in place right now. That is partially why we brought all of our stakehol= ders together to look at every opportunity we can to support those who are in ne= ed.
It is = true, Mr. Speaker, that we have a very extensive wait-list for Yukon housing at this particular time, and my office has directed the Yukon Housing Corporation to look at a= ll available options for us as we go into the winter — for those in need — even with some of the challenges that we see with potential displacement today.
Again,= we continue to look at a number of projects. The $20 million that we have received from CMHC that was negotiated as well = as the $20 million that was negotiated by the previous minister is funding a number of projects and projects that are to be completed and opened to supp= ort those who are on those wait-lists.
I look= forward to questions two and three, and we will go through a number of other strate= gies that we are deploying at this particular time.
Ms. Tredger: Mr. Speaker, this government has failed to regulate housing, allowing hotels and short-t= erm rentals to run housing however they like. People need housing so, more often than not, they have no choice but to accept whatever conditions are being imposed. For Yukoners living in short-term rentals like hotels and Airbnbs, there is virtually no protection or certaint= y.
What p= rotections is the minister putting in place to protect Yukoners living in hotels or ot= her short-term rental units from eviction?
Hon. Mr. Pillai: So, our work to increase the amount of affordable housing in Y= ukon broadly falls under three areas. First of all, we are continuing to support over 1,000 households through our community housing programs, which include= our employee housing, our rent geared to income, and our rent supplement.
As wel= l, we are continuing to offer incentive programs, such as the housing initiatives fun= d, the rural home ownership loan program, and the municipal matching construct= ion grant. Again, we are continuing to work with a number of our partners at all levels of government. There are a number of First Nation government and community projects that are underway, from Mayo to Whitehorse to Watson Lak= e. All one has to do is just walk out of the main administration building and = they will see the 47‑unit building that is being put in place on Jeckell Street.
So, ag= ain, we do work with the Department of Health and Social Services, which, in some case= s, will use short-term agreements in place to house folks, if needed, in hotel= s. But what I am hearing today from the NDP is a request, I think, to start to move to regulate relationships between folks within hotel spaces, so I would like to hear more about that because that sounds a bit concerning.= p>
Ms. Tredger: Time and time again, we have heard from Yukon tenants about just how vulnerable = they feel. Frankly, rental protection should be the number one priority for this government, pandemic or not, and yet countless tenants are still being evic= ted from their homes. In mobile home parks, that vulnerability is even worse. I have heard so many stories from folks all over the Yukon who are on the edg= e of homelessness. People deserve better.
Can th= e minister tell us what this government is doing to protect tenants from unfair evicti= ons and unfair treatment in the midst of the fourth wave of the pandemic?
Hon. Mr. Pillai: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, we stand by the work and t= he legislation that is in place, which balances both the supports for tenants = but also the supports for landlords. Again, we have seen unprecedented supports being put in place. Our subsidy program that we put in place, providing peo= ple with either $200, $400, $600, or $800 in grant form — and again, using our current budget to top that up —
It goe= s without saying that we understand that there is a challenge at this particular time= . We have had very impressive growth in our economy. We have seen population gro= wth moving over anything that was identified over the last decade here in the Yukon. All one has to see is that we’re one of the fastest growing provinces or territories in the country. All of those variables are leading= to more pressure.
Again,= I thank the Yukon Housing Corporation for looking at all opportunities. I thank tho= se who work under Community Services, which actually oversees the relationships between those renting and landlords. I think they continue to do good work.=
Again, we’re going to work with others like the Anti-Poverty Coalition to en= sure that everyone, the most needy — we understand what their needs are an= d we have the right supports in place.
Question
re: Sexual assault in elementary school
Mr. Dixon: The former Education minister knew about what happened at Hidden Valley and did= not live up to her responsibility as the leader of the education system to ensu= re that parents were made aware. Now the former minister is refusing to come c= lean about when she found out about the abuse at the school and why she did not notify parents.
Last w= eek, when asked by media if she had responded to any requests to meet with parents, s= he said — and I quote: “I haven’t received any requests from families to do that.”
Well, = a CBC story from Friday evening directly contradicts the Deputy Premier’s claim, as at least one parent has said publicly that they have requested a meeting with the minister.
Can th= e former Minister of Education tell us why she did not give accurate information to = the media?
Hon. Ms. McLean: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I thank you for the questions regarding Hidden Valley school and the interaction with parents. I myself met with the families on September 22 in a closed meeting, whic= h I was invited to. I have continued to ensure that the school community knows = that I am available to continue to meet with them, which is what I intend to do.= I have also committed to a restorative process that will take us into an area= of moving into a place of healing around this and ensuring that the parents who rightfully have all of the concerns that have been raised here in the Legis= lative Assembly — and that the concerns that they have relayed directly to me — are heard and that we are moving forward together.
I know that’s difficult. There is nothing more difficult than having your ch= ild harmed. There is nothing more difficult. It’s actually, in my opinion, every parent’s worst nightmare to entrust their child to anyone and t= hen have them harmed. So, I take this seriously.
Mr. Dixon: Mr. Speaker, it’s clear that the former Minister of Education did not live up to h= er responsibilities to ensure that parents were made aware of the sexual abuse that occurred at the school. The former minister did not do her job. As a result of this failure to do her job, victims of abuse went unidentified for over a year and did not receive justice or support. How did the Premier res= pond to this massive failure of duty and responsibility to parents? Well, he promoted her to Deputy Premier.
Can th= e Premier tell us: When he promoted the former Minister of Education to Deputy Premie= r, was he aware that she had made the decision not to inform parents of the ab= use that occurred at the school?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Mr. Speaker, again, this is an extremely devastating situ= ation to everybody involved. My ministers have acknowledged that mistakes have be= en made and that there was a breakdown in trust between us, the Department of Education, Hidden Valley Elementary School, the parents, the teachers. They have apologized to the community, the parents, and that is not enough. That’s why we are doing the independent review. That’s why the Child and Youth Advocate is doing the review. All of these answers will come out in those reviews. We have taken the steps to get to the bottom of what happened and ensure that we make the system better moving forward. We have = to. We absolutely have to. Our government is absolutely committed to rebuilding that relationship and to rebuilding the trust and the strength of our educa= tion system. I know that the Yukon Party wants to be the judge and the jury. We = will allow the independent review to answer all questions and make sure that this issue — this devastating situation — does not go without respon= se to the parents, to the families, to the educational community.
Mr. Dixon: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the Premier, he didn’t answer the question th= at I asked, which is: When he decided to promote the former Minister of Educatio= n to Deputy Premier, was he aware that she had made the decision not to inform parents about what happened at Hidden Valley school?
When d= id he learn of this, Mr. Speaker? Those are the questions that Yukoners want answers to, and they shouldn’t have to wait for a number of months fo= r an independent investigation to get those answers.
So, le= t’s ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: When did he learn of what happened at Hi= dden Valley school, and did he know about it when he decided to promote the Mini= ster of Education to Deputy Premier?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Mr. Speaker, again, what families and what Yukoners need = to know is that the Minister of Education has launched an independent review, = and our government will be fully supporting the questions asked to make sure th= at we get, at the end of the day, the response necessary for the parents, for = the children, for the school community, to make sure that these issues are addressed.
This r= eview will involve parents and guardians, as well as partners, agencies, and organizations, with the goal of understanding what occurred and to make improvements to ensure that our education system is protected, that our sch= ools and students are protected, and that the support in the school community is protected. This is the commitment that the Minister of Education has made. =
The me= mber opposite has already decided who is responsible. We will let an independent, non-biased individual and the Child and Youth Advocate be the determiners of that. We will completely — 100 percent — support all of th= eir questions in that pursuit.
Speaker: The= time for Question Period has now elapsed.
Government
House Leader’s report on length of Sitting
Hon. M=
s. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, I rise =
pursuant
to the provisions of Standing Order 75(4) to inform the House that the House
Leaders have met for the purpose of achieving agreement on the maximum numb=
er
of sitting days for the current Sitting.
I am informing the House that the resu=
lts
are that there shall be a maximum of 31 sitting days, with the 31st
sitting day being Thursday, December 2, 2021.
Speaker:=
195;Accordingly, I declare th=
at the
current Sitting shall be a maximum of 31 sitting days, with the 31st=
sup>
sitting day being Thursday, December 2, 2021.
We will now proceed to Orders of the D=
ay.
Orders of
the Day
Government
Bills
Bill
No. 6: Act to Amend the Safer
Communities and Neighbourhoods Act (2021) — Second Reading
Clerk:̳=
5;Second
reading, Bill No. 6, standing in the name of the Hon. Ms. Mc=
Phee.
Hon. M=
s. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, I move =
that Bill
No. 6, entitled Act to Amend t=
he
Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act (2021), be now read a second time.
Speaker:=
195;It has been moved by the =
Minister
of Justice that Bill No. 6, entitled Act
to Amend the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act (2021), be now re=
ad a
second time.
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, the government is pleased to bring forward the Act to Amend the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act (2021) for second reading.
The Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods A= ct, or the SCAN act, enables members of the public to file a complaint with the SCAN unit when there is a suspicion that illegal or dangerous activities are occurring habitually on a local property and negatively affecting their neighbourhood community.
The ty= pe of activities that the SCAN unit can investigate are identified in the act as a “specified use”, which currently includes prostitution and ille= gal drug, cannabis, or alcohol activities.
The us= e of civil remedies increases the public’s access to justice by providing a confidential and timely means of seeking redress and relieves pressure on t= he territorial law enforcement and court resources. This is a complaint-driven process. These are neighbours who want to keep their community safe.
When t= he SCAN unit receives a complaint, it supports community safety by responding to the concerns of Yukoners and disrupting activities that are harmful to communit= ies and neighbourhoods. It’s important to note that all SCAN unit activit= ies are initiated by a complaint from a community member, after which the SCAN = unit will assess if the complaint can be substantiated. The SCAN unit will only = take action if there is evidence of one or more of the specified use activities occurring on the property.
The pr= oposed amendment to the SCAN act will expand the scope of “specified useR= 21;. It is quite specific and minute. It will expand the scope of specified uses that the SCAN unit can investigate to include activities related to child sexual exploitation, criminal organizations, and firearms. Our government is seeking to amend the act in light of changes in criminal and social dynamics over the past few years.
We rec= ognize that there is a considerable population of law-abiding gun owners and gun u= sers in the territory. I want to emphasize that the lawful purchase, possession, use, storage, and transportation of firearms are activities that are simply= not captured by the proposed amendments. We believe that Yukoners deserve safe, healthy communities wherein the possession, use, and trade of illegal firea= rms, organized crime, and child sexual exploitation do not exist. Thus, we are pleased to bring forward this bill to the Legislative Assembly.
I woul= d like to add just a bit of information so that Yukoners can be fully aware of these important amendments.
The Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods A= ct, or the SCAN act, was enacted in May 2006 and is administered and enfor= ced by a team of investigators known as the SCAN unit. They respond to complain= ts from citizens about illegal activities that are having adverse effects on t= heir communities and their neighbourhoods.
Pursua= nt to the SCAN act, three conditions must be present prior to the SCAN unit taking any action. The activity is included in the act, of course, under a specified u= se. We are trying to expand the list of specified uses. It is occurring habitua= lly — so it must be ongoing — and it is having an adverse effect on= the community or the neighbourhood. The number of complaints received by SCAN h= as increased significantly in the last four years, rising from 61 in 2017 to 1= 05 in 2020. So far, in 2021, SCAN has received and investigated 84 complaints.=
The SC= AN unit can resolve these complaints in many ways. They can address the problem informally with the tenant or with the property owner. They can send a form= al warning letter or agreement for providing a verbal warning — that they would cease the illegal activities on the property. They can serve an evict= ion notice issued by the landlord, and they can apply to the Yukon Supreme Cour= t to close the property for up to 90 days through the community safety order.
In the= last five years, the vast majority — 83 out of 115 complaints — were reso= lved by a warning; 23 of those 115 were landlord-assisted evictions; two were matters that needed a community safety order in the last five years; and one matter went to court. I note that those are important statistics for people= to understand.
Chief Doris Bills says — and I quote: “I support t= he Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods= i> (SCAN) Act amendments to include illegal activities related to child sexual abuse and sexual exploitation, g= angs and criminal organizations, and illegal firearms.
“I have seen firsthand how drug dealing and illegal acti= vities can devastate a community. It has a ripple effect that impacts neighbours, families, Elders and youth. It makes them afraid to speak up and scared to leave their homes. No one should have to live like that.
“I have also seen firsthand how SCAN legislation can hel= p. SCAN is one tool and we need every tool we can have at our disposal to help Yukon communities deal with illegal activities.
“For our next steps, I would like to see a broader conversation between NGOs and the Yukon government to ensure there are supp= orts in place for the vulnerable people affected by this legislation.”
I woul= d also like to add some information. In support of the work that has been done regarding leading community safety initiatives, our government has been wor= king closely with Gina Nagano, who has been leading safe community initiatives across the territory but focusing now on community initiatives and programm= ing for neighbourhoods in Whitehorse and Yukon. She is very supportive of this = bill as well.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address the importance of these amendments = at second reading, and hopefully it’s supported at this level and we wil= l be able to answer questions as we go forward.
Mr. Cathers: Mr. Speaker, I’m rising to speak to this as the Official Opposition Justice critic= . I would note that, first of all, the lack of public consultation regarding th= ese changes is a concern. One issue that has been highlighted, not only by us b= ut also by the NDP, is the fact that the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act has not had a public review since it= was put in place over 15 years ago. There have been issues and concerns with it= , as the members of the government will know, and, as you may know, Mr. Spe= aker, there is outstanding court action directed at the government regarding this legislation and the use of it.
There = have been concerns from advocacy groups, and I have to remind the government that they have a tendency to use a double standard when they roll out arguments on certain days against proposals brought forward by the opposition and then c= onveniently forget their arguments and do it regarding another matter.
The fo= rmer Minister of Community Services, the Member for Mount Lorne-Southern Lakes, = has previously argued — when we were proposing changes to the Civil Emergencies Measures Act to = increase safeguards and public oversight, that former minister argued that it was unreasonable to propose amending an act when the government was currently in court with Yukoners over that very act. Fast-forward to today, and apparent= ly that standard doesn’t apply anymore for this Liberal government.
The Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act was brought in 2006. I would note th= at the reasons for it or the challenge of using a criminal standard — the act has been successful in many ways. However, it is also very important to emphasize and note that there is also a reason for using the criminal stand= ard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”, and that is to provide protecti= on to people who may be innocent from being wrongfully convicted.
The us= e of the civil standard used by SCAN does, on the plus side, make it easier to go af= ter illegal activities that are harming neighbourhoods — that may be hard= to get the proof necessary to meet that criminal standard for — but it is always important to view that area with caution and recognize that, with ma= king it easier for law enforcement and government to take action, there is also = some risk of innocent people being hurt in the process when it is falling short = of that standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
Again,= a couple of our concerns include the lack of consultation with the public and a lack= of a review of SCAN. The government should have done both before proceeding wi= th changes here, but I want to note that some elements of the bill that they brought forward contain additions that I believe are worth considering; however, I do have strong concern with the provision that the government has brought forward regarding firearms.
In ris= ing to talk about the background to this, I want to note that, on May 1, 2020, the Trudeau Liberal Cabinet passed an order-in-council reclassifying over 1= ,500 firearms that had previously been legally purchased as either non-restricte= d or restricted weapons as prohibited firearms. Also, in dramatic contrast to the tradition here within Canada — unlike previous legislation where, if a firearm was classified as a prohibited weapon, the existing owners were all= owed to keep those weapons but not resell or transfer them — this crossed = the line with what they referred to as a “buyback” but is in fact c= onfiscation by a friendlier name.
This s= tep was profoundly upsetting to many law-abiding firearms owners, including here in= the Yukon. The legislative amendment to the SCAN act tabled by this territorial Liberal government will make it easier for them to confiscate the very same firearms that the Trudeau government banned through their infamous May = ;1, 2020 order-in-council. I would note that it is especially important to recognize that many of those firearms, at the time of purchase, were non-restricted weapons.
What t= his means, through these legislative changes, is that instead of applying a standard s= et out in the Criminal Code of “beyond a reasonable doubt”, this Liberal government wants to lower the bar and make it easier for them to confiscate these lawfully acquired firearms. Within the federal government’s OIC — the infamous gun= ban — there was a two-year timeline imposed by which firearms owners who purchased their weapons legally have to surrender their legally acquired private property covered by the ban to government. The Trudeau Liberal government has struggled with figuring out how to implement this confiscati= on, or the so-called “gun buyback”, and it’s important to note that this legislative amendment brought forward by this territorial Liberal= government will help the federal government by doing the dirty work for them in firear= ms confiscation through broadening the powers under the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, one thing I want to emphasize is that it is not just the Yukon Party or Yukoners who are bringing forward concerns about the Trudeau Liberal government’s gun ban. The National Police Federation, which, as you m= ay know, is the union that represents RCMP members, issued a position statemen= t on the subject of the Trudeau Liberal government’s gun ban in November&n= bsp;2020.
I am g= oing to quote several relevant parts in their position statement, which, as I mentioned, was issued in November 2020, to help all members understand= why this whole issue is not only an issue of property rights and individual freedoms but is also, according to the union representing the RCMP, a waste= ful diversion of resources that should be used in other ways to target real cri= me and real criminal activity.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, just for the reference of Hansard, I would note that the statement was issu= ed by the National Police Federation on November 23, 2020, and includes a link to their position statement on the current statement of gun violence in Canada. They should be able to find it there, but if required, I can certai= nly provide the link.
So, I = just want to quote, beginning with an excerpt from the National Police FederationR= 17;s position statement — which includes, under the area of “Challenges”: “The increase in homicides related to firea= rms continues to threaten the safety of the public and RCMP Members. Effectively addressing the threat of Canada’s growing illicit firearms market and related increased gang violence requires the urgent, efficient, and effecti= ve deployment of law enforcement expertise, personnel, and financial resources= .
“= ;While the growing prevalence and threat of illegal firearms in Canada is generally acknowledged, data on the origins of firearms is lacking and greater resour= ces are needed to better understand and address this critical issue: The Canadi= an Firearms Program is responsible for the administration of the Firearms Act; however, does not have the resources to provide effective gun crime tracing= and enforcement units. The Canadian National Firearms Tracing Centre processes = tracing requests for national and international law enforcement agencies. However, = the center does not collect statistics on illegal guns; rather, it determines t= he history of a gun connected to a criminal investigation and uses that information as potential evidence in court. Further, there is no legal requirement for police to submit firearms for tracing.
“= ;Costly and current legislation, such as the Order in Council prohibiting various firearms and the proposed ‘buy-back’ program by the federal government targeted at legal firearm owners, does not address these current= and emerging themes or urgent threats to public safety.
“= ;It also does not address: criminal activity, illegal firearms proliferation, gang crime, illegal guns crossing the border or the criminal use of firearms. = span>
“= ;In fact, it diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”
I just= want to briefly repeat two parts of that; I want to emphasize them for the governme= nt and for members. The National Police Federation said, again — and I quote: “Costly and current legislation, such as the Order in Council prohibiting various firearms and the proposed ‘buy-back’ progra= m by the federal government targeted at legal firearm owners, does not address t= hese current and emerging themes or urgent threats to public safety.”
The se= cond quote is: “In fact, it diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of crimi= nal use of illegal firearms.”
So, it= ’s important to note that, in addition to the many Yukoners who are upset by t= he Trudeau Liberal government’s approach through the gun ban, in fact, R= CMP members across the country, as represented by their union, have very similar views on this proposed ban — that it is a misuse of government resour= ces. While this was, of course, primarily directed at the federal government, I would note that the same issue applies here in the Yukon.
I also= want to just quote a couple more excerpts from, in this case, the press release iss= ued by the National Police Federation on November 23, 2020, which notes — and I quote: “Although we share a border with the world’= ;s largest manufacturer of small arms, 2,242 illegal guns used in crimes here = in Canada last year were traced back to manufacturers in the United States. In fact, three of the four firearms used in the tragic mass shooting in Portapique, Nova Scotia, in April 2020, were obtained illegally in the United States.
‘= ;“The NPF takes this issue very seriously because, as police officers, we routinely see first-hand how illegal weapons are direct= ly linked to increased gun violence and, sadly, death,’ said Brian Sauvé, President, National Police Federation. ‘Our recommendat= ions call for a combination of better legislation, better funding, and evidence-based solutions that we believe are necessary to curtailing the proliferation of illegal guns in Canada.’”
So, ag= ain, what I want to emphasize here for members is that this is not just an issue of citizens who are upset by the Trudeau Liberal government’s order-in-council backed up by the changes that the Minister of Justice has introduced today to make it easier for the Yukon government to help the fed= eral Liberal government to go after those firearms. In fact, based on listening = to law enforcement professionals, based on listening to the union representing RCMP members across the country, they are saying that this is not the best = use of resources, and, in fact, it diverts those resources from where they coul= d be used better.
I woul= d also note that, as highlighted in their press release and on the front page of t= he position statement: “The National Police Federation (NPF) supports an evidence-based approach to advancing public safety and the prevention of gun violence in Canada.” To that end, what is very clea= r is that the evidence does not support the approach taken by the Trudeau Liberal government, which is being supported and executed through the actions of th= is territorial Liberal government.
That i= s the reason, Mr. Speaker, why we can’t support this in its current fo= rm and do believe that the government has failed to take a couple of actions t= hat are necessary, which are to, first of all, actually do a public review of t= he Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods A= ct since it has been 15 years since that has been implemented, and we know that there have been concerns raised about it. As I mentioned earlier, in stark contrast to the excuse that the Liberal government previously used for argu= ing that the Civil Emergency Measures A= ct couldn’t be amended while the government was being sued for the use of that legislation, they don’t seem to have the same concerns regarding= the Safer Communities and Neighbourhood= s Act, which is a little bit of a double standard if you ask me.
I woul= d again emphasize the fact that the key problem — or one of the key problems,= I should say — with the approach taken by the federal Liberal government backed up by their territorial branch here is that, in addition to the infringement on people’s property rights, according to the union representing the RCMP, this whole gun ban and buyback in fact “… diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.” That’s a quote from page 2 of the position statement issued by the National Police Federation.
With t= hat, Mr. Speaker, I will wrap up my remarks. I do want to emphasize, as I did at the start, t= hat there are some parts of this proposal and additional definitions that the government is proposing adding that we do think are worthy of consideration= . We do have a problem with the lack of public consultation. We do have a problem with the fact that this territorial Liberal government is supporting the Trudeau Liberal government and making it easier to go after firearms owners= who purchase their property legally and have done nothing wrong with it since t= he time of purchase.
But ul= timately, in its current form, we will not be supporting this legislation.
Ms. White:= 195;Mr. Speaker, I appreciate all different iterations of my title, so it’s all right = with me.
I think it’s important to start the conversation by saying that the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods A= ct is a blunt tool. It attempts to solve really complex problems in kind of a hammer-like fashion. I totally acknowledge that this was a piece of legisla= tion that was brought forward actually by members of the NDP back in the early 2000s. It was specifically meant to resolve issues with one very specific h= ouse on Wheeler Street. Here we are, 14 or almost 15 years later, and it’s being used widely across the territory — unfortunately, with devastat= ing effects.
The on= e big question is: Why is it that a piece of legislation that is so far-reaching = has not been reviewed since it was first brought forward and passed in 2006? Why has it not been reviewed? Why are we expanding the scope of the legislation before reviewing it?
I thin= k about housing when I think about the SCAN legislation. I think that the decision = to expand the scope of this legislation is possibly reckless, because it will worsen the housing crisis. As it currently exists, the government tells us = that the SCAN results — and we heard this in our briefing the other day — results in — and this is a quote — “hardly any evictions” or a couple per year. But those numbers only consider the evictions that happened through SCAN orders. I would expect that, at this p= oint in time, everyone in this House knows and understands how weak the protecti= ons from evictions are to tenants. Landlords in the Yukon do not need a reason = to evict. With the stigma that comes with a SCAN investigation, countless Yukoners lo= se housing — at least a whole lot more than the numbers that are being considered by this government.
SCAN investigations support a landlord’s claims to end tenancies. The idea that it’s just up to the landlord — and SCAN can wash their han= ds of it — means that the government isn’t taking accountability because these are indirect evictions and these are indirect consequences. Putting someone into homelessness is not the solution. Taking a vulnerable person from a situation and making them more vulnerable is not a solution. = It is not a solution to a crime, to substance use, or to exploitation.<= /p>
I thin= k about the fact that if you were to open up common signs of illegal activities tak= ing place at a property — and this is just right off the website: “Frequent visitors at all times of the day and night.” I can te= ll you that there are friends whom I visit frequently at different times during the day or night, and sometimes I am not on my own there. There may be many= of us stopping by. “Many short and suspicious visits to the propertyR= 21; — I definitely have friends where they are definitely short visits. I might be a suspicious person, so I guess they could be suspicious as well. =
We hav= e: “Visiting vehicles with many occupants yet only 1 person goes into the residence.” I have a tiny library outside my house. Let me tell you t= hat people cruise up to my house all the time. One person hops out, and they hop back in. It could be suspicious.
“= ;Occupants frequently leaving from the property” — well, I guess if you are visiting, you probably have to leave at some point, so I guess that would be suspicious activity as well.
“= ;Residences with blackened windows or curtains always drawn” — I don’= t know about members of this House, but my television is in my living room, which = also faces my tiny library and a park where children play. If anyone here has watched Game of Thrones, they w= ould know that it is not suitable viewing for children. That is an example of wh= y my curtains are always drawn. I also have two dogs and they bark at people out= side of the house. My curtains are always drawn, but I guess that could be suspicious activity.
So, wh= at we are doing with this legislation — even when we talk about common signs of illegal activity — is worrisome, because we are encouraging neighbour= s to police one another and make complaints based on suspicions. That can cause = real consequences. I don’t think this makes communities safer.
In the= same breath, we talk about this legislation that has never been reviewed in all = the time that it has been up, and I think it is really fascinating that there is something called the “annual report”. Safer communities and neighbourhoods — and it says the “2019 annual report”, but “annual” makes me think that it should be out every year. It’s annual. It should happen every year, but at this point in time, = the only one I can find online is from 2019. Is there a 2020 report? Is there a 2018 report? Can I go all the way back to 2007 to see what happened in the first year it was out? Is there a way for me to compare year to year what is going on? But right now, I can say with certainty that there is a 2019 annu= al report. Maybe that is a stand-alone report. If that is the case, it should = say “the 2019 SCAN stand-alone report”.
You kn= ow, it is so interesting. My colleague, the Member for Lake Laberge, and I disagree on lots and lots of things. I guess it is no surprise here. It’s no surp= rise to him and it’s no surprise to me, but he just highlighted the lack of public consultation around the amendments to this legislation, and I have to say that I agree. I agree for different reasons, but I absolutely agree. Th= at is good; it’s on the record; it is in Hansard forever that I agree with the Member for Lake Laberge.<= /p>
In a b= riefing for this amendment, it was confirmed that there was zero consultation done = on this amendment. Not a single NGO or community partner was contacted, let al= one the people who are directly affected by SCAN. No one was consulted on this amendment. I have been told before by the Minister responsible for the Yukon Housing Corporation at different times that it is irresponsible to come into this House without having reached out and asked people what they think about things.
I shou= ld have gone through her quote because that was a particularly stinging day in my world. I got chastised for an entire response, but I was chastised because I was told that I didn’t consult with people whom this would affect. I = just said that this was an opposition Wednesday back in the winter of 2020, but = here we are, and government is moving forward legislation. The government wants = to amend legislation, and during the briefing, there was the acknowledgement t= hat there was zero consultation — legislation that was tabled and passed = in 2006.
You kn= ow, it is worrisome. It is worrisome because we know that, just recently, this legislation has come under scrutiny. We know that there has been outrage wh= en we talk about the mother with the number of children who were evicted, and = it wasn’t because she was involved in any illegal practice, but it was t= he perception of being involved. Being evicted with that many children was obviously devastating.
There = are so many concerns about this legislation that representatives for Blood Ties Fo= ur Directions, the Safe at Home society, the Yukon Status of Women Council, and the Yukon Anti-Poverty Coalition all filed affidavits to the Yukon Supreme Court on August 31 — each and every one of them calling for the = Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods A= ct to be reviewed. Each of these organizations is vulnerable because each of t= hese organizations is funded by the Yukon government. Each of them thought that = this legislation was so important and it was so critical that it be reviewed that they filed affidavits in the Yukon Supreme Court to highlight their concerns with this legislation. That is a really big deal, Mr. Speaker.<= /p>
In the= briefing, we were told that it is not the people that SCAN investigates; it’s t= he property. This completely ignores the fact that people live in the property. You can’t just remove people from the equation. You just displace them then; it doesn’t solve the problem.
I had a conversation with Blood Ties Four Directions, and they said: “You kno= w, when there is a house, we support people who are working at harm reduction.” They said that there are times when it is safer for people — and in this case, those who are being investigated for drug reasons — when there is a place where there are harm reduction tools — = so, the crackpipe kits, the naloxone kits, et cetera. The van knows where to go. They build relationships with people accessing that space, and it’s n= ot ideal — no one says that it is ideal, but when that house disbands, we’re displacing people. We are displacing the problem. It is not goi= ng away.
Women&= #8217;s organizations have pointed to a dangerous part of the legislation that hasn’t been touched on, and that is that, under the current SCAN act,= one of the reasons for an investigation is prostitution. That word is outdated = in Canada for lots of reasons — so many reasons. The term that is being = used now by those who practise is actually “sex work”, because prostitution has so many other connotations with it. I am sure that the Minister of Justice is well aware that, under the federal legislation, the = act of sex work itself is not illegal, just the solicitation of it.
The te= rm “prostitution” is outdated. It is dangerous, and it is a sexist description of sex work. It ultimately leads, in this case and with this legislation, to sex workers losing housing, making them even more vulnerabl= e. It is just piling vulnerability upon vulnerability.
When w= e look at this legislation — and I remember the conversations that were happeni= ng in the community in 2006 when this was being brought forward. A good friend= of mine was behind it. Todd Hardy — they were trying to deal with a real= ly complicated situation. This looked like the answer. I appreciate the quote = that the Minister of Justice read from the Chief of the Kwa= nlin Dün First Nation. There is no doubt that t= his at times can be a very helpful tool, but the problem is that, without a review= , we don’t know what works now and what doesn’t work. We know that t= he situation in the world in 2006 and the situation in the world in 2021 are substantially different.
We hav= e all sorts of acts. The Child and Youth Advocate Act is a good example. It says that it must be reviewed every = five years. Well, I can say that we have done a terrible job of that, but it is finally on the docket to be reviewed. But this legislation has no review cl= ause — none. It means that at times the government can make decisions to a= dd things, but it is not being reviewed in its entirety. Although the Member f= or Lake Laberge and I have very different opinions about why it should be reviewed, the commonality is that we both think it should be reviewed. Unli= ke the Member for Lake Laberge, I am interested in moving into Committee of the Whole because I want to ask those questions. I want to understand why these decisions were made.
Back b= etween 2011 and 2016, the Liquor Act w= as brought forward. There was an amendment to make drinking in public in Mayo against the law. We asked at the time why they didn’t want to remove = the word “Indian” from the act.
Why wouldn’t we update the language? We were told, at the time, that it j= ust was too much work at the time to update all of the language in the act, and that, I have to say, was offensive. We were talking about the Liquor Act. There was an opportuni= ty; it was open. Let’s fix it.
Well, = Mr. Speaker, here is the opportunity. There has been an amendment brought forward to upd= ate the Safer Communities and Neighbour= hoods Act, all without review, so I want the justification. I want to underst= and why. Saying that this will help address a whole different set of situations doesn’t acknowledge the harm that it does. It doesn’t talk about the unintended consequences.
I read= the description of what you could do when you were — possible illegal activities. Again, I was challenged that, at times, it would look like I was doing things in my house that were against the law. So, asking neighbours to police each other doesn’t lead to safer communities. This doesn’= ;t encourage that.
Also, = in that same flipside, I acknowledge 100 percent that there are times when I w= ould not encourage people to have the conversations with the neighbours that they are worried about. Absolutely — call in the professionals for that. B= ut, as it stands, there are lots of questions around it. I look forward to hear= ing from the minister in her response, but I do look forward to having that conversation in Committee of the Whole.
With t= hat, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat.
Speaker: If = the member now speaks, she will close debate.
Does a= ny other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things that I should address. I’m going to start with the concept of the court case that h= as been referenced by both members opposite. I appreciate their comments, but it’s important for Yukoners to know that the court case is a challeng= e to one specific section of SCAN that actually supports landlords and enables t= hem to shorten a period of time of notice if they are doing so with respect to = an eviction. In addition to that, that matter will be resolved through the cou= rt process.
I appr= eciate that affidavits have been filed with respect to that, but I think that it’s important that we have this conversation about SCAN — a broader conversation — but that is not what this bill is about.
I thin= k the Member for Lake Laberge talked about arguing against C= EMA, when the court case was there, and the changes to CEMA= — I should note that, at that time, my colleague, Minister Streicker, brought forward the motion to create the CEMA r= eview select committee —
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Point of order
Speaker:=
195;The Member for Lake Laber=
ge, on a
point of order.
Mr. Cathers: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice just referred to the Member for Mount Lorne-Southern Lakes by his name, which, of course, is contrary to our Standing Orders.
Hon. Ms. McPhee: My apologies, Mr. Speaker. I should have made reference to
“the Minister of Community Services” or “the Member for M=
ount
Lorne-Southern Lakes”. I’m sure everyone knows who I am talking
about.
He bro= ught forward the motion to create the CEMA review se= lect committee and voted for it on October 6, 2020. We did not argue against reviewing CEMA because of a court case.<= /p>
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, it is true that this legislation was brought into force with the dedication= of resolving issues and focusing on safety of communities and neighbourhoods. Let’s be clear. What we are doing here is adding three new specified uses. We are adding three activities to the “specified use” definition in SCAN. Those activities are horrible crimes. Consultation that= is considered necessary by my colleagues — I question as to whether or n= ot the focus of those horrible crimes would be necessary.
Let me= say that both my colleagues have agreed that this legislation is useful, and that is= why we have brought these surgical amendments. A full review of the act —= a larger review of the SCAN process — that is a good idea. That is not = what we are talking about here. What we are talking about here is surgical amendments so that those activities could be part of the SCAN opportunities= , or possible investigations.
We als= o have to be clear that these investigations that come from SCAN are complaint-driven. They resolve, going forward, when there is habitual behaviour and when it i= s a specified use. I am sorry that the Leader of the Third Party was making lig= ht of the important work done by the SCAN unit to make neighbourhoods safer. Individuals have been evicted — certainly, they have — with the= ir landlord’s implications and assistance through this process. The vast majority of cases in the last five years have been resolved through warning= s. The vast number of cases do not result in evictions of any kind.
I thin= k that we also have to turn our minds to the idea that living next to a drug dealer p= uts children at risk, puts neighbourhoods at risk, and puts communities at risk= . I know that the comment that came from Chief Bill was a result of her experie= nce with that — of finding needles on the front lawn, of having kids play= ing next door, of having the safety of her community taken into account and challenged.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, the proposed amendments to the SCAN act will expand the scope of specified = use that the SCAN unit can investigate if there is habitual behaviour, if there= has been a complaint, and will add the activities related to child exploitation, criminal organizations, and firearms — illegal firearms’ manufacture and use. It will, in no way, be the mysterious support that the Member for Lake Laberge has connected to federal legislation regarding firearms.
These = changes, as I have said earlier, will not affect the legal ownership of firearms, nor will it affect the legal possession, use, sale, purchase, storage, or transportation of firearms. This amendment will only apply to firearms-rela= ted activities that are currently illegal under the Criminal Code.
The Me= mber for Lake Laberge had quite a well-researched submission on this bill. It spoke primarily of the federal programs, and the focus here, with this bill, is a= bout adding three horrific crimes to specified use to help Yukoners to be safer = in their communities and in their neighbourhoods.
Speaker: Are= you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: Division.
Division
Speaker: Div= ision has been called.
Bells
Clerk: Mr.&n=
bsp;Speaker,
pursuant to the sessional order adopted by this House on October 12, 2=
021,
Motion No. 84, the Member for Mount Lorne-Southern Lakes is participat=
ing in
today’s proceedings by teleconference.
Speaker: Mr.= Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Silver: Agree.
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Streicker: <= span lang=3DEN-CA>Agree.
Hon. Mr. Pillai: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Clarke: Agree.
Hon. Ms. McLean: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Mostyn: Agree.
Mr. Dixon: Disagree.
Mr. Kent: Disagree.
Ms. Clarke: Disagree.
Mr. Cathers: Disagree.
Ms. McLeod: Disagree.
Ms. Van Bibber: Disagree.
Mr. Hassard: Disagree.
Mr. Istchenko: Disagree.
Ms. White: Agree.
Ms. Tredger: Agree.
Clerk: Mr.&n= bsp;Speaker, the results are nine yea, eight nay.
Speaker: The= yeas have it. I declare the motion carried.
Motion for second reading of Bill No. 6 agr= eed to
Bill
No. 202: Second Appropriation =
Act 2021‑22
— Second Reading — adjo=
urned
debate
Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 202, standing in the name of the Hon. Mr. = Silver; adjourned debate, Mr. Dixon.
Mr. Dixon: Mr. Speaker, it’s a pleasure to continue my comments on this supplementary estimat= es bill that is before us today. As I began to explain when I spoke to this la= st time, I’ll focus my comments on a number of departments that arenR= 17;t included in the bill, because this is the only time we’ll have to make comments on those departments, and we’ll focus on, in particular, a f= ew issues within each of them.
I appr= eciate that I will be able to ask — that all of us will be able to ask ̵= 2; questions on these in Committee, but, of course, this will be the only opportunity I have to speak in the main Assembly about this at this point. =
First = of all, Mr. Speaker, I note, in the Premier’s presentation of this, the significant increa= se in net debt as a result of this bill, so, obviously, I have general concern= s as well.
Withou= t too much about the implications of the bill, I want to focus on a few specific departments.
Let me= begin with the Yukon Liquor Corporation and the cannabis corporation, which don’t have appropriations in this budget. Obviously, since the House = has returned, we have a new minister for the Yukon Liquor Corporation, which is interesting. Of course, the previous minister spent a lot of time talking a= bout a number of issues in the department, so I would appreciate hearing an upda= te from the minister in Committee when he gets a chance.
One of= the issues that I’m interested in hearing about is the review of the pric= ing structure that is being launched by the corporation. My understanding is th= at, over the period of COVID support, there has been a broader discussion about= a more comprehensive review of the pricing structure for products in the Yukon Liquor Corporation. Since COVID measures have been in place, there have bee= n a number of supports that have been provided to licensees by way of a percent= age wholesale discount. That wholesale discount, I understand, either has recen= tly changed or will change very soon, and it will be reduced from the rate that= it was at during COVID to a lower rate. My understanding from speaking to a nu= mber of licensees is that there was a fairly comprehensive review being undertak= en that looked at products, looked at wholesale pricing, and looked at categor= ies. Ultimately, a lot of work was done over two years to come up with a new sys= tem, but my understanding is that all of that work has been set aside and the decision was made to simply go with a flat-rate, wholesale discount instead= .
When w= e get into Committee, I would like to hear from the minister about that decision and a= bout whether or not that comprehensive review that was undertaken, which a numbe= r of licensees put a lot of work into, will be actually utilized or if it will simply be focused on the current policy approach, which has been to offer a uniform wholesale discount.
I am a= lso interested to learn if there is further COVID‑related relief that is planned. Obviously, for licensees here in the capital of Whitehorse, busine= ss has close to resumed to some amount of normalcy, but I do know from speakin= g to a number of rural licensees that ongoing support would be welcome and neede= d.
I know= that the tool that the government has used so far to support licensees has been the wholesale discount and not something that is more targeted at individual businesses in rural parts of the territory. To that end, Mr. Speaker, I would be interested in hearing if the new Minister responsible for the Yukon Liquor Corporation is considering any sort of specific supports to licensees outside of Whitehorse who continue to feel the negative impacts of COVID= 209;19 on their businesses.
Anothe= r issue that I have heard about from some brewers is the idea — and something that is being looked at in other provinces — of delivery. In various = ways across the country, there is a system of brewers being permitted to allow f= or direct delivery of their product to their customer. That is not, to my understanding, done currently and it is not allowed in the territory. It is something that has been expressed by some breweries as a point of interest = for them, and so I am curious to hear from the minister at the appropriate time= if they are looking at something to do with delivery for brewers.
The la= st piece on the liquor side — I know that there are a number of trade issues related to alcohol and the trade of alcohol in the country that have occurr= ed over the last few years. In particular, there has been a lot of discussion, through the CFTA and its various working groups, about the issue of alcohol. This is obviously something that transcends both the Yukon Liquor Corporation and the minister’s other department, Economic Development, which I will turn to in a few minutes as well.=
Essent= ially what I am looking for is whether or not the Yukon government is advancing any so= rt of initiatives at the trade table with regard to alcohol. I know that acces= s to Outside markets is a very important aspect for some brewers here in the territory. In particular, I know that Yukon Brewing has had some struggles = with access to the market in Alberta. They previously had a fairly strong footpr= int in Alberta, but as a result of a variety of decisions that have been made, = they have reduced the amount of business that they have been able to do in Alber= ta. I would be interested to hear from the minister if he has spoken to any bre= wers and is pursuing any initiatives with regard to trade and access to markets outside of the Yukon for our local breweries.
As wel= l, I know that there are a number of proposals at the CFTA — the Canadian Free Trade Agr= eement — level with regard to personal exemptions. I know that a decision was taken, presumably by the Premier at the Council of the Federation, to not do away with the personal exemption limit, and some provinces did make that decision.
I unde= rstand — from the media, at least — that the Premier had indicated tha= t it was due to some of the circumstances here in the Yukon — for instance, the alcohol bans that are in place in certain communities in the Yukon. I w= ould like to hear, if possible, when we get into Committee, about that decision = and whether that is something that would be revisited at some point.
Within= that field, I will turn to cannabis. I do note that, just today, there was a bil= l to amend the Cannabis Control and Regu= lation Act, which came as a surprise to me, so I do confess that I don’t fully know exactly what the bill, which was tabled today, will accomplish, = but I do note from a cursory overview that it is related to e‑commerce, w= hich is a very good step. I am happy to hear that. One of the issues that I was going to raise was the availability of e‑commerce to cannabis retaile= rs.
I note= that, over the course of the pandemic through emergency order, the former minister allowed cannabis retailers to access e‑commerce channels for a fixed = period of time. That was then taken away when the ministerial order to that effect= was rescinded. Since that time, a number of cannabis retailers have been seeking that the issue be revisited.
Now, i= f the bill that was tabled today — I note that we haven’t been briefed on = it yet — accomplishes that, I’m sure I will be supporting that bil= l, but I look forward to getting into that on a different day.
Anothe= r issue related to cannabis sales is, of course, the pricing structure. I know that there was a commitment made in April 2019 by the former minister to re= view the pricing structure. My understanding is that retailers are still waiting= for that, and so I look forward to hearing from the current minister about what= the current timeline is for the comprehensive price review for cannabis product= s. In particular, I know that the government markup aspect of the pricing in Y= ukon — at least according to some I have heard from — is one of high= est — if not the highest — in the country. So, I think that if we w= ant to incentivize and encourage our legal cannabis industry to compete with the illegal industry, we need to do everything that we can to support them and ensure that they have the pricing tools available to them to do that.
Speaki= ng of that, Mr. Speaker, the overall model is something that we would like to see reconsidered when it comes to cannabis. I know that the direct-to-retai= ler model of distribution is one that we would prefer, and I think that is the = case in several other provinces. In particular, I find the model in Saskatchewan= to be a far better model that would allow for increased growth in the industry= .
One of= the issues that came up earlier in the stages of legalization was the availabil= ity of product. I know that the corporation has done a lot of work to improve t= he availability of product by signing additional agreements with other wholesalers, but I would like to hear an update on that.
There = are two other issues to do with cannabis, Mr. Speaker. The first is the inabil= ity of local companies to offer loyalty programs for cannabis sales. For instan= ce, if you are a large multi-jurisdictional business that operates in the Yukon, they oftentimes offer loyalty programs. If you buy a certain amount, you are eligible for non-cannabis-related rewards — movie tickets, hockey tickets, and those types of things. That’s something that’s not available to solely local businesses but is available to the bigger chains. That is something that I have heard about.
The la= st piece, Mr. Speaker, is in relation to advertising. Cannabis retailers in Yukon are not able to advertise in the same way that other businesses are. Some of that is becaus= e of federal legislation, but some of it is, of course, because of the Cannabis Control and Regulation Act of Yukon. I think it’s something that should be addressed.
An exa= mple that I’ve heard in the territory is that a retailer of cannabis cannot off= er to sell a t-shirt or so-called “swag” that is labelled with the= ir business in the store, but they can sell it in the building next to them at= the very same store that they also own. That’s something that seems to be fairly nonsensical, so I would like to see that addressed.
Moving= on, Mr. Speaker, I know that my time is short. Another department that we won’t have a chance to speak to is the Department of Economic Development. I raised a few trade-related issues earlier. I do have some questions for the minister abo= ut the new consolidated super fund. I’m curious how the new consolidated= fund is working and whether or not there have been uptake issues already and, if= so, what sort of results have we seen from the new fund and whether or not it h= as been effective at achieving the goals that were set out for it early on. = span>
I have= another series of trade issues as well, Mr. Speaker, that perhaps I can get in= to in Committee, but I think it’s sufficient to note today that I’= ll be raising those with the minister, perhaps in Committee.
I have= a number of questions about the implementation of the CFTA and some of the ongoing work being done by working groups at that table. I do h= ave a number of questions about the Panache investment that was made by the department in the previous Legislature. I know that, at the time, there wer= e a number of questions for the minister about the structure of that deal ̵= 2; some of the policy frameworks within it which were made, or lack thereof, I should say. I look forward to hearing an update about whether or not the outcomes have been achieved that were intended. In particular, has that com= pany been doing regular visits to the Yukon? Have they developed a local presenc= e? And, since then, has the department developed any sort of new framework or policy to deal with future requests like this for investment?
I know= that the First Nation development corporations, who were partners in this deal, certainly have done well from the deal, and I would like to hear if the Yuk= on government has had a similar return on their investment.
I real= ize that I am running short of time, Mr. Speaker, so I will note, as well, for the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission, that I will have a = few questions related to that department. I am particularly interested in the relocation policy and the funding that is provided to prospective employees= for relocation and whether or not we have seen an uptake in that budget line it= em over the years. I am just flagging for the new minister that I will be interested to hear about that issue.
In Com= mittee, my colleague, the Member for Kluane, will have a number of questions on the Environment file for the new minister, so I look forward to getting to those questions as well. I won’t cover them off today.
With t= hat, Mr. Speaker, I want to offer to the ministers of those respective departments a heads-up that those are the kinds of questions that we will ask, and if we aren̵= 7;t able to ask them sufficiently through either debate today on this bill, or = in Committee on this bill, we will just follow up with written questions, beca= use we know that those departments won’t appear before the Legislature wi= th their deputy ministers and ministers, like the other departments that have = line items will.
I hope= that my colleagues across the way can take notice of some of the questions that I h= ave highlighted and perhaps offer to provide some of those answers in due cours= e.
With t= hat, I will conclude my remarks on this bill and look forward to getting into Committee.
Ms. Tredger: I want to speak a bit about the priorities that I see in this budget, because that is to me what a budget is about — it’s about laying out priorities. There are any number of things we can spend our money on, but w= here we choose to spend our money shows what our priorities are for the Yukon. I want to talk about the priorities that I’ve been hearing about from Yukoners. There are many, of course, but the two that come up over and over again when I speak with my constituents is housing and climate change.
Earlie= r, I talked about how much we can do on the policy front related to the housing crisis. It is clear to me that, while this government is certainly throwing= a lot of money at lot development and is scrambling as fast as they can to increase housing supply, this government has not tried to have a conversati= on about how tenants in this territory are protected, about how home investmen= t is out of reach and how people are going to find housing. Developing more homes doesn’t help anyone if other issues aren’t fixed. Having four, five, six, seven, or more hundred-thousand-dollar homes doesn’t help Yukoners who are housing insecure.
Before= we start encouraging more Yukoners to build their investment portfolio, we need to m= ake sure that all Yukoners who don’t have houses and can’t afford to own houses still have access to homes. Why is this government prioritizing wealthy Yukoners who want second or third properties before Yukoners who actually need a safe, warm place to live? This is Poverty and Homelessness Action Week here in the Yukon. For Yukoners who are on the verge of homelessness, affording a new property in Whistle Bend is out of reach. We = need to make sure that everyone has solutions.
Can the government tell me what we are doing in this budget for tenants or for low-income Yukoners to afford a house or to help Yukoners move out of dange= rous situations in hotels and into long-term housing? Has there been any thought given to make the residential tenancies office a helpful, accessible place = for tenants? I have to say that there is not much that I see agreement on betwe= en tenants and landlords, but what they do agree on is that the residential tenancies office is not helpful to anyone.
How is= this government incentivizing developers to build affordable housing? How are we encouraging housing to stay affordable, as prices continue to skyrocket? I = have heard lots from the government about the future possibility of a community = land trust. I would really like to know where that project is at, because those = are the ideas that come from the NGOs from our community that I think have the = real potential to keep housing affordable for everyone.
I also= want to turn to climate change, which is an overarching concern for so many Yukoner= s. I worry when I look at a budget like this that we are trying to fix climate change with a technological solution, as if it was a technological problem.= To counter that, I want to read just the first statement of the Yukon Youth Pa= nel on Climate Change report. They say that they prioritize “… reconnection and sustainable relationsh= ips with the land and people to ensure that social and economic systems are based on reciprocity and supported by ecological integrity.”
That i= s what I hope to see in a budget. That is what I hope to see — not more money = for quick fixes.
They j= ust released their report late last week, so I would not expect to see its call= s to action addressed immediately, but I would hope to see these in future budge= ts. Some of those include education. They have talked about having free tuition= at the Yukon University so that all Yukoners can be educated and have the powe= r of education behind them as they fight for climate action.
They t= alk about increased resources for land use planning, increased resources for climate change investments within the Yukon government, so that everything can be looked at through a climate lens.
They t= alk about separating the enforcement work that is currently done by Energy, Mines and Resources to an independent body, rather than having Energy, Mines and Resources investigating their own projects.
These = are the priorities that Yukoners have, and these are the priorities we need to see reflected in this budget. I look forward to a further conversation about ho= w we can make sure these priorities are reflected in the budget.
Speaker: If = the member now speaks, he will close debate.
Does a= ny other member wish to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all the members in the government, the Official Opposition, and the Third Party who made comments today and over the last week on second reading of our Second Appropriation Act 2021‑22, Supplementary Estimates No.= 1.
Yukone= rs sent us to this place to represent them and the work we do together for the betterm= ent of the territory, and that responsibility rarely comes to a more critical p= oint than when we discuss Yukon’s budgetary future. Again, for all the pro= grams to work, for all the services, for all of the platform commitments, this is= the important conversation for sure. For those colleagues who responded today, thank you very much — and over the last week as well — for enga= ging in this important conversation.
As we = look into the supplementary estimates, which will support Yukon families with afforda= ble, high-quality childcare — that’s extremely important to this Lib= eral government — these are supplementary estimates that will support our territory from unprecedented flooding — again, a huge responsibility toward those who have been impacted by it over the past few months.<= /p>
The in= vestments into our education, with investments as wide-ranging as educational support services throughout the territory to specific construction and maintenance — for example, modular additions at Robert Service School in Dawson C= ity — that will continue to support the individuals and businesses, as we= ll, from Old Crow to Carcross, from Beaver Creek to Watson Lake, during the pan= demic — a lot of those details are also in this supplementary budget.
Also, supplementary estimates invest in the health of our territory, beginning wi= th COVID‑19, and also by integrating midwifery into our health care system and staff-supervised consumption sites as well. These are just a small handful,= Mr. Speaker, of the important measures that we’re looking to implement in the mont= hs and years ahead, all while maintaining a formidable economic outlook with a responsible surplus deficit position.
I̵= 7;m very proud of our team and, in particular, our remarkable public servants who ha= ve put together supplementary estimates to be proud of, and for non-Yukoners t= o be jealous of, as well.
Speaki= ng of public servants, Mr. Speaker, I mentioned a moment ago about how appreciative we are of their commitments and of my colleagues on this bill = and that I thank them for their engagement in this debate — and I do mean= it.
Yet, I= did note that the Member for Lake Laberge did comment disapprovingly last week about= the amount of full-time equivalent positions that he has noticed in the updates= , in the estimates. I’ll make sure that our new hardworking government employees whom he’s talking about — 79 percent of whom are diligently working to make it through the pandemic as helpfully and prosper= ously as possible — that the member opposite has concerns about their employment. But, thankfully, I can contrast this news by sharing that membe= rs on this side of the House are incredibly grateful for their commitment, the= ir work, and the sacrifice that so many of them and their colleagues have faced over the past 19 months.
WeR= 17;ll stay prudent, Mr. Speaker. We’ll ensure that every dollar that this government spends on behalf of Yukoners is a dollar well spent, but we also know of the talent, the ingenuity, and the resolve of Yukoners. It proves t= hat these employees are some of the greatest assets that we could ever ask for = in the territory.
In clo= sing, Mr. Speaker, as I think back to last week, which is when the bill was last discussed, I remember an excellent meeting that I and some of my colleagues had with the Yukon Youth Panel on Climate Change — a panel that our government committed to establishing — we did that in 2019 — and which had= its first call for applications just one year later.
I have= no doubt that the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, the Minister of Environme= nt and of Highways and Public Works and I and the Leader of the Third Party, w= ho were all present at the event, would agree with me that we are so grateful = to our young people, as engaged as they are on these incredibly important issu= es.
These = young people, whom we met with last Friday, are passionately committed to the fig= ht against climate change and to keep our feet to the fire, as elected representatives, in that important fight.
Their = example goes even further. They are the future of Yukon; they are the future of Can= ada and the future of our planet. While they have generously shared their time = with us on the topic of climate change, there are other critically important inv= estments and initiatives that this government will do that will also impact them. So= me of them may choose to have children and raise a family one day and may bene= fit from affordable childcare or our future midwifery options, too. They may ha= ve a younger sibling, or a cousin, who is not yet eligible for a COVID‑19 vaccination and is being protected from the virus, in part, by a government that takes actions to ensure that more of the individuals aged 12 and up ar= ound them have their sleeves rolled up and they have their vaccination.= p>
They m= ay also have a family friend with property in the Southern Lakes, for example, which has been protected from floods more catastrophic than any one of us has ever seen or expected to see in the Yukon.
Mr.&nb= sp;Speaker, for any line in these supplementary estimates, I can think about how these young people will be impacted for the better by the works of this government and the works of the dollars in this budget. They should really be our litm= us test for anything we do, as elected representatives. It’s extremely important what these young people will gain. That’s always the goal, = that the next generation is better off than the previous. That’s a hard conversation in recent years, that’s for sure.
Hopefu= lly, through this budgetary process and the hard work of the public servants, we will have a sustainable, prosperous, and healthy future for them.
I̵= 7;m very pleased to say that this bill, in my opinion, passes that litmus test, and I look forward to general debate, both in Committee of the Whole and the departments as well.
Speaker: Are= you prepared for the question?
Some Hon. Members: Division.
Division
Speaker: Div= ision has been called.
Bells
Speaker: Mr.= Clerk, please poll the House.
Hon. Mr. Silver: Agree.
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Streicker: <= span lang=3DEN-CA>Agree.
Hon. Mr. Pillai: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Clarke: Agree.
Ms. McLeod: Agree.
Hon. Mr. Mostyn: Agree.
Mr. Dixon: Disagree.
Mr. Kent: Disagree.
Ms. Clarke: Disagree.
Mr. Cathers: Disagree.
Ms. McLeod: Disagree.
Ms. Van Bibber: Disagree.
Mr. Hassard: Disagree.
Mr. Istchenko: Disagree.
Ms. White: Agree.
Ms. Tredger: Agree.
Clerk: Mr.&n= bsp;Speaker, the results are nine yea, eight nay.
Speaker: The= ayes have it. I declare the motion carried.
Mot=
ion for
second reading of Bill No. 202 agreed to
Hon. Ms. McPhee: I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the Ho= use resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: It = has been moved by the Government House Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Mot=
ion agreed
to
Spe=
aker
leaves the Chair
Committee
of the Whole
Deputy Chair (Ms. Tredger): = b>Committee of the Whole will now come to order.
The ma= tter before Committee of the Whole is general debate on Bill No. 202, entit= led Second Appropriation Act 2021‑22.
Do mem= bers wish to take a brief recess?
All Hon. Members: Agreed.
Deputy Chair: Committee of the Whole will recess for 15 minutes.
Rec=
ess
Deputy Chair:̳= 5;Committee of the Whole will now come to order.
Bill
No. 202: Second Appropriation =
Act 2021‑22
Deputy Chair: The matter before the Committee is general debate on Bill No. 202, entitle= d Second Appropriation Act 2021‑22= .
Is the= re any general debate?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I am very pleased this afternoon to begin debate on the Second Appropriation Act 2021‑22= in Committee of the Whole. I would like to welcome my Deputy Minister of Finan= ce, Mr. Scott Thompson, to the floor of the Legislative Assembly, of which he is no rooki= e.
I am v= ery pleased to be here, and this bill, otherwise known as the 2021‑22 Supplementary Estimates No. 1, is critical to ensuring that Yukoners can continue to be supported throughout = COVID‑19 and beyond. Deputy Chair, this bill also provides the necessary funding to departments so that many of the supports that Yukoners have, after unpreced= ented flooding this past summer, can be there. It will also make sure that Yukon families will have access to accessible, affordable, quality early learning= and childcare.
We bel= ieve that all families should have access to high-quality and affordable childcare. T= he supplementary estimates address all of these needs and more. While there are costs associated with many of these initiatives, this government remains committed to providing Yukoners with the services that they need and expect, especially during a pandemic.
At the= same time, this bill manages these funding increases responsibly so that we are well-positioned and on our path to recovery as we emerge from the immediate effects of COVID‑19. These supplementary estimates build on the foundation of responsible spending that we established in the 2021‑22 main estimates where we were able to table a modest deficit, despite the effects of the pandemic.
As par= t of the 2021‑22 first supplementary estimates, we see a slight increase to this figure. However, much of the new spending is offset by federal recoveries. In total, this supplementary budget contains $72.2 million in additional gross spending. It can be broken down to $58.4 million in gross operation and maintenance expenditures and an increase of $13.8 million in gross cap= ital spending.
Change= s in the supplementary estimates result in a revised deficit of $18.2 million, = as mentioned, in 2021‑22, or a change of $11.6 million from the forecast from the main estimates. The first supplementary estimates also sh= ow revised year-end net debt of $183.1 million, which is an increase of $= 13.5 million from the May estimates.
As I m= entioned, this government’s ability to leverage its excellent relationship with= the federal government also ensures that appropriate recoveries are in place whenever possible. The results of this collaborative relationship are paying dividends, with $49.4 million in total new recoveries, offsetting almo= st 70 percent of new spending.
The 20= 21‑22 main estimates include a $15‑million COVID‑19 contingency, which was reserved in the government’s fiscal framework to fund further potential support without affecting the surplus or deficit position. Again, this is money that we baked in that wasn’t assigned to any specific spending.
The fi= rst supplementary estimates include a reduction of $4.5 million from the COVID‑19 contingency fund to support the tourism sector, the COVID‑19 call cen= tre, and additional cleaning that was required in buildings. On top of that, we = are trying to be cautious and preserve the ability to respond to new pandemic needs, including possible future waves. This is why we are keeping over $10= million of that COVID contingency line for future use. This contingency in the fisc= al plan is a responsible and transparent way to protect Yukoners against the unknown evolution of this pandemic.
Under = O&M, as I mentioned, the bill contains $58.4 = ;million in new spending. The result is $20.9 million in additional COVID‑= ;related O&M spending and $37.5 million in non-= COVID spending. Part of this increase includes $16.9 million with the Depart= ment of Health and Social Services. The largest portion of this increase, or $10= .7 million, is being used to address additional COVID pressures and is entirely recoverable.
The re= maining amount will go forward and will be for programs and initiatives like midwif= ery at $515,000, a carry-forward amount under the territorial health investment fund at $2.4 million, and initiatives like cultural activities for children out of home care at $1.3 million.
The De= partment of Highways and Public Works also requires a further $5.8 million in funding to cover costs related to the pandemic. Of this funding, $5.3 = million represents a distribution of federal funds flowing through the Government of Yukon to support air carriers in order to maintain essential air services to the communities. This amount is also entirely recoverable.
In the supplementary estimates, we are including $4 million to continue supporting Yukon businesses and individuals through the tourism accommodati= on sector supplement and the tourism non-accommodation sector supplement, also known as TAS and TNAS respectively. These progr= ams help tourism-reliant Yukon businesses remain solvent by providing funding u= p to the break-even point.
The to= urism accommodation supplement provides up to $400 per room each month up to the point of break even for eligible accommodation businesses. Under the tourism non-accommodation supplement, businesses can receive up to $60,000 between = October 1, 2021 and March 31, 2022 to cover eligible expenses up to the point of break even. This extends the total amount eligible for non-accommodation businesses from $60,000 to a total cap of $120,000 in the 2021‑22 fis= cal year.
Deputy= Chair, as of September 23, these programs have provided $4.4 million to sup= port businesses. We also extended the paid sick leave rebate from September = ;30, 2021 to September 30, 2022. Since being launched in March 2020, o= ver 180 businesses have benefited from nearly $850,000 in support from that paid sick leave program.
Changi= ng the focus to non-COVID expenses, I would like to speak on the record of record flooding that we have seen in the territory. The effects of this flooding w= ere felt by many Yukoners over the past few months, but perhaps no group more t= han the homeowners in southern Yukon who dealt with the uncertainty of losing t= heir homes. In my second reading remarks, I extended thanks to all those who hel= ped during this time, but it is absolutely worth repeating. We are extremely grateful to every individual and every group that played a role in making s= ure that Yukoners didn’t lose their homes, from Yukon government personne= l to municipal and First Nation governments, incident management teams from out = of territory, flood specialists, engineers, the Canadian Armed Forces, property owners, community members, and all the volunteers. Again, thank you — thank you to every single one of you. As part of the supplementary estimate= s, approximately $11 million will go toward flood mitigation and response efforts.
With r= espect to wildfires, $250,000 will go toward efforts to enhance First Nation FireSmart projects. Looking forward, we must plan for extreme weather events by creating wildfire- and climate-resistant communit= ies and investing in infrastructure that protects us from climate disasters. = span>
Our go= vernment is working with local leaders and stakeholders to create community wildfire preparedness plans for Yukon communities. In flood-prone communities, it wi= ll be important to consider infrastructure improvements — permanent dike= s or breakwaters, raising up roads and highways to adequate heights to protect t= hem against the rising water.
Also, = in Community Services, $1.1 million will go toward Emergency Medical Serv= ices — EMS — for additional staff.
Moving= to early learning and childcare, we have $9.9 million that will go toward cover= ing costs associated with these programs in the Department of Education. As I mentioned earlier, we believe that all families should have access to high-quality, affordable childcare. The new universal childcare system in Y= ukon provides children with an opportunity for learning and development in these early years. I am very pleased to report that every penny of this funding is recoverable from Canada.
There = will be $375,000 included in this supplementary budget as part of a transfer agreement to the Queer Yukon Society for the Pride Centre.
Finall= y, this supplementary estimate includes a number of initiatives related to wildfire protection and habitat mapping. The largest of these initiatives includes $620,000 in the Department of Environment’s Fish and Wildlife branch = for updated moose surveying. Also in Environment is $23,000 for the Porcupine caribou herd sampling recovery and $36,000 for Fish and Wildlife meadow-map= ping recovery.
I am g= oing to turn my attention to capital. There are a number of increased projects incl= uded in our capital plan for this year. In this supplementary estimate, we will = see increases for the Mayo-to-McQuesten transmission line and battery grid proj= ect; $6.4 million represents funds that were deferred in 2020-21 to this ye= ar as a result of COVID‑19-related delays. That work can now proceed. Th= is funding, again, is 100‑percent recoverable.
The supplementary budget also includes $2.4 million in additional funding = for modular classrooms at the Robert Service School in Dawson City and $36 = ;million more for the Whitehorse housing complex at 4th Avenue and Jeckell Street. The former is 100‑percent recoverable.
There = is also $1 million in this budget for program increases under the Innovative Renewable Energy Initiative. This will allow more applications to be approved, helping to increase the supply of renewable energy and reduced diesel consumption in t= he Yukon.
An add= itional $5.8 million will also go toward capital costs in Health and Social Services, with a portion of these costs to help Yukon meet its goal under Putting People First. This include= s $2.3 million for Canada Health Infoway and $1.5 million for Meditech. Both are under the 1Health program. The $5.8 million also includes $1.7 million = for renovations needed at Copper Ridge Place and there are also some decreases = in capital spending. Most notably, there is a $6‑million decrease in spending for urban land development. This decrease results from the repacka= ging of the Whistle Bend phase 7 tender, which will be re‑released in the fall. This timing change allowed us to accelerate rural lot development so = that there is a $3.7‑million increase in spending for developing rural lot= s in places like Haines Junction, Dawson City, and Watson Lake.
As I m= entioned, many of these notable increases come with significant recoveries. This is, again, thanks to a very positive relationship that we have with the federal government and our partners, and I am pleased to say that the result of this work with our federal partners means that, of the $13.8 million in new capital spending, nearly all of it — $12.3 million — is recoverable.
On the= O&M side, almost 70 percent of new O&M spending, or $37.1 million, is recoverable.
This o= ngoing contribution with our partners is quite the feat. It is critical in ensuring our ability to deliver on services, infrastructure, and investments that all Yukoners expect. The number of recoveries span a lengthy list, but I will d= etail some of the more prominent ones for members today.
On the= O&M side, the $10.7 million mentioned earlier for= COVID‑related spending in Health and Social Services is entirely recoverable. In Educatio= n, the $9.9 million is recoverable for early learning and childcare, and a future $3 million is recoverable in carry-forward funding for the Yukon lab= our market development agreement and the Yukon workforce development agreement.=
Within= the Department of Environment, Yukon will see $334,000 in federal funds under t= he Inuvialuit Final Agreement, $291,0= 00 under the northern climate change preparedness agreement extension, and many smaller recoveries for some of the wildlife-related expenditures that I mentioned earlier.
On the= capital side, members will note that I detailed most of the recoverable items when I spoke to the adjustments in capital spending.
Now, b= efore I turn things over to other members, Deputy Chair, I would also like to speak= a bit about changes in revenue. As I mentioned in the second reading, the 202= 1‑22 first supplementary estimates reflect a decrease of $10 million in revenues. The most significant impact on the Yukon’s revenues is reflected in t= he $8.5‑million decrease to reflect the timing of those lots sales. The remaining decrease in revenue is split between supports to Yukoners and Yukon’s industries and a decrease in revenues at several continuing c= are facilities.
For th= e latter, there would be a net decrease of $651,000 in revenues associated with these facilities as an increase in respite, and re-ablement<= /span> revenues at Thomson Centre is offset by decreases owing to facility vacanci= es at Whistle Bend Place and the closure of Birch Lodge.
With r= espect to the former, some fees, including aviation fees, were waived or reduced, decreasing those potential revenues; $450,000 of that decrease is associated with support for the industry by foregoing aviation operation expenditures. Another $430,000 is associated with reduced fishing licence and campground revenues due to decreased levels of tourism and travel.
In con= clusion, it is always my absolute pleasure to lay out the budget for the upcoming ye= ar but also to update members on our supplementary budgets. Within the territo= ry, we have continued to face challenges related to COVID‑19 — new clusters and rising case counts over the summer.
We alw= ays have much to be optimistic about heading into the winter. We have seen first-hand the decreasing amounts of COVID‑19 related to spending and, through t= he interim fiscal and economic updates, an increase in our projections of real= GDP and other economic indicators. It is with great optimism that I can say that better days are ahead for the territory, and I look forward to continuing to make Yukon the best place to live.
With t= hat, I will conclude my remarks by saying that I look forward to a productive deba= te with all Members of the Legislative Assembly. I will also include reassuran= ce that if I do not have the answers about specific departments, appropriate ministers will be pleased to respond during their departmental debate, including some of those departments that, as the Leader of the Official Opposition mentioned, will not be here because they don’t have a budg= etary item. I spoke with ministers, and they are happy — again, in general debate, I will do what I can, but written responses could be accomplished in those departments.
Mr. Dixon: Thanks to the Premier for his opening remarks and providing some information about= the budget that is before us now. I will begin very briefly with a few fairly b= road questions. I hope that the minister can offer some information that we can discuss.
Can th= e Premier give us an overview of where we are with regard to the territorial financing formula and whether or not we will see any changes coming in the near futur= e? The Premier mentioned the strong relationship with the federal government a= nd the fact that the increases that we’ve seen over the last years have = been a result of that.
My que= stion is simply: What does the Premier see coming down the pike in future years?
Hon. Mr. Silver: We do know that the federal government is conducting a review = of the transfer. We will have an opportunity at the Finance ministers’ meeti= ngs to have a conversation — sometimes dwarfed by equalization conversati= ons, I must admit. At the same time, we do know that there is a review coming to that specific question. Suffice it to say that every year we have been seei= ng an increase in that transfer.
Mr. Dixon: Over the past number of years, the increase to the TFF has been fairly predictable. What is the annual increase to the TFF from last year?
Hon. Mr. Silver: As my colleague looks to get that number, I will let the member opposite ask another question and we will get that answer for him.= p>
Mr. Dixon: I appreciate that. The question was very specific, so I appreciate that my colleagues need to find the time for those answers.
The re= ason I am asking is that I am interested to know if the review that is being conducte= d by the federal government will consider the historic increases that we have se= en. Is there any sort of framework for maintaining the current formula, or are = we anticipating a more comprehensive overview that is going to reconsider the actual details of the formula and whether or not we see the types of annual increases that we have seen?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Again, a pretty specific question — as the member opposi= te knows, this is a very complicated algorithm that comes with this formula. In that, a lot of it is based on not only spending here, but also spending rig= ht across the country. This is over a rolling average, not just one year, but = the effects of spending for COVID will be an interesting part of this conversat= ion as we talk with Finance ministers right across Canada, so the details will = come out about that.
What i= s really interesting for me, as well, is, from the federal government’s perspective, how we turn from relief to recovery. We have been making a push for help from the federal government, as Prince Edward Island has, when it comes specifically to tourism. We have always been making the push when it comes to everything — from the Canada health transfer to flexible infrastructure dollars. With the help of my colleagues right across the nor= th — the premiers in the other two territories — we have been very effective at bringing our narrative to western premiers and then to the Cou= ncil of the Federation and then to the First Ministers’ meetings about the unique differences of living in the north.
There = is going to be a lot to debate, for sure. When it comes to the revenue sources from = the federal government, the 2021‑22 estimates for the Government of Canada would be $1,442,280,000. That is comparable to the 2020-21 forecast of just over $1.4 billion, or $1,401,907,000. Compare that to an estimate in the 2021-21 fiscal year of $1,307,946,000 and the actual of 2019-20, which is $1,225,191,000, so the grant from Canada went up 5.8 percent from the 2020-= 21 estimates.
Mr. Dixon: For context, one of the reasons that this is coming up today — what we se= e at the federal level is a deteriorating public finance picture for the country= and the country taking on fairly massive new debt. That has prompted a lot of speculation in the media nationally — typically in the bigger provinc= es than here in the north — about the ability of the federal government = to continue transferring money to the provinces and territories at the rate th= at it has been over the last few years.
In tha= t context, when we learn that there is a review of the TFF, obviously that can raise some concern if the federal government is looking = at its fiscal picture and looking at ways to save money. It may be an unfortun= ate coincidence, but conducting a review of the TFF= may be the time they look at to do that.
What I= am looking for is some assurances from the Premier that he is advocating with = the federal government to either maintain or continue to enhance the TFF. If there is more information about the review th= at Finance Canada is conducting, we would be interested to learn more about th= at.
Hon. Mr. Silver: I agree that there is an awful lot of speculation, interest, a= nd concern about spending federally. Again, as of yet, as far as any substanti= al changes to the formula, that is not information I have. I don’t know = if the member opposite has been hearing to the contrary; I haven’t. I can’t see any substantive changes coming to that. We always make the point that, on the grand scheme of things, the three territories are a very, very small part of the spending right across Canada.
We als= o have a united front with the premiers right across Canada of recognizing the diffe= rences between territories and provinces. We don’t spend a lot of time talki= ng about equalization when it is our time to stand and talk at Finance ministers’ meetings or at the Council of the Federation or the First Ministers’ meetings because we are on the TFF, but we also do really appreciate that we have acknowledgement from the prem= iers of those provinces as well of the unique differences here in the north.
We saw= that when the National Advisory Committee on Immunization came out with how we really need to prioritize northern, remote, and rural communities. That transferred into the territories, specifically. You could argue that all of Canada is northern, remote, and rural, if you put things in context, but having the ability to have a decided-upon understanding of the unique territorial considerations is extremely important.
Back t= o the concerns from the members opposite, we have had conversations with Canadian investment banks as well, saying things like: To recover from a war is one thing, but to recover from a pandemic — they are two different things. There is a lot of discretionary spending that people are sitting on right n= ow, which does bode well for the economy moving forward. I would say that, specifically, when you look at the context of Yukon, we were very concerned about economies, and we have done very well in the last few years. We had an estimated growth of 1.1 percent GDP for 2020. The Yukon’s real gross domestic product, the GDP, is forecasted to grow by six percent in 2021 and= 8.1 percent in 2022.
We had= a successful rollout, as I have mentioned, of vaccinations. That was key to allowing us to lift restrictions on capacity and social distancing that had weighed on economic activity. We know, as well, that the removal of internal border restrictions and the loosening of international restrictions support= ed a faster recovery. Suffice it to say that these are really important, as the different jurisdictions start to get back to some kind of sense of normalcy= and recovery. This is good for revenues locally and nationally. It is an extrem= ely important conversation that will be continually analyzed, obviously.=
To dis= pel some of the fears from the opposition — or some of the questions — I really don’t see substantive changes to the TFF<= /span> at this point. When it comes to transfers from Canada, in December 202= 0, the federal government confirmed again, as I said, that the fiscal grant fr= om Canada would be $1.118 billion. The total grant consists entirely of the territorial formula financing — the TFF &= #8212; grant, and there are no deductions because of resource offsets, which is go= od to know for the members opposite.
Global= resource revenues represent the Yukon government’s revenues for forestry, oil = and gas, land, minerals, and water, and every dollar above $6 million in global resources revenues is offset by a $1 deduction in the grant from Can= ada. So, just a little bit of context there, as far as no deductions because of those offsets, but they will be coming.
In add= ition, just for some information, and then I’ll cede the floor, the federal government provided those estimates for 2021‑22 for the fiscal year, = as related to the Canada health transfer, the CHT,= and that’s $47.9 million. The Canada social transfer, the CST, is $1= 7.2 million. These amounts are reflected in the 2021‑22 main estimates. These transfers are legislated by Canada for the five-year period from 2019 to 20= 24. Discussions on renewal for 2025 to 2029 have begun, and they will be conclu= ded by December 2023.
The de= partment expects that changes, if any, will be minor and may be technical in nature, but, again, that’s the information we have at this point.
Mr. Dixon: When did the federal government begin the review of the TFF= , and when did the department and/or the Premier learn of this?
Hon. Mr. Silver: There would be a difference between the political level or the technician level. = On the political level, we haven’t had that conversation, but I would say that, on the technical level, those conversations are continuing all the ti= me. Again, in the last note that I gave, the transfers being legislated for a five-year period, those discussions for renewal are for 2025 to 2029. Again= , as far as them beginning and concluding in December 2023, they have not b= een brought up at the Finance ministers’ meetings, which is the technical table where we would have those conversations — or, sorry, the politi= cal table where we would have those conversations.
Mr. Dixon: So, just so I am clear, the federal government has indicated at a technical lev= el, or departmental level, that they are conducting a review, and I assume that= the Department of Finance is having ongoing discussions, but the Premier has sa= id that he has never spoken to the Prime Minister or the federal minister about this. Do I have that right?
Hon. Mr. Silver: What I said was that, at the Finance ministers’ meetings= , this conversation has not been brought up — remembering that these meetings have been very focused on COVID — and I have been briefed by our technical teams if there are any changes being proposed with the information that I have, from conversations that our government has had with the federal government, minor and technical details — if I see a flag, then I wou= ld definitely be concerned, and I would add that to the national conversation.= At this point, we have seen no flags to indicate that there is going to be a concern.
If the= member opposite has a particular concern, I would be more than willing to discuss = that to figure out whether this is worthy of being brought up at any table, eith= er technical or political.
Mr. Dixon: I don’t have a specific concern. My concern is simply that we see a deteriorating financial picture at the federal level, decreasing capacity to provide the kinds of funding that we have seen over the last little while, = and then, in that context, we learn, just now, from the Premier, that the feder= al government is conducting a review of the TFF, w= hich sparks these questions. I don’t have any alternative source of information about this or anything like that. I am just strictly going on w= hat he has said today.
He did= also indicate that the review would not take effect until the 2025-29 cycle, I believe, so if the Premier could confirm that, I would appreciate that as w= ell.
Hon. Mr. Silver: The answer is yes.
Mr. Dixon: In his remarks, explaining it a few questions ago, the Premier referenced that= he had been in discussions with a Canadian investment bank. I am wondering if = he can tell us which investment bank that is or if he meant something differen= t by that.
Hon. Mr. Silver: Deputy Chair, Canada Investment Bank. My apologies.
Mr. Dixon: I will move on.
Could = the Premier explain a little bit more on the COVID contingency fund? This was a unique addition to the budget in the spring, which we typically haven’= ;t seen before — a contingency fund of that size — a line item that has no clear use, going forward. We knew that it was going to be related to COVID, but as we have learned, COVID affects pretty much everything in the government’s budget. I am wondering how the decision is made internal= ly to allocate funds from that $10 million line, as opposed to having departments go back and seek additional funding themselves.
Is the= re some sort of funding rubric or matrix that is used to make that decision? How was the decision made to allocate the funds to the three items that the Premier mentioned that were spent under the COVID contingency, which I wrote down as being for the tourism fund, the call centre, and some additional cleaning?<= /span>
So, my= question is: How did the government decide to allocate funds from the COVD contingency for something like cleaning when, I = would think, that would be done at a departmental level through a normal appropriation?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I will begin with why we would put $15 million aside in t= he main estimates. We were in a good financial position to do so. We presented= a very mild deficit at that time. That mild deficit included a $15‑mill= ion COVID contingency. We knew, at that time, that we were not done with COVID = and that COVID is not done with us. We also know that there is federal programm= ing and federal recoveries. We saw flexibility and quick thinking from national conversations with all the Premiers to try to grapple with specifics that a= ll the jurisdictions are facing. Usually what ends up happening with the feder= al funding — it’s a conversation of national consideration, obviou= sly, and that every jurisdiction is finding problems with — whether it be = PPEs or relief for certain business sectors, those types of things.
Suffic= e to say that the three things we are talking about on the floor of the Legislative Assembly today is that we are looking for approval from the Legislative Assembly through the budgetary process for those things because we put asid= e a contingency to be open and accountable to say that we believe that we are g= oing to have to spend more money on COVID. There are going to be recoveries from= the federal government, so let’s make sure that we maximize those recover= ies and get the flexibility that we need with our federal conversations, which = were weekly from my office alone. What remains is what you see here today. There= are three specific things that we believe should be used from that rainy day fu= nd.
Mr. Dixon: A quick question — the Premier said $15 million. Is that indeed wh= at it was? I thought it was $10 million. I could have that wrong. I apolo= gize if I’m wrong.
Hon. Mr. Silver: Yes, $15 million was in the mains. Now that we have ident= ified roughly $5 million in those three things — $4.5 million = 212; we still have, again, about $10.5 million left. That is probably where= the member opposite is getting that $10‑million number. It is the money t= hat is leftover right now. We have assigned the $4.5 million for those thr= ee items that he referenced.
Mr. Dixon: I will move on. The Premier mentioned the early learning funding in the new program. That was a program that was identified in the spring budget of 202= 1.
My fir= st question was — the Premier had indicated that every dollar — I believe those were his words — was recoverable in that program. I ass= ume that he meant it was recoverable from Canada. Can the Premier confirm that every dollar in the early learning program that they have announced is recoverable?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Every dollar on the floor of the Legislative Assembly here for= the supplementary is 100‑percent recoverable.
Mr. Dixon: Is that a result of the agreement between the federal government and the Yukon that was made and signed in late July?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Yes, again, working with Canada to build that community-based = system that provides Yukon families with that high-quality, affordable, flexible, inclusive early learning and childcare and getting it to money that is recoverable is definitely part of the agreement made with the federal gover= nment. We have made significant and ongoing investment in early learning and childcare, and we’ve reached that agreement in accessing an additional $54.3 million in federal funding over the next five years to support t= his investment. It’s extremely important to put that on the floor today as well.
The ad= ditional funding is going to help to enhance recruitment, retention, and the develop= ment of early childcare educators, as well as culturally appropriate early learn= ing and childcare programming, inclusive early learning and childcare, and also= to support space creation, including start-up funds, wages for early childhood educators — all very important to us when we spoke with the federal government.
As you= know, Deputy Chair, we were already committed to this before the federal governme= nt made their announcements. Then to go back to them and say, “Well, here are the things that are important to us; here is what we need in our agreem= ent. This is what we need if the federal government is looking toward more of a = national programming” — these are the things that were extremely importa= nt to our government. That funding also helps to support the reduction of pare= nt fees to remain, on average, less than $10 a day for Yukon’s universal childcare program.
A litt= le bit more background: Between the 2017-18 fiscal year and the 2020-21 fiscal year, Yu= kon did receive a total of $9.6 million from Canada under the Canada-Yukon Early Learning and Child = Care Agreement, and the Government of Yukon has made very significant and on= going financial investments with that.
WeR= 17;ve also signed, as we’ve said, these agreements with the federal government, = and now we’re seeing the recoveries therein in the supplementary budget.<= /span>
Mr. Dixon: I understand that the funding came from the bilateral agreement prior to the signing of the new agreement that was signed between the Minister of Educat= ion here and the federal minister back in July. I appreciate the Premier’s willingness to provide some details there, but I’ll save my specific questions about the program and some of the structure of it for the Ministe= r of Education when we get into Committee with that minister.
My que= stion at this stage is more about the budgetary implications of this program and the decision to include it in the mains of the budget in the spring. Following = that decision and the passage of the budget earlier this spring, the government signed a large new agreement that brought in a bunch of new money. <= /p>
My que= stion is: Is the money that is in this supplementary recoverable from Canada as a res= ult of the agreement that was signed, or is it something that we had already planned for, prior to the agreement being signed in the summer?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I am just trying to figure out the logic there. When the feder= al government makes their announcement, then we start working with them. We ha= ve decided already that this was important. To say that there were rumblings f= rom the federal government about universal childcare — well, there have b= een rumblings from a few different federal governments on a few different initiatives nationally. We weren’t going to wait; we were going to in= vest in that. We have done the fiscal accountability to put ourselves in the position. The determination that we made before the federal government was based on the index of well-being. This was the first time that we had the c= hief medical officer of health — that office — contributing to this statistical analysis of how we are, as Yukoners, and where we are. Out of t= hat study came disparaging results about how COVID is not as friendly to single parents and women, and we believed that this was an extremely important investment because of that.
Moving= forward, the federal government makes a decision to go ahead and put their money whe= re their mouth is, and then all of the details about the money that comes out = and the recoverables start at that time. I am wonde= ring if the member is making a parallel between the $10 million COVID and something here in the federal agreement. I am getting a no from the member opposite, so I will just stop there. The numbers are very similar, but, yes, that is how things kind of move forward.
We mov= ed forward on our plan for early learning and childcare. This was an evidence-based decision based on the index of well-being. That was the genesis of the conversation that ended in a Management Board decision. We were grateful th= at the federal government has a very similar initiative or ideal with how we f= und and making sure that the funding not only decreases the cost to parents, but also invests in spaces and invests in professional training of educators in that demographic of students and children that is very, very important. The= re are lots of stats to say that a dollar invested in a young person’s m= ind compared to that same amount of investment in high school — we can qu= ote all those different things. We thought it was an extremely important invest= ment and we are very happy to see a like-minded philosophy to early learning and childcare from the federal government.
Mr. Dixon: What I am asking is that, in the spring budget — the March budget — = the Government of Yukon decided to make this large investment. It was something that they spent a lot of time talking about. The press release from March 9 indicated that more than $25 million would be in the 2021‑22 bud= get toward this new program, and $15 million of that was for a new — what they called at the time — “Yukon-wide universal childcare program”. They made that investment in the budget and the budget pass= ed. Subsequent to that, the federal government signed an agreement with them to give a whole bunch of new money to them for that program. I am asking how t= he fiscal picture changes as a result of that agreement. What the Premier just told us now is that the agreement is worth roughly $50-some million ov= er the next five years, which is about $10 million a year, assuming that it’s given out equally per year.
My que= stion is: How have the recoverables on that changed since= the signing of that agreement? The budget was appropriated, the money was voted= on in the spring, and then an agreement after the fact to provide a bunch of n= ew money was signed, so I am wondering how that changed.
Hon. Mr. Silver: Again, we put in our initial investment. I wouldn’t say necessarily that it would be a linear relationship as well, because if you build more, then you are going to spend more on this program. You know, the= re is also an upfront cost as well. So, to say that it would be a linear cost,= I would disagree respectfully.
We did= invest heavily in this program. The feds came on board with $10 million, which will now be recoverable for that initiative, and it allows us to invest in more, and quicker, as well.
Mr. Dixon:= 195;The point was that, in the spring, this money was not recoverable from the fede= ral government. As a result of the agreement signed in July, it is now recovera= ble. That was my question.
How ha= s the budget changed as a result of that agreement and the fact that the funding = is now recoverable, where, in the spring, when they passed the budget, it wasn’t recoverable?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I hope that I’m not adding to the confusion here. It is = not my intent.
None o= f that $15 million up front is recoverable. The federal government comes in with $10 mill= ion. That makes that $10 million of the total investment recoverable from t= he federal government.
Again,= we can say then that it is more money. Yes, it is — more money than what was budgeted in the first year — but with that federal supplement, it all= ows us to do more in that first year as well. I hope that helps to clear things= up.
Mr. Dixon: Deputy Chair, yes. I will move on.
The Pr= emier, in his opening statements, mentioned funding for air carriers and that it was recoverable from Canada. I am wondering if he can elaborate on the funding = that was provided to air carriers under the federal funding and whether the syst= em, or the allocation amounts to the various air carriers here in Yukon, was a decision that was made by the Yukon government, or was that based on some parameters from the federal government?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I think that the specifics of how the department and the mini= ster worked with aviation companies in the Yukon would be information that I wou= ldn’t necessarily have here on the fly, but you could definitely have that conversation with the minister when he appears at Committee of the Whole. I= do know — as we all know — how essential aviation is for connecting our communities. Our government was able to continue to make strategic investments to keep our aerodromes and our airports safe and open for busin= ess. Our investments and their investments — the federal government’s investments — and the conversations from the department — our government made significant investments in aviation over the past few years, including upgrades to equipment and facilities. We mentioned, as well, in t= he beginning speech about the waiving of airport fees. However, we know that t= here is more work that needs to be done, as well, in the future, and those conversations are ongoing. It is always a pleasure to be able to sit down w= ith somebody like Wendy Tayler or somebody like Joe Sparling or any of our other smaller aviation operators in the Yukon. Those conversations help, not only when it comes to conversations with the federal government when they come in with some recoverable federal support for COVID, but also for the Minister = of Economic Development and Tourism and Culture — these things, when we = are developing our projects, our programs, here as well.
Since = the pandemic began, the Government of Yukon distributed over $6 million to support air carriers that provide that critical and essential service. This funding supports the aviation industry, which has been among the hardest hi= t, as we all know, by COVID‑19. Since the beginning of the pandemic, air passenger traffic has declined dramatically. Airlines have faced staffing layoffs and the grounding of planes. I keep seeing folks whom I normally se= e in airplanes working in other areas to try to supplement their incomes.=
Our go= vernment has also administered funding from the federal government through COVIDR= 09;19 to ensure that essential services and medevac operations continue. Sorry, I= am confusing two different things. We help with the federal government for the= recoverables that we are talking about here, but thro= ugh our investment — administering our funding — that was more about making sure that these essential services and medevac operations continued.=
Especi= ally in the early days of COVID, to have access to the professional centres —= the DNA centres, basically — in Vancouver, which was industry standard, b= est efficacy as far as testing goes, and to have Air North, a local provider, b= eing able to help us with that — yes, in the first few months and first ye= ar, it was all about traceability. That statistical analysis that we had becaus= e of the quick response from the best testing was extremely important to our low case numbers.
On add= itional support for local industry, we waived those fees in December. I am just mak= ing sure I have all the information and the very specific numbers. To date, the aviation relief funding that we’ve operated with is $6.5 million= , as I mentioned. If the member opposite wants to have a better understanding of= the conversations between the minister and his team when it came to how he parl= ayed the information from local providers — local aviators — to the federal government, I don’t have as wide a breadth of knowledge on th= at as the minister does, so that would be a better place for it.
Mr. Dixon: I only asked because the Premier referenced it in his opening comments, so I thought he might have a bit more information, but I will reserve the questi= on about how the air carrier funding was allocated and the determination by wh= ich it was allocated for the Minister of Highways and Public Works when we get = to that department.
I will= move on. The Premier also mentioned the flooding that happened this summer and some = of the funding that has been allocated in this budget as a result of that. I k= now that the funding in this supplementary is in relation to money that was actually spent on the response to the flood, so I understand that. But one = of the issues that has come up — and there has been a lot of discussion about it from members of the public, especially in affected areas — is what the possibility for ongoing future relief might look like.
Has the government begun a conversation internally or with the federal government a= bout flood relief funding and whether or not there will be a specific program th= at will be catered toward this so-called “once-in-400-years event”= or whatever it was, or will it be based on the normal flood relief funding tha= t is offered either through the federal government or the Yukon government?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Interesting phrasing of “so-called” 400-year event= . When we were out in Marsh Lake and talking to people whose houses were right the= re on the shore and they are showing us the levels of the once-in-200-years ev= ent back in the early 2000s — 2007 — they were kicking themselves n= ow because they will never use that terminology ever again of “once in a decade” or “once in a two-century cycle”, because clearly within less than two decades, we have seen massive flooding. To say that th= is would be a one-off or a once-in-an-X amount of centuries event — I think you would have a hard time convincing the people living out there that they shouldn’t have to prepare for it for another 400 years.
The re= sources that were deployed to respond to the 2021 flooding resulted in expenditures exceeding $8.5 million, as we discussed earlier. So, I will give a lit= tle bit of a breakdown of that: $750,000 for personnel to fill the incident management team roles, such as the commander, the finance officials, logist= ics, planning — for every person you see out with the sandbags, there is a whole team of other folks in the logistical, finance, and planning componen= ts, but also personnel deployed to fill the sandbags, obviously, maintain the pumps, conduct inspections, and communicate with residents, as well as to h= ire three interprovincial task teams from Manitoba and Alberta — who were amazing people and provided invaluable expertise. There was additional cost= , as well, for personnel, which exceeded about a half-a‑million dollars, to hire casual employees to assist with response. They incurred overtime as we= ll in response to the incident — request for extended hours quite often.=
There = was $550,000 expensed to local caterers who provided meals to those who were on= the flood response, including on-site for crews outside of Whitehorse and to the incident management teams that were working extended hours at the Elijah Sm= ith Elementary School. The budget breaks down to $80,000 for provisions of food= and transportation to the Canadian Armed Forces soldiers who supported the event until August 2.
Anecdo= tally, Deputy Chair, talking to these Armed Forces individuals and asking them, “Where were you last? Where do you go next? How has your experience b= een during COVID?” — what I got from not just one but many of these individuals — they said: “We have never seen the level of hospitality that we’ve seen here among Yukoners.” They said, “You’re feeding us so very, very well.” Knowing the chefs= on a first-name basis — they couldn’t get over the exceptional Yuk= on hospitality. I wasn’t surprised; I don’t think anybody in this Legislative Assembly would be surprised by that, but it sure was great to h= ear this from the soldiers.
Contin= uing on this — more than $2.5 million to many local contractors was spent who hired and put in countless hours supporting the response by providing h= eavy equipment; $700,000 to Yukon First Nations Wildfire, which provided front-l= ine assistance as well; $240,000 for vehicle rentals to transportation crews and equipment; $780,000 for service contracts and for rentals and sewer pump-ou= ts; and $2.4 million to purchase equipment from local vendors wherever possible, including pumps, hoses, sand rock, poly — the list goes on.=
An add= itional $2.9 million being set aside for remediation and recovery — that’s where it begins the next phase. So, $2.9 million is being= set aside for that remediation and recovery.
We hav= e begun conversations internally: Yukon Housing Corporation survey to assess the ne= eds of the affected communities and community members and property owners; and = EMO is planning to engage experts and engineers as well to evaluate the options= for permanent mitigation, which is extremely important. Also, externally, the Y= ukon will work with the federal government through the DFAA= process. We will see work recovery money from that as per our recovery form= ula. I don’t have much more detail on that. Again, it will be a great ques= tion for the minister responsible.
We did= hold an open house meeting last week with the Marsh Lake community to continue to understand how to support community members. We have an open house this evening, I believe, at Lake Laberge to support that community as well.
Mr. Dixon: My comment about the once in however many years was not meant to cause any sor= t of disagreement. I simply could not remember how many years it was. When we we= re briefed by hydrologists, we were given a date, which was, I believe, of onc= e in 300 or 400 years. I apologize for not getting the number right if I was wro= ng about that.
My que= stion, though — and the Premier began to address it at the tail end of his comments there — was about the potential creation of a new program related to remediation and recovery and whether or not the department or the government was considering creating either a unique program to address the 2020-21 flood or an ongoing remediation and recovery program to address flooding going forward. Because, as the Premier pointed out, it is much more likely, it seems, that we will have to deal with this kind of issue again. = I am curious if the department, through housing or other departments, is conside= ring the development of a new program or a stand-alone program to deal specifica= lly with 2021.
The Pr= emier has indicated that there is $2.9 million set aside for remediation and recovery, so I was hoping to get an explanation of how that is going to be rolled out or what individuals and residents in the area might expect to se= e by way of either an application form or program criteria to understand whether= or not they will be eligible for relief.
In the= past, I know that the government needs to make an application to the federal govern= ment to access federal flood relief funding. I am wondering if that has been done already. If it’s a question that is meant for the Yukon Housing Corporation, I am happy to write a letter about it instead — sorry, a= sk about it when Yukon Housing Corporation is up for debate. In any event, tha= t is the nature of my question.
Hon. Mr. Silver: Yes, as I was saying, we are moving from response into recover= y. We are working across government to provide program support. Our first priority when responding to a flood is public safety, obviously, and the protection = of critical infrastructure, vital community services, the environment, and the economy. It is really important to kind of lay out the full picture of what= we have done. Where we are going now — we did mention that we are out in= the communities now, engaging with folks on the front line who have been affect= ed by this. Flood response — ongoing all summer. I have never seen the Y= ukon River this high in my short time on this planet. It is interesting as well = that if you go up to the Klondike, we are seeing record low levels. Change is coming. Lots is going on here.
Our go= vernment is developing a remediation and recovery program, as I mentioned, that will assist homeowners to restore their properties and to increase community resilience and mitigate against future flooding events. Again, the well abo= ve average snowpack of last winter, together with the summer’s unseasona= bly hot weather in the Pacific Northwest, leading to the largest flood relief effort in Yukon history — absolutely. My comments about the 200-year events — it is interesting to see the folks who have been through two= of those floods, that people have been saying that they should be centuries ap= art — it is important for today’s debate, saying, well, those happe= ned within less than 20 years. It’s extremely important.
Also t= o note that, when we talked about all the different departments, 130 Yukon governm= ent employees, contractors, and volunteers were assigned to support that flood.= I think that is about it. I don’t have a lot of specifics about the $2.= 9 million and what it is going to be used for. I would imagine that the conversations that are happening tonight at Lake Laberge and conversations last week at M= arsh Lake are extremely important in that conversation. We are definitely lookin= g at options similar to the programs that the Government of Yukon designed after= the 2007 flood events, for example.
The Yu= kon Housing Corporation has a survey out, as well, that will evaluate the needs= of those property owners.
Mr. Dixon: My question, in particular, was about the $2.9 million and what it is goi= ng to be used for, so I will hold onto that one and bring it up in Committee instead with the Yukon Housing Corporation.
I will= move on. Can the Premier tell us: Where is the contract for the chief medical office= r of health housed? Is it in Finance or is it in Health and Social Services?
Hon. Mr. Silver: That is in Health and Social Services.
Mr. Dixon: I will hold off on that until the department comes up.
Where = does the government typically fund the specific allocations for the confidence and supply agreement between the Liberals and the NDP? Is that through the Executive Council Office or is that in Finance?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I guess that depends on what specific pieces of CASA the oppos= ition member is asking about. Is he asking about the implantation of some of the Putting People First initiative, or is the member is asking about specific supports for the NDP? I am not really sure. Perhaps he could qualify his question.
Mr. Dixon: Well, I am interested in all of it, so I will start going through it. Where would= we find the additional funding identified for the additional caucus resources = for the NDP that is provided by the CASA?
Hon. Mr. Silver: If it’s more of an administrative nature, like the extra supports, that would be through the Executive Council Office. I am assuming= it would be more obvious that, if it were something like safe supply or the de= ntal programming, then that would be through the departments specifically. In th= is case, those would be in Health and Social Services.
Mr. Dixon: The Executive Council Office doesn’t have an appropriation in this budget= , so can we assume then that the additional caucus resources that were identified for the NDP were met within the department’s existing resources?
Hon. Mr. Silver: Yes, the department believes that it can access existing funds= , but if not, we would have to account for this in the second supplementary.
Mr. Dixon: Is the minister contemplating then that there will be additional funding that would come in the second supplementary?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I’m not anticipating it, but that’s where it would= show up if it were necessary.
Mr. Dixon: The CASA outlines the creation of a number of new committees and panels. Last w= eek, one of the ministers introduced somebody in the gallery who was apparently a member of one of those panels, yet I haven’t seen any sort of public communication about who is on those panels or committees and who is not.
I̵= 7;m wondering if the Premier can shed some light on which committees have been struck and who is on them.
Hon. Mr. Silver: I’m really not sure who the member opposite is referring to when he said that somebody was introduced in the gallery who was on a committee. I don’t know which minister he is speaking of or who was identified — I apologize. We do have a secretariat and that secretariat works with the two parties. If he has some specific questions about engagement with committees= or that, then I would be happy to pass that on to the secretariat.
Mr. Dixon:= 195;I’ll just turn to the CASA then. On page 3, section 2, it says: “Within on= e month of the swearing-in of a Yukon Liberal Government, a policy panel shall laun= ch. The panel will be co-chaired by one Yukon Liberal MLA and one Yukon NDP MLA. The panel shall consist of four additional persons, two to be selected by t= he Yukon Liberal Government, two to be selected by the Yukon NDP Caucus. This panel will be supported by the civil service, with teams for each that incl= ude an Assistant Deputy Minister.
“= ;The panel — Making Work Safe —= ; will conduct a public consultation to develop recommendations for the Legislative Assembly to established permanent paid sick days in the Yukon.”
I̵= 7;m wondering, Deputy Chair, who is on those committees. Has there been a public announcement about who is on those committees or not?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I am not aware of any decisions that have been made about specific committees yet, but I can endeavour to get that information back to the member opposit= e. There are some key projects being delivered through that collaboration with= our NDP partners, including the Yukon safe consumption site, an increased minim= um wage, working toward banning single-use plastics, more aggressive action to tackle climate change, working with the private sector to explore paid sick leave, advancing our work on electoral reform. The Leader of the NDP and I = meet regularly, and a lot of our conversations are based on maybe solving some of the issues that were brought forth on a more technical level through the secretariat. None of those conversations so far have involved specific peop= le being submitted to specific committees, but if some of that work is already ongoing or if there is any more information through the secretariat, I will= get that information for the member opposite.
Mr. Dixon:= 195;Is the Premier telling us that he doesn’t know who is on this panel? It = was struck a couple of months ago. “Making work safe” is the name of the panel, and the Liberal government would have had to appoint at least two people to it. I am wondering: If it wasn’t the Premier who appointed = it, who appointed it?
Hon. Mr. Silver: I will get a complete list for the complete Legislative Assembly. The minister has helpfully given me all the names, but what I will just do is to submit = not only the names but maybe some other information as well about timelines or meetings that have or haven’t been conducted.
Mr. Dixon:= 195;Just to be clear, the Premier didn’t know who was on this committee? That seems to be the case. If he didn’t appoint the people to this committ= ee, then who was it who made the appointments to the committee?
Hon. Mr. Silver: It might surprise the member opposite that I am not involved in all of the thi= ngs of government. So, to answer his question, no, I didn’t appoint anybo= dy to that board, but there is an agreement between the NDP and the Liberals, = and we have a secretariat and ministers responsible, and those conversations are had between those two parties in which these people get appointed through t= hose conversations. But to say that I was in those conversations, no, I wasn’t.
Mr. Dixon: So, this panel has been appointed. Up until a few minutes ago, the Premier didn’t know who was on it.
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Mr. Dixon:= 195;The Premier is indicating off-mic that he still doesn’t know who is on it. Was there ever any plan to announce this publicly? This is a committee that= is going to do some very important work. It has been appointed for — wel= l, if they followed the agreement, it has been appointed for several months no= w, and we haven’t heard any sort of public announcement about it. I am w= ondering if there is planned to be any sort of public communication about the operat= ions of this committee.
Hon. Mr. Silver: If this committee is going to be doing the work that needs to be done, then obviously we will be communicating. The communication is not something that= we are going to wait until the Legislative Assembly — when we ask questi= ons in general debate, then that is when we are going to tell you about how the= se committees work. So, no announcements so far — there is a plan, IR= 17;m sure, through the secretariat to announce all the work as we go forward, whether it be in making the democracy work or any of the other initiatives = on making life more affordable. There are a whole bunch of initiatives that are happening. In CASA, there is specific wording about how we move forward together when it comes to these committees. I think that it is really impor= tant that we have a stable government at this time and that strong leadership involves these committees.
I̵= 7;m very confident in the conversations through the secretariat. We invested in the secretariat for a reason — so that these conversations can be had on a daily basis. As we move forward all of the different initiatives in CASA, I’m very confident in the secretariat’s ability to get the information out to the public in a timely fashion. I have nothing specifica= lly, as the Premier, to report today as far as any of those committees, but if t= here is anything else, I will look into it. I’ll have my conversation with= my CASA secretariat individuals and get updated to see if there is anything specific that has happened that we need to inform the House of. At this poi= nt, I don’t have anything else to add to that. By working together, we can make progress on a whole bunch of priorities that Yukoners want and hopeful= ly build a bright future for our territory.
With t= hat, seeing the time, I move that you report progress.
Deputy Chair: It has been moved by Mr. Silver that the Deputy Chair report progress.
Mot=
ion agreed
to
Hon. Ms. McPhee: I move that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Deputy Chair: It has been moved by Ms. McPhee that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.
Mot=
ion agreed
to
Spe=
aker
resumes the Chair
Speaker: I w= ill now call the House to order.
May th= e House have a report from the Deputy Chair of Committee of the Whole?
Chair’s
report
Ms. Tredger:&= #8195;Mr. Speaker, Committee of the Whole has considered Bill No. 202, entitled Second Appropriation Act 2021‑22, and directed me to report progress. = span>
Speaker: You= have heard the report from the Deputy Chair of Committee of the Whole. = p>
Are yo= u agreed?
Some Hon. Members: Agreed.
Speaker: I d= eclare the report carried.
Hon. Ms. McPhee: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
Speaker: It = has been moved by the Government House Leader that the House do now adjourn. =
Mot=
ion agreed
to
Speaker: Thi= s House now stands adjourned until 1:00 p.m. tomorrow.
The=
House
adjourned at 5:29 p.m.
The=
following
sessional papers were tabled October 18, 2021:
35-1-18
Fir=
st Report
of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts =
(October
2021) (Dixon)
35-1-1= 9
Sec= ond Report of the Standing Committee on Appointments to Major Government Boards and Committees (October 18, 2021) (Clarke, N= .)
The=
following
documents were filed October 18, 2021:
35-1-10
Yuk=
on Youth
Panel on Climate Change 2021 — Our Recommendations, Our Future —=
; 27
Programs and Policies to Embolden the Yukon's Climate Action
35-1-11
Boos= ter shots for Yukoners 65 and older, letter re (dated October 15, 2021) fr= om Brad Cathers, Member for Lake Laberge, to Hon. Tracy-Anne McPhee, Depu= ty Premier (Cathers)
35-1= -12
Covid Questions from Yukoners, letter re (dated August 31, 2021) from Kate White, Leader of the Third Party, to Hon. Sandy Silver, Premier, and Catherine Elliot, Acting Chief Medical Officer of Health (White)
<= !--[if supportFields]> PAGE 451451