back

Whitehorse, Yukon

Wednesday, April 20 - 1:30 p.m.

Speaker: I will now call the House to order. We will proceed with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

Speaker: Introduction of visitors?

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Nordling: I would like to introduce the Grade 5 class from the Jack Hulland School in Porter Creek West and their teacher, Mrs. Loerke. They are learning about the parliamentary system and they are here today to listen during Question Period.

Applause

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I would also like to introduce to Members’ attention the presence in the Gallery of some distinguished constituents of the Mayo riding, Ofelia Andrade and Ewan, Vanessa and Laua McDonald

Applause

Speaker: Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I have for tabling answers to questions to a matter outstanding from discussions on the 1988-89 Capital Budget Estimates.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I have for tabling reports of the Yukon Public Service Staff Relations Board and the Yukon Teachers Staff Relations Board.

Speaker: Reports of committees?

Petitions?

Introduction of bills?

Notices of motion for the production of papers?

Notices of motion?

Statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Steps to Improve Indian Education

Hon. Mr. McDonald: It is with great pleasure that I rise today to announce three new steps to improve Indian education in the Yukon.

All Members will recall last fall’s Kwiya Report from the Joint Commission on Indian Education and Training. As the Minister of Education, I was pleased to receive the guidance of this report but, as a long-time Yukon resident, I was disturbed by the serious problems and needs it described.

I am proud to be part of a government that is addressing those needs. We are, of course, taking some very big steps with our training strategy, with the opening of Yukon College and the rewriting of the School Act now underway.

I would like to outline specific measures that can make a difference.

First, a native programs coordinator will be hired by the Libraries and Archives Branch. I look forward to seeing this position used to help Yukon Indian people in several ways: by making full use of our fine libraries and archives; by advising the government on the collection of materials important to aboriginal heritage; and by setting up their own local libraries and archives in those communities that want them.

The presence of such a resource person will encourage reading and literacy among Yukon Indian people. This person will also promote knowledge of archival materials that exist in aboriginal communities and aboriginal families throughout the Yukon.

Second, we are adding to the resources of the Yukon Native Language Centre. We are increasing the funding of the centre for its regular work by $57,000. We are also creating a position for a language instructor trainee and, for the first time, the government will provide employee benefits for the 18 native language instructors. Many of these people are long-term employees who have not had job security, paid sick days, access to pension plans and other benefits.

The employees of the Yukon Native Language Centre have preserved and given life to one of the Yukon’s most precious resources: the language and culture of aboriginal people who have lived here for countless generations.

A recent article in Saturday Night magazine quoted our own resident linguist, John Ritter, at length on this subject. Mr. Ritter summed up the feelings of many Yukon people about the program.

“A major aspect (regarding native languages) is the matter of pride. Until this program started, almost all the teachers in the Yukon were non-native. It’s hard to overestimate how good the kids feel about seeing a native in school as a teacher instead of as a cleaner.”

Finally, my department will purchase a collection of videotapes from the Nedaa television program. These will be used now by schools and the public, as well as being preserved for future generations. Already, these tapes are considered valuable teaching tools. I believe they will greatly help our students and the public to understand issues of vital importance to Yukon Indian people.

These are small steps and diverse, but they all reflect this government’s commitment to Indian education. They are pieces of a larger plan. It is my hope, as Minister of Education, to see the results of that plan: higher literacy, more graduates, languages that are alive and well, and stronger communities. All Yukon people will be better for it.

Mrs. Firth: I rise to respond to the very positive ministerial statement the Minister has brought forward and congratulate the Minister on his efforts and steps taken in response to the report of the Joint Commission on Indian Education and Training.

There is no denying that when you visit schools today you see more Indian students and teachers. I know that gives not only the children, but the Indian people a great feeling of pride and accomplishment. We have always been proponents and supporters of the native language program here in the Yukon and will continue to do so. The initiatives that the Minister has announced will enhance the present programs and will continue to promote a greater awareness of native language education for all Yukoners. There are more non-Indian children as well as Indian children and adults benefiting from the program.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the government on their efforts.

Speaker: This then brings us to the Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Land claims/Teslin land selection

Mr. Phelps: I have a number of questions on the issue of the land selection on Nisutlin Bay, Teslin Lake and the Wolf and Nisutlin Rivers. The Minister said yesterday that this selection was intended to be an interim protection measure and the land in the final selection would not amount to as much as was being protected. The Minister also said there would be no strips in the final selection and both sides of the river would not be selected.

If that is the understanding the parties have, then why has Chief Jackson said that the band is claiming and expects to get 1500 square miles, which is several times the 646 square miles included in the map?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: Forgive me, but I think the Leader of the Official Opposition is making a somewhat liberal interpretation of my statements yesterday.

To repeat myself, there appears to be a difference of opinion between the Teslin Band and the negotiators on our side. That is why we are having negotiations and these issues will be worked out in negotiations. I have indicated to the Leader of the Official Opposition our basic approach in the negotiations, but it should be said the negotiations will go on at the land claims table, not on the floor of this House.

Mr. Phelps: The Government Leader cannot have it both ways. He cannot say that the maps were released so that the public could have input and then not want the input. He has said, on numerous occasions in this House, that the government wants input from the public about those maps, and we are giving it to him right here.

Did the Minister not instruct his negotiators to clarify the ground rules before the land got frozen? Was there not some attempt to clarify so that everybody had a firm understanding as to what the maps meant before the Order-in-Council was obtained?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: Of course we want public input, and we are glad to have the input of the Member opposite. Our negotiator has been made well aware of the views of the Member opposite on this question. The interim protection is to prevent further alienation of this land while negotiations proceed towards a final agreement.

That is probably well understood by the Member opposite, but perhaps not as well understood by the public as a result of some of the reactions I have heard in the last few days. We will be redoubling our efforts in terms of explaining to people what is involved here.

Mr. Phelps: The question was really whether or not this government put their position in writing so that the other parties understood it prior to the land being frozen.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: We will be attempting to get the agreement in principle in writing in the next little while, which will deal with some of these positions. We do not yet have an agreement in principle. Interim protection is provided without prejudice to the final settlement, without prejudice to any party, to prevent further alienation by third party interests while we get on with the difficult and complex task of negotiating final agreements with each of the bands.

Question re: Land claims/Teslin land selection

Mr. Phelps: Surely, the Minister has to have a concern that by allowing strip selections, the land on both sides of the Nisutlin River, on both sides of part of the Wolf River, strip selection on the shores of Teslin Lake, that the expectations of band members would be raised by this action. Does he not have that concern?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: We are not only concerned about expectations - and we want everybody to be realistic about their expectations on land claims - but we also want to take public reactions into account. We are concerned about both factors, because our objective is to get a land claims settlement that is fair to the aboriginal people of the territory and is in the best interest of the public of the territory as a whole.

Mr. Phelps: The public has already raised concerns about strip selection, and raised concerns about both sides of rivers, and so on, and were given assurances in public meetings. What I am concerned about now is: can the government realistically say that it is actually going to end up with a land selection for Teslin that is going to meet the principles that the negotiators have been telling the public would be met?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I find it unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition refers to the public. Obviously, his public does not include Indian people. We have heard from some members of the public some specific concerns. I am making a reasonable point. The Member for Porter Creek East says: “he makes us ill”. We all know his views on land claims - he is opposed to aboriginal rights. He was head of an organization that promised us violence if we settled land claims. We know his views. The Leader of the Opposition has been involved in negotiations. He knows that this government must represent the interests of both Indian and non-Indian people, and try and get a settlement that provides for both us to live together.

Mr. Phelps: The problem is that we have platitudes, and we have things happening that I think are extremely unfortunate. I think that they are mistakes. I would like to know whether or not the government is supporting additional selections that will be frozen, that will be strips along both sides of rivers, and stripps along one side of rivers in the Yukon. Are they supporting this for other bands?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: The selection of the bands is not yet public but, as the Member knows, I have indicated our position in terms of selections on both sides of roads and rivers. I have also indicated that we are in negotiations about those questions and we have differing points of view to resolve. The Member also knows well that the issue of quantum was one of the reasons why the settlement in 1984 was rejected. Bands, among them Teslin, were, we understand, not satisfied with the selection that they were given in the agreement of 1984. Obviously, they are going to be seeking more land. That is what we are negotiating about; that is what land claims negotiations are about.

Question re: Land claims/Teslin land selection

Mr. Phelps: It seems unfortunate that the Government Leader wants to change history because the Teslin band voted strongly in support of the agreement in principle of 1984, as did eight other bands. Old Crow was strongly in support, Champagne/Aishihik was strongly in support, and so was Teslin. So I would appreciate the Minister not trying to twist the simple facts.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I did not hear a question there but a fact is that the Teslin band did not claim, in these negotiations, the same amount of land that they were offered in the settlement in 1984. Everything that I have heard from the leadership and membership of that band indicates to this government that they were not satisfied in the selection that was given in 1984. In recognition of that fact, the federal government’s negotiating position, as all Member well know, is that the quantum would have to be increased in order to get a settlement.

Question re: Young offenders facility

Mr. McLachlan: On Monday, I asked the Minister responsible for the Young Offenders Act about plans for the new care facility to be built near the Whitehorse Correctional Centre. As we recently heard on the news media, there have been a number of people walking away from detention centres here in the City of Whitehorse. My question for the Minister is: given the record of at least two of the young juvenile offenders who left Lambert Street last weekend under questionable circumstances, why were there only two female guards on duty that night, given the questionable status of those two young offenders who broke out and considering they were already facing charges from another previous incident?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: One cannot always anticipate what young children are going to do, whether they are young offenders or not. The required number of youth services workers were on duty that night, and I do not think we could have known what the young offenders were going to do that night.

Mr. McLachlan: The Minister said that she will be cutting out locks except those keyed to a fire alarm system and eliminating fences as part of the cost-cutting procedures at the new facility, on the retendered plans, in order to save some more money. I am sure the RCMP have better things to do than track down young offenders who want to break out and go downtown for a pizza on Friday or Saturday night. My question to the Minister is: what does she plan to do then to prevent such occurrences from becoming regular every weekend or every weekday night of the year?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: We have young offenders in custody who are sentenced to open custody. The sentence does not require us to put locks on all the doors, although the doors are locked. I never did say that I was going to cut out locks, so I do not know what the Member for Faro is referring to. Certain things have been changed in the design of the care facility, as I mentioned, but that has nothing to do with the children who are in open custody right now.

Mr. McLachlan: The Minister said, “one cannot always anticipate what children are going to do.” We have two guards, forced into a closet, locked up, a vehicle stolen, and that is hardly what I would call the action of children. My question to the Minister is: does she foresee any circumstance at all, given the answers she has just given to the two previous questions, where one just has to put one’s foot down and hold the young offenders in a secure facility, guarded? Does she foresee any situation like that?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: The two young people who left the facility the other night were in a facility that had locked doors. The doors were all locked, yet they got out. They were sentenced to open custody; they were not sentenced to secure custody where we had a situation where they could not get out at all. There are certain circumstances regarding young offenders who we have in our young offenders facilities and they cannot be treated like hardened criminals. They are in there to try to be rehabilitated and we have to look at those circumstances as well. One cannot treat them as if they were older, adult, hardened criminals.

Question re: Whitehorse Correctional Centre/inquiry

Mr. Phillips: With respect to the Whitehorse Correctional Centre inquiry, the Government Leader told the House last Monday he would examine the facts the three guards presented to him and would decide soon whether or not he would call for an inquiry. Has he had an opportunity to look at the facts, and when can we expect his decision?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I am still making inquiries into the facts, as I indicated to the House on Monday. I have heard from a number of people, and I expect to be talking to other people in the next little while who can provide me with useful information. When I believe I have all the relevant information, I will be discussion the options with my colleagues, as I indicated earlier in the House.

Mr. Phillips: Earlier this week, the irresponsible Minister of Justice produced a hastily put-together document trying to refute the facts put forward by the guards. This document is so full of holes, you could drive a bus through it.

There are obviously two sides to the story, and people need an opportunity to tell their story. Will the Government Leader consider this and call for an inquiry as soon as possible?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I have already answered the question. I have not yet found grounds for an inquiry. My colleague, the Minister of Justice, has advised the House about the intentions of the chief coroner concerning the allegations around the inquest into the unfortunate death at the Whitehorse Correctional Centre. The Minister’s answer quite correctly described other procedures that are underway dealing with various questions that have been raised in this House. The remaining issues are those into which I am trying to get a handle on the facts.

Question re: Hyland Forest Products

Mr. Nordling: With respect to Hyland Forest Products, the Government Leader said yesterday that the fire damage to the mill in Watson Lake was being assessed by underwriters. Can the Government Leader confirm that the loss will be covered by insurance?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I do not know that I can confirm anything of the kind in advance of an underwriter’s report. The Member may find it useful to know that officials of the Yukon Development Corporation will shortly be traveling to Watson Lake in connection with this matter. Upon their return early next week, I may have some more information I can give the House.

Mr. Nordling: Does the Government Leader have any information today on the extent of the damage, the dollar amount and the loss?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: In advance of an underwriter’s report and a more formal report from the development corporation, I have nothing of a practical nature I can add to previous answers.

Mr. Nordling: From the previous answers, I take it the mill is insured. Will production be affected at all? He must know that by now.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: Production will, no doubt, be affected, but I cannot quantify the ways in which it will be affected. It would be best if I took the question as notice. When the situation has been assessed by the development corporation officials, who are traveling there this week, and once they have reported to me at the end of this week or early next week, I will be able to provide more answers to the kind of questions being put by the Member.

Question re: Office space/old Yukon College

Mr. Brewster: Last fall we were told that the Department of Renewable Resources would be moving to the old Yukon College. When does the Minister expect this move to start?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: It is impossible to give a fixed date. I am expecting to discuss the move during the Supplementary Estimates debate as occurred in the last session, but, generally speaking, the department will be moving in to the old Yukon College very soon after the college vacates the premises and moves to the new campus. I am expecting that in June or July.

Mr. Brewster: Will the Marwell offices also be moved to the old Yukon College?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The plans of the department are not to relocate the Marwell function to the old Yukon College.

Question re: Traffic flow/old Yukon College

Mr. Phillips: On January 7, 1988, I asked the Minister of Community and Transportation Services a question regarding the planned government moves to the old Yukon College and its effect on traffic in and out of Riverdale. At that time, the Minister indicated to this House that the department is prepared to co-fund a traffic study in this area. Has the Minister directed his officials to proceed with this traffic study?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Department of Community and Transportation Services, in conjunction with the City of Whitehorse, had ongoing discussions about traffic in and around Yukon College and about the south access entry on this side of the bridge. Those discussions are continuing. I do not have information at this point as to when they are scheduled to conclude, but they are continuing.

Mr. Phillips: I understand that what is happening is that the Department of Community and Transportation Services has not committed any funds to the traffic study as yet and nothing has taken place. My concern is that we should do the traffic study when students are in school and people are not on summer holidays.

Could the Minister of Community and Transportation Services get on his department now and honour the commitment that he made in the House so that the traffic study can be done when the highest traffic peaks are taking place?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Traffic counting has been undertaken in the past. The Department of Community and Transportation Services does have traffic engineers on staff whose job it is to undertake projects like this. They have been working on the project and are discussing the traffic patterns with the City of Whitehorse.

Mr. Phillips: My information is different from the Minister’s. The fact that they are talking with the City of Whitehorse does not help. The city needs funds, as the Minister said he would provide, to carry out the traffic study. Would the Minister of Community and Transportation Services ask his department to negotiate with the city a funding program for the traffic study before some serious accidents happen in that area? There are problems and they said they would address it. Would the Minister quit dragging his feet and get after it?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Member is all wet. Clearly the government has indicated a very direct interest in addressing a traffic study in that particular area. I have indicated on numerous occasions what would be undertaken with respect to the traffic study. If the Member is assuming that a traffic study has to be undertaken by consultants, he is wrong. It does not have to require those resources at all. The Department of Community and Transportation Services has traffic engineers who can do the analyses themselves, and they have been discussing the matter with the city in terms of providing for long-term projections and any remedial action that may be taken if traffic flow patterns are projected to be different as a result of the Department of Renewable Resources moving into the old college site.

Question re: Traffic flow/old Yukon College  

Mrs. Firth: Can the Minister tell us if the committee having discussions is the same committee that was formed when the new college transportation study for the Takhini area was done?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The traffic engineers in the department are the persons that the Government of Yukon counts on to provide analyses for traffic flow patterns in and out of Whitehorse where there is a government interest. These are the people charged with the responsibility of reviewing traffic plans and advising the government and senior members of the department with respect to what action might be taken to alleviate any traffic problems that may exist. It would ultimately be up to the Government of Yukon, along with the City of Whitehorse, to determine what remedial action is the responsibility of the government and what is the responsibility of the city. That will be decided at a later date.

Mrs. Firth: Let us establish whether anything is being done or not. My information is that there has been one meeting. The Minister talks about a committee, determining remedial action and advising government.

Speaker: Would the Member please get to the supplementary question.

Mrs. Firth: Yes. He talks about ongoing discussions. I would like to know who the members of this special committee are and how many meetings they have had.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I will undertake to bring the names back and what specific communications they have had with their counterparts in the city. The directions I have given are exactly as I have stated in the House. The directions were co-determined at a breakfast meeting between City Council and the representatives of the Government of the Yukon, to establish the traffic flow patterns in and around the college site and the South Access Road to determine if remedial action should be taken, and what financial responsibility would be left for the Government of Yukon. That will be negotiated at a later date.

In terms of the details the Member is asking, I will have to bring those back because I do not have them at my fingertips.

Question re: Traffic flow/old Yukon College

Mrs. Firth: When we discussed this issue last, the Minister gave us a commitment that, number one, this study would be done before June, before the move was to take place. He also said that the government was going to be prepared to look at giving some financial assistance. We have had communication back and forth saying that that was the case. I understand, from my information, that it is the same committee that looked on the new college site that is supposed to be meeting on this site. My information tells me that they have met once. We are trying to express the urgency to get this business done. The City of Whitehorse keeps its own traffic counts; we have seen them out there doing counts for their own information. This government has made no attempt to proceed with a specific study of this particular area. We are not talking about the whole of the boulevard, we are talking about the particular area where the move is going to take place, the intersection at the old college site.

When is this study going to be completed, and when are we going to have this necessary information before this move takes place? We are running out of time.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I have indicated many times, and I indicated when the Member for Riverdale North first brought the matter to the Legislature, that what would have to be determined first of all is whether or not there was financial liability for the Government of Yukon. An analysis would have to be done first to determine what the traffic flow patterns were. There is some reason to believe that the traffic patterns at the college site would not change substantially as a result of the move of Renewable Resources to the college, and the removal of the college people and hundreds of students to the new Yukon College site. That is one point to make sure that the Member is clear upon.

Secondly, I think that it is important to say that the study is being undertaken between the two governments, the City of Whitehorse and the Yukon government. Whatever remedial action is seen to be necessary as a result of that study may determine the time lines by which the remedial action can be undertaken. The financial commitments of the two governments have to be established, as well, so there are discussions that have to be undertaken. I would doubt very much that any major road improvements could be undertaken prior to June, if, and I say “if”, those road improvements are deemed to be necessary. There is no proof of that, at this point.

Mrs. Firth: The Minister said that the study would be done before June. I was very clear about that. The Minister also said, “We feel that it is our obligation to get involved.” I would like to know if that Minister will fulfill that obligation? Will he make a financial commitment, and will he get involved and get this done in the next two months?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I have indicated it is true that it is the Government of Yukon’s obligation to get involved in a traffic study. We have dedicated resources to do the review. The resources do not have to include a consultant. They can include the traffic engineers we have on staff who are responsible for just this kind of work. These people are trained to do this kind of analysis. These people are dedicated to this project, along with other projects in the City of Whitehorse and around the territory. Those people will be charged with the responsibility of analysing data and coming up with some conclusions with the City of Whitehorse as to what might be done, as well as making recommendations to senior departmental personnel with respect to whose responsibility lies where as far as financing the options are concerned.

Mrs. Firth: Is the Minister and his government prepared to commit any additional funds to the city, should they require it for this analysis?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: No, we do not believe that is necessary.

Question re: Office space/Yukon Housing Corporation

Mr. Lang: We were speaking earlier about the movements of departments by the government. It is common knowledge that the government is in almost every, if not all, buildings in the downtown core, in one manner or another. One area that has come to my attention is that the Yukon Housing Corporation is expanding by at least another five person years, contrary to the Minister’s statements last year when he was going to keep the corporation mean, lean and tough.

Could the Minister advise this House whether it is true that the housing corporation is either in the process of renting new space, or has rented new office space?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I have previously informed the House at the last sitting of the processes underway, which was a question put by the same Member who just asked this question. I answered specifically as to the square footages. If he reads Hansard, he will find it.

Mr. Lang: Obviously, there was some discussion, but it was not firm. Perhaps I should ask the Minister responsible for the housing corporation, because I get consistently straighter answers from him, and I think the public is aware of that, as well.

Is it true the housing corporation has rented new office space and, if so, where?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I reported fully during the Supplementary Estimates debate in the fall and, during the estimates debate on Government Services I will be equipped with the square footages and the costs of the lease, as well as all details the Member could possibly want.

Mr. Lang: Has the government rented new office spaces for the Yukon Housing Corporation and, if so, where?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: As the Member knows, the answer is yes. It was discussed in the Supplementary Estimates last fall. I will come to the House with all of the details about exactly where, the exact square footage and the exact price at the appropriate time.

Question re: Office space/Yukon Housing Corporation

Mr. Lang: I am sure that it is embarrassing to the Minister that the government is growing in such great numbers and has neat new office space. I can appreciate the embarrassing position that he might find himself in that he is not prepared to answer in this House where. The public does have a right to know. Where is this new office space that the Minister says that the Department of Government Services has rented?

Maybe I will direct the question to the Minister responsible for Housing Corporation, who is going to keep it lean, mean and tough.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Yukon Housing Corporation has been given some responsibilities beyond simply winding up its operations in the last couple of years. This has necessitated that it have the proper staffing to do the job as well as the appropriate square footage in which to do their job according to the government’s standards.

The short answer to the Member’s question is that the location is the Nissan Building, a rental agreement has been struck, and there are some internal modifications to the site that have to be done prior to relocation of the housing corporation from its current location to the new one.

Mr. Lang: In conjunction with this move that the Minister is going to keep mean, lean and tough, could he inform the public whether or not the $50,000 allocated to buy office furniture has been spent?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I am not familiar with that detail. This Legislature voted money for the housing corporation to purchase equipment for their location, and they are charged with the purchasing of equipment and furniture during this fiscal year. They will be doing that.

Question re: Service contracts

Mr. McLachlan: In the large number of contracts that the Minister of Government Services tabled in this Legislature on Monday, there is one for a company called Mane Masters here in Whitehorse, for not an insignificant amount of money. Could the Minister tell us who, on the front bench or the back bench, is in receipt of a haircut, a free perm, shampoo or cut and set at the courtesy of the Yukon taxpayer.

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I understand the motivations of the Member opposite completely. If he will give us the number of the contract, it will be supplied as per the policy. I can say that it is for no one on the front bench, but there are expenses by the government for Macaulay Lodge and in the correctional system, specifically for juveniles, I believe. The contract will be supplied on request.

Mr. McLachlan: We have recently been in receipt of a couple of fancy, high gloss productions on fishing and hunting. It has a picture of the Minister of Renewable Resources in it, and I am wondering whether the Minister can advise us if it is, in fact, Cabinet policy that when Ministers are having their pictures put in these fancy, high gloss productions they attend the barber or hairdresser as the case may be and get primped up for those photographic sessions.

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That is not government policy and never has been.

Mr. McLachlan: I want to get at the source of the $200. I am wondering, then, if the Minister can say that when it is Cabinet picture day, is it also policy for Cabinet to have their pictures done in that photographic session for the annual general report?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: No.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Speaker: Motions other than government motions?

MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS

Hon. Mr. Porter: I would like to request the unanimous consent of the House to have Motion No. 41 called after the House has completed its consideration of Motion No. 6.

Speaker: Is there unanimous consent?

All Hon. Members: Agreed.

Motion No. 6 - adjourned debate

Clerk: Item no. 1, standing in the name of Ms. Kassi; amendment moved by Mr. Brewster; debate adjourned, hon. Mr. Kimmerly.

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I am going to take a somewhat different tack than I was taking two weeks ago because of the interruption in the debate. I will speak for quite a short time on this amendment and make only one general point.

I think it is a fair observation to make about all sides of this House. We sometimes spend more time and effort on speaking than we do on listening, and I made a conscious effort over the two-week adjournment to read very carefully, not only once but several times, the previous debate and the statements, especially those of the Member for Kluane in moving this amendment. I want to make reference to one of the things he said and emphasize it, and then make reference to one of the things that the mover of the motion, the Member for Old Crow, said and then compare them.

The Member for Kluane said, on April 6, page 123 of Hansard, and I quote: “You can go over to Riverdale and see many proud natives who have come out of universities and everything else. They do not want to go back there.”

I do not wish to misinterpret that statement, but I would take it as in the nature of a symbolic statement as Riverdale, I suppose, is symbolic in the public consciousness.

It is important to emphasize to the Member for Kluane, and I am not criticizing what he meant because he was speaking symbolically, that you can see many proud native people in places other than Riverdale. You can see proud native people who have not come out of universities. That symbolism is perhaps what the Member for Old Crow was talking about in a general sense when she said, and I quote from page 122, “With the local people more in charge of their own affairs, you will see more respect for the law.” I am going to repeat that, “With local people more in charge of their own affairs, you will see more respect for the law.”

It is fairly clear that the local culture, or the aboriginal culture, is more apparent outside of Riverdale than inside. It is interesting that the Minister of Education today made comments about the feeling of pride that native people have in the school system when they see native people as teachers and not only as janitors. I was very encouraged by the congratulatory statements of the Member for Riverdale South of that government initiative.

The reason why I mention these things in a symbolic way is because I want to make a point. The point is that we all know that the greatest social issue that is before this territory and the greatest political issue in the general sense that is before this House today is to encourage and foster a relationship between the two major cultures of the territory to work better together, to live more closely together and to develop a sense of mutual trust of each other’s culture. This is only going to be achieved if there is adaptation on both sides.

Specifically about the justice system: it is only going to be achieved in the justice system if the system does a little bit of adjusting as well as the native culture adjusting to it. The Member for Old Crow has been very, very clear on page 122 about what it is this motion asks for. It is clear that it is not asking for a separate system. It is clear that it is motivated by a desire for all of the peoples of the territory to have more respect for the law and to come closer together. I have read and reread and reread again those statements in the motion and that is absolutely clear. It is emphasized in the speech to this motion.

In my answer I said the same thing, but in quite different words, so I say that the central point here is that although the wording of this motion is specifically about policing, the debate is much wider. The mover of the motion talked about tribal justice systems and the first Opposition speaker broadened it again and talked about the general racial makeup of the territory, and talked about a philosophy of how the two cultures should live together. That is not inappropriate. In responding to that general issue, I say that in the social service area, generally, in the justice area, generally, and in the policing area, specifically, it is necessary for the two cultures to build a better sense of trust of each other. The only way we are going to achieve that is by working together on projects that are successful. We should be finding projects, however small, where the two cultures can work in harmony, and we should develop those experiments.

The motion does not call for a “feasibility study”, the motion calls for working on projects that occur in the communities, and the practical one, which is ongoing today, is in Teslin. It is not just a feasibility study; it is a project that was initiated by the band, supported by the RCMP, supported by the federal government and supported by the territorial government, and which is designed to have the two cultures working more closely together. We must be doing these things and we must be successful in the long run and build on successes. Otherwise, we will never get a land claims settlement, and otherwise, the respect for the law will be lessened, and the two cultures will not live together in harmony. It is for those reasons that we on this side cannot accept the motion, as the motion is calling for a stop to the project as it is asking only for a feasibility study.

Mr. McLachlan: Most of my comments are for the main motion, or for the main motion as it is amended. I will only address a few brief comments on the amendment that we have under discussion at the moment.

The Minister must have a new definition of feasibility. The motion very carefully calls for investigating a feasibility. By definition, that is a feasibility study. I see no problem in having a report tabled in the Legislature so that it may be available for inspection by all Members as to the pros and cons of the process that we are investigating. I find it a little strange that Members on that side, who often profess to be good parliamentarians, are saying that they would cut off any future debate on the motion and institute it post haste.

If there are problems, let us see them, let us here them, and we can talk about them. If there are good points, let us hear those as well. I am somewhat surprised at the reaction of Members who would turn down the recommendation that the feasibility study be tabled in this Legislature for further consideration. Because of that, I will be supporting the amendment on the basis of further study into this matter, with which I see nothing wrong.

Mr. Phelps: On the amendment, I am going to speak to the main motion, but I will wait for this vote. I fully support the suggested amendment for the very reasons given by the Member for Faro. I rise to say that we will be supporting the amendment.

Amendment negatived

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: For the record, the Member for Faro completely misunderstood the situation on the amendment. There is absolutely no intention at all of cutting off any debate or of not tabling the study information that is available in the House. I will be pleased to table that in the House, and I will. I will be pleased to have further debate. The Member was obviously either misinformed or he misinterpreted the meaning of the amendment.

On the main motion, it is crucial to understand that prior to the influx of Europeans into this territory, the various Indian peoples and the various communities were governed by a traditional system of justice, which for want of a better word, I will call a traditional tribal system of justice, or by customary law.

The customary law, as it then existed, had deep foundations in the spiritual or religious beliefs of the people who lived in the territory. It was not articulated in a written set of rules. I believe it is very imperfectly and inadequately understood in an archaeological or anthropological sense by the nonnative culture of the Yukon today.

This system operated on a consensus, which involved discussion, mediation and arbitration. The arbitration was generally done by the elders. The intent of the system was to restore harmony in the community. It had a different intent from the traditional Anglo-Saxon jury or adversarial legal system that we know of today. The legal system that is now operating has as its primary function the centering out of individuals who are to blame for certain acts, the finding of blame or guilt for those criminal acts, and the delivery of punishment, in either the name of correction or rehabilitation or, simply, punishment. That is the aim of the system developed in the Anglo-Saxon world.

As it is applied to the traditional culture here, the system meets a very significant cultural gap. In introducing their British system, the Europeans also introduced a police force. The police force was originally the Royal Northwest Mounted Police and is today the RCMP. This force is modelled on the British constabulary. It provided an enforcement of the Crown’s rules and prerogatives, it enforced a system of law, and it brought with it a method of solving disputes. We brought the civil law, as well as the criminal law, which was based on an adversarial court system.

The differences in the two cultures should force us to adapt the systems to better meet the needs of both the cultures that live here in the territory. To put it another way, the justice system generally, and the policing specifically, should be more responsive to the native cultures found here in the territory. We do have some historical efforts at accommodation. One of them is the RCMP special constable program.

Another one is that the RCMP have made some efforts in cross cultural awareness programs, and in the police academy in Regina there is some effort at cross cultural awareness, an effort which I am extremely pleased to see the present Commissioner of the RCMP is expanding. These are steps taken generally to improve the relationships between the police and the communities whose duty it is for the police to serve. This government is supportive of these measures and this motion can never be legitimately interpreted as an effort to undermine or speak against those initiatives. The mover of the motion, on page 122 of Hansard, is very clear and, I would suggest, even eloquent in specifically saying that.

Some other efforts have been efforts to recruit and to train native justices of the peace. We have not been very successful in either the long term history or the short term history of the territory in doing this, although it is a substantial effort. There has been an increasing effort over the past few years to have native people represented on government boards, which is a related issue. These are adaptations that the system is making to address the legitimate interests of our indigenous people.

There is a greater challenge, however, to all of our peoples and specifically the non native culture to further incorporate the legitimate traditional ways into a modern system of justice. This is the challenge, I would submit, that is essentially before the territory in a general sense and before us today in a specific sense concerning policing.

There are many avenues of improvement that I can think of, and I am sure that in the years ahead there will be more avenues of improvement identified. I want to mention and emphasize clearly cross cultural education. This is education that must occur on behalf of both cultures to both cultures, a sensitivity wthat must be increased in both directions in order to foster the relationship between the two races in the territory. It is particularly important for members of police forces to be sensitive in their duties concerning, for example, family violence, spousal assaults and in dealing with children. The liaison by the RCMP and chiefs and councils around the territory is in a peculiar position in Yukon today. The top brass, if I can call them that, among the RCMP appear to be satisfied that there is a close relationship and that there is good communication. The chiefs and councils have expressed a substantially less satisfied position to me, although it varies in different communities.

That is understandable. There is a need for increased liaison with the chiefs and councils and the police. For the information of the Members, I have recommended that the liaison function, which is partially done by a person within the RCMP establishment who has that as part of their job description and is partially done by the commanding officers and officers in charge of detachments, include native people who have been raised here in the communities be involved on the RCMP side to better achieve that liaison. That could be done through contracts let by the RCMP for exactly that purpose.

Other efforts can generally be talked about under the area of the style of policing that is most responsive to aboriginal concerns. I had already raised this point in my address on April 6, on page 123 and 124 of Hansard, that a community-based policing model is the model which is most appropriate in the territory and an increasing effort should be put on crime prevention which attacks into all the community resources. This model, although not in those specific words, has been clearly identified by the Member for Old Crow in her speech introducing this motion. These measures are all partial responses to the problem and I have not given an exhaustive list. I should mention again in order to emphasize this that the prospect of increased foot patrols is occurring, but there is still some distance to go to have even more foot patrols in many of the communities.

It is crucial to talk about what is happening in Teslin today. A crime prevention officer was hired under the professional direction of the crime prevention office in the territorial government, and under the day to day supervision of chief and council. This person is not a police officer in the traditional sense. This person is hired to pay particular attention to crime prevention and to emphasize a person’s roots in the community as a crime prevention initiative. It is pretty clear that the criminal problem in the territory and around the world is occasioned by people who are not committed to the community in which they live.

I will put it another way: it is people who do not feel such a part of the community who are willing to risk the censure, or the displeasure, of the majority of the right-thinking citizens in the community.

The problem of crime is occasioned by individuals who have lost contact and who have lost a feeling of belongingness in their community, from which they abuse other people, or steal from them, or do other criminal acts. It is fundamental that these people will be stronger members of their community and feel a stronger attachment if they are proud of their own roots and their own cultural identity. Because of that, this crime prevention measure has a cultural aspect.

It is crucial, as well, that the community develop a greater sensitivity to, and a greater awareness of, the traditional ability of especially the native elders to solve disputes. It is this initiative, which comes from the community, which is supported by this government. That initiative is being evaluated and a report will be generated that will clearly  evaluate the program that exists. The report may contain recommendations for change or to support particular aspects of the program, and that report will be public. We will be welcoming further debate about that initiative.

Mr. McLachlan: There is no doubt in my mind that this motion on the Order Paper is probably one of the most controversial ones of this spring session. I suppose there is a natural, logical tendency to be leery or afraid of something that is new and radical in some of its changes - as least new in the justice system as most of us know it.

It is up to the presenter of this motion, Members for Whitehorse South Centre, North Centre, Watson Lake and Tatchun to convince other Members of its validity. What I have heard so far would not sell very much to very many people. I have not heard anything to date that totally justifies that approach.

A number of questions should have been answered that have not yet been. I am afraid that, at times, there seems to be more questions than there are answers. I am curious how we deal fairly with all people in this situation, whatever their racial or ethnic origin, when they are charged with an offence. How do we show all in the community that equal justice has been meted out to all participants in an infraction, no matter what the crime is?

For example, on a charge of break and enter in Pelly Crossing, would a penalty of stacking an elder’s wood pile bear the same weight as 90 days in the detention centre on Lambert Street. I do not know. There is a fear that perhaps the end does not solve the crime. I realize that Members on that side are walking an idea by as a trial balloon to test the situation and to test the waters. It is indeed very new.

The question of dealing with repeat offenders in a system like this has also not been answered. Do we have them stack twice as much wood? Those questions have not been answered. The biggest problem of all with the motion is that it has left one Member of the Legislature open to charges of flip-flop, of being inconsistent, of double-talk and of speaking from one side of the mouth. That is the Member for Whitehorse South Centre who was, three years ago in 1985, the Minister of Justice when this very same question was raised with him during the debate on the native courtworkers. When this question was put to him by myself, he said, “It is my belief that the whole issue of native policing, and by implication, its consequent justice system, should be left to the land claims table.” That is what the Minister of Justice said three years ago.

Was that a personal opinion? Is so, has it now changed? Was that a Cabinet policy? If so, has it now changed? There are no answers for that, only more questions. It is this different approach that causes Members on both sides to be concerned with the intent of this motion. The Member has said that the RCMP agree with it. I respectfully submit the qualifier that, yes, where our budget is not cut to deal with it. The Minister did not add that there is a great fear amongst the RCMP that their activities are being restricted by the pen that signs the budget figures every January telling the local inspector what he can and cannot have for funding.

The community that I represent probably has four percent or less native people. Therefore, there is a natural tendency on my part to be extremely careful of this motion. I have not yet heard enough, and I have not had all my questions answered. My mind is not totally open, nor is it totally closed on this issue.

I am prepared to listen to further debate and make my mind up later, but I want to emphasize to the side opposite that not enough has been presented so far to allow Members to make an informed decision on this motion.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: It gives me great pleasure to rise in the House today to address the motion that was presented here by my colleague, the Member for Old Crow. My experience, both within the Indian organizations and as a justice of the peace, has shown me that the Canadian legal system does not meet the needs of Indian people.

I would like, first of all, to mention something here that I thought I would like to bring to the attention of the Member for Kluane. He said, “In regard to this motion, what we are trying to do strikes me very much like reservations and as a boy I was on one. If this is what the Indian leaders are doing, they are going backwards in this role. They are not going forwards. This simply confines people to one area. They live there and do not get off it. They do not move anywhere else, and they stay in it.”

I took objection to that simply because I, myself, lived on a reservation and I did not choose to leave it; I left because of a discriminatory section of the Indian Act and I was forced to leave. I have family members who still live on that reservation. I have a mother and dad who live on that reservation; they choose to stay there and they live and thrive on it. I just wanted to point out to the Member that maybe his experience was not a good one, but mine certainly was, except for the discriminatory clause that Indian people had nothing to do with.

For hundreds of years Indian people have been subject to a criminal justice system that has been at odds with their own traditional ways of resolving conflicts. The system has been foreign, imposed by a domineering society, has been difficult to understand and is often very harsh. In the north, there are facts that have been very evident in regard to criminal justice; people in the Yukon are jailed at a much higher rate than people in the rest of Canada, and Indian people are jailed more often and are over represented in our northern jails. Informal reports indicate that native people are over represented at all stages of the criminal justice system. The nature of the offences that Indian people go to jail for are largely not serious crimes in relation to the south.

There has been a movement in recent years to develop noninstitutional methods of dealing with offenders, such as probation and community services. This appears to be a good thing. However, the community supervision caseloads were reported in parliament a few years ago to be five times as high for Yukoners as for the rest of Canada. We all know that the majority of those individuals doing that kind of supervised community work are Indian people. We see them in town all the time. It has been very evident in the camp up at Haines Junction this past summer. One can tell exactly who the majority of those inmates are.

The proposal to turn control of Indian justice back to Indian people is not a new concept. Thirteen years ago, there was a national conference and a federal/provincial conference on native people in the criminal justice system. A lot of people here might be aware of that conference; it was held in Edmonton. There were a number of individuals who were with the Yukon territorial government at that time who took part in it, along with Indian people here from the north.

It was held because there was a great deal of concern over the jailing of a disproportionate number of Canadian Indian people. It prompted the calling of a national conference to consider issues of prime importance, not only to native people but, also, to the governments under which they lived, and that included all three governments.

A three-day meeting in Edmonton in February, 1975, called the National Conference on Native People and the Criminal Justice System, was attended by persons from every area of Canada interested in finding ways to bring the country’s laws and their administration more in tune with the needs of the native population.

The conference’s tone was described by Solicitor General Helen Huntley of Alberta, at that time, when she told delegates that her province was bringing to the talks a genuine desire for a greater level of understanding. The Minister said she was “sure that all other delegations had come with the same intent, and we feel confident that this meeting will prove to be beneficial, not only to the government and our native Canadians, but to all Canadians.” Warren Allmend, the Solicitor General at that time, told the same session, “Our expectations of this conference are high, and so they should be. The right people are here. We share a determination to gain a better understanding of the problems we face and to move towards their solution.”

The meeting was unusual, in that its third day was actually a formal federal/provincial conference to which delegates to the overall meeting were admitted as observers. Such ministerial meetings are usually closed, at least in part. Representatives of native people, Cabinet ministers and officials took part in closed workshop sessions, each limited to 20 persons to make discussions easier. The reports of those workshops were then presented to a plenary session, presided over by Judge Ian Debinski of Winnipeg.

The workshops produced more than 200 suggestions that were later grouped to eliminated duplication and to enable ministers to deal with them more effectively in their talks. Most of the key subjects were examined by two groups. One stressed the urban implications of the subjects, the other the ramifications in less settled areas of the country.

The conference covered virtually every aspect of the criminal law and administration of justice as it relates to native people, and identified problems that must be faced to ensure the equitable treatment of native people within the Canadian criminal justice system.

That was 13 years ago. At that time, I was involved with an Indian group here in the Yukon called the Yukon Indians and the Law Committee. We followed up on a number of the initiatives that were developed. I attended that meeting, along with a number of other people. We continued to have ongoing meetings with the territorial government.

I am not sure whether the Member for Porter Creek East at that time was a Member of the Legislature, but we had ongoing meetings that were taken very seriously. At that time, there were a number of changes that we were able to make. There were things that we were able to get involved in with respect to what was happening in the jails and the court systems. As a matter of fact, at the conference in Edmonton there were a number of inmates from different facilities across Canada who were delegates at that meeting. A follow-up meeting here in the Yukon also had inmates from the Whitehorse Correctional Centre there. There were a lot of things that happened as a result of that.

At the time of the conference, there were six guidelines for action on tribal justice that were passed by the conference delegates. Those guidelines stated that “Indian people should be closely involved in the planning and delivery of services associated with criminal justice and Indians, and that native communities should have a greater responsibility for the delivery of the criminal justice services to their people.

“Further to this, the delegates said that all non-native staff in the criminal justice system who serve the aboriginal population should be required to participate in some form of orientation training to familiarize themselves with the special needs and aspirations of native people.”

This government institution of cross cultural training for justice staff and support of the native courtworkers program addresses this need to a certain extent. The conference delegates resolved that more native people should be recruited and trained for service in the existing criminal justice system, and the use of native paraprofessional legal services should be encouraged. The final guideline passed was that in policy planning and program development emphasis should be placed on prevention, diversion from the justice system to community resources and continued investigation of alternatives to imprisonment and youth detention.

In the Yukon a few years ago, Barry Stuart, in his time on the bench, took the initiative to consult tribal justice councils before sentencing and considered the information in sentencing. I was involved in a lot of those discussions because I was a justice of the peace at that time. We did involve a lot of community people with regard to the sentencing and asked for their advice. They gave us advice in many cases. It was not the easiest thing to try to deal with the certain things they were asked to deal with, but they did provide a lot of valuable advice and experience from the past. It is my hope that someday that kind of a program would be reinforced. I enjoyed that part of my life and I certainly learned from it. I certainly learned from what those elders told me at the time. They are still saying those kind of tribal traditional things have to take place.

In other jurisdictions control of justice for Indian people has met with success. Quebec, for example, is serviced in 22 communities by 73 Amerindian police officers who enforce band developed bylaws, traditional laws and any federal or provincial laws that apply on reserves.

While serving as a JP, I knew there were better ways for communities to address the problems facing them in the justice system. Investigating tribal police/peacemaking and tribal justice systems will highlight those alternatives. Listening to the solutions Indian people have to deal with their difficulties in the justice system and implementing those solutions will also decrease the number of people who appear in court.

Practical and immediate steps can be taken to make the existing legal system aware of the different cultural approaches to justice in this country. Methods used to keep Yukon Indians out of the court system will contribute to the overall health of our communities.

Tribal councils can play a key role in providing alternatives to our present criminal justice system. Band administration of justice for young offenders could be investigated. Diversion, community service and cultural activities can all be used to provide young offenders with an alternative to court.

It was only a couple of weeks ago that we heard from Professor Peter Russell who spoke during Law Week. He talked about Indian bands working at developing tribal justice systems. He said it is something that Canadians have not considered carefully enough and that there may well be a wisdom and understanding particularly about family relations in native communities that we are not just tapping and using, that we are suppressing, and there may be ways of harnessing that into the modern justice system.

I believe that there are things that we have to take into consideration when we are dealing with the Indian people and the traditional laws they used. This motion is not forcing anybody to do something they do not want to do. We are investigating the feasibility. We are not saying we want to do this right away, we would have to first find out whether or not something like that would be feasible. I am supporting this motion fully and would like to thank the Member for Old Crow for bringing it to this House.

Mr. Phelps: I, too, would like to thank the Member for Old Crow for bringing this motion to the House so that we could debate it. I have a great deal of sympathy with much that has been said by the Member for Old Crow, as well as by the Member for Whitehorse North Centre. There is no question but there are problems with the present justice system. Some of the problems seem to be most felt in the Indian communities and by Indian people and thus we do have a higher crime rate, more Indian people in jail - disproportionate numbers in relation to the total population. It is an issue that anyone concerned or involved in the justice system has been concerned about. Various attempts have been made over the years to involve Indian people, at every level of the system, with some degree of success. We have had Indian constables, Indian special constables, Indian justices of the peace, Indian lawyers, and there has been a very great attempt made by some of the universities to increase the number of aboriginal people in the legal profession and in the accompanying professions, with regard to such things as criminology, and other aspects of the law. There is no question that there is a problem, and steps have to be taken to try to find solutions.

The area of justice was dealt with in land claims negotiations in the negotiations that led up to the 1984 agreement in principle. Those negotiations took place at various times and in various places, and I recall very vividly a trip that a number of us took, including the Minister of Justice, at the request of the Council for Yukon Indians. We went down and visited the Navajo Nation, at Window Rock, Arizona, in order to examine and to see first hand how their system worked. The Navajo Nation is the largest reserve in the United States with a very large population at the time - I think we were told about 150,000 people resided on the reserve, which comprised over 25,000 square miles and was situated in a total of four states, if I remember correctly. That Navajo Nation has their own police force and their own court system, with band members sitting as judges in their courts.

The consensus seems to be that the system is not one that the Council for Yukon Indians thought was appropriate for the Yukon. I certainly shared that observation as did some of the other people present on the trip. There were a whole bunch of reasons, not the least of those being the very small populations of the aboriginal people that we have in the numerous communities around the territory and the real practical problems of getting people to sit as judges and the cost implications of such a system as was, and works quite well, on the Navajo Nation Reserve.

That was one of the studies that I was involved in. We got all kinds of literature and saw all kinds of reports. The Member for Whitehorse North Centre has read in some very interesting and compelling excerpts regarding meetings that have taken place. The federal government has always played a fairly key role in such meetings because, for the most part, the criminal law is of federal jurisdiction.

In any event, a model was worked out, that was consistent with the overall settlement model for land claims and a package that was known as the 1984 Overall Agreement in Principle. I do not know, I am not privy to where parties are going now, what kind of models that they are examining, whether or not there is a desire to change that agreement in principle or if anything has transpired in that regard.

The Member for Faro has made a very good point. He quoted the Minister of Justice a few years ago saying that these issues should be dealt with at the land claims table. I agreed with those comments at the time, and I still feel that the land claims table is the place that most of the work ought to be done in determining what kind of modifications might be made to the present system in order to meet the objectives that we all share, to see more understanding of the legal system, more participation and to see more emphasis on crime prevention, and the list goes on.

One could write a full page of objectives. I have not done that, so I will not try to make up all the objectives that I would see as being realistic and ones that ought to be achieved and are achievable.

The purpose of the amendment put forward by the Member for Kluane was made, I think, for some very sound and basic reasons. The reasons behind the amendment were basically a concern that any steps taken be practical and that commonsense be imposed on the people who are so eager to make changes. There is a fear, shared by many, that a motion such as this will be seen by the Minister of Justice as a carte blanche for him to go off in any direction, doing what he thinks is so wonderful and taking radical steps. We have seen what happened with the 36 page Human Rights document which, only after a year of struggling and debating, was knocked down to a fairly simple and straightforward package.

There are all kinds of reasons for Members on this side wanting to see feasibility studies and to discuss the implications. There is a fear out there about radical changes. I think there is a great deal of sympathy, though, for the noble sentiments expressed by the person who moved the motion and the Member for Whitehorse North Centre. It is not my wish to try impede practical progress that would make the justice system respond more evenly and in a better way and make the system work for aboriginal people. I am fully committed to that, personally, but at the same time I do not want to write a blank cheque and tell the Minister of Justice to go ahead, because I share the concern of the Member for Kluane. I would want to see what is being planned. I would want to be assured that whatever happens has been considered by such groups as the Yukon Law Society and agreed to, because the people who make up that association have practical experience in the field. I would want to think that the Judicial Council had reviewed it very carefully and thought about it and could support it fully. I would want to think that the RCMP would have a chance to consider it objectively and scrutinize it and have genuine input into the end result. I would want to think that the JPs, presently sitting, and those who have retired, would have time to look at the package and have their input and see it as a commonsense and practical approach, whatever might happen.

There are all kinds of models, all kinds of things that can be done. The words tribal police, peace making and tribal justice systems are concepts that I am sympathetic to seeing in place, but the concepts are vague. There are all kinds of permutations or combinations that could result from the justice minister’s bad experimentation.

Some people really do not want to serve as the test tubes and chemicals of a mad scientist. What they want to see are sound practical steps that will enhance the justice system that will be of benefit to the Indian people and to us all. You do not tinker with the justice system haphazardly. You do not do it simply to perform experiments on very fragile, delicate social fabric such as that in the Yukon.

Because I have no idea of what this motion would really mean to the Minister and because I deeply fear the kinds of mandate that he has been given, I very reluctantly say that I will vote against the motion. I would have voted for it with the amendment. I would vote for it if I had any kind of faith in the common sense of the Minister responsible, but I do not. The consequences of radical changes and the potential harm that could arise is such that unless we can have a thorough examination in this House, with input from all the various people who make up what we call the justice system, I am scared to death of the Justice Minister and am not prepared to vote for it.

Ms. Kassi: I would like to make reference to the Member for Kluane and his statement in Hansard last week where he talked about how he fought for this country so everybody could be equal. Now, at my age we are seeing things where we are not apparently going to be equal. I would like to say to that Member that I feel very optimistic at this time that we are working very hard toward being equal in this territory. Within the justice system alone, if we are so equal why is there such a large majority of aboriginal people in the correctional institutions?

We want to build a healthy foundation for our children - the ones you speak about who are yet unborn. That is very much a part of our customary law. We want to build that foundation for those children for our future.

The Member spoke about breaking and enter. What would happen then? In Old Crow we want to be able to develop a system of a strong council represented by both sides of our clan system, the Wolf and the Crow, and to have those people deal with individuals in a way they see fit, along with the RCMP or a judge in the community at that time to work together.

We realize that we have a long way to go to reestablish our strengths and our pride within our nations. we realize that it will be extremely hard to do with the existing systems, as well with the people who continually tell us, “You will not make it, you will not succeed.” No wonder some of us cannot feel equal. No wonder some of us fill up these institutions.

We have just received a tribal coordinator in my village, and we will work at building it up. We may make our mistakes; we have every right to make mistakes and to fix them during development. However, for the first time in history, we are given the chance to take the first steps toward developing such a justice program in my village, a program that will eventually, in the long term, be strong enough to govern our whole village in all areas. That is the long term. We have a lot to learn, we have a long way to go, and we are going to do it.

We must work toward building both cultures. I am more and more optimistic when I see nonaboriginal people join us when we have our potlatches and feasts, where our customary laws are open and there for people to see and to use. I am optimistic when I see more non-aboriginal people in our sweat lodges - there are a lot of them - who join in our celebrations, and live with us in our village, and accept the way that we live, and eat the food that we eat, and follow our laws within our villages. Until we, the aboriginal people, are recognized as being different, and accepted, and recognized as indigenous people, with profound laws and knowledge in our own areas because we lived there for so long, until our customary laws, that we had followed long before the European justice system every arrived, are recognized and brought out again - which are still being practised in a lot of places - we need to pull those out, we need to use them. We have come to realize that aboriginal people in the Yukon need to utilize these more and more. We do not need another consultation process on this. The aboriginal people are saying that we need to change it, so let us change it. Let us try it out in various communities.

There is no way that we want to look at a separate system. We want to work together with the white people. We need them just as much as they need us. When the cultures of the indigenous people of this country are recognized and accepted is when we can speak about pride and equality within this territory.

I move we call question on the motion.

Motion No. 6 agreed to

Motion No. 41

Clerk: Item No. 6, standing in the name of Ms. Kassi.

Speaker: Is the hon. Member prepared to proceed with Item No. 6?

Ms. Kassi: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Member for Old Crow

THAT this House extends its congratulations to Ducks Unlimited Canada on achieving its 50th anniversary; and

THAT, on behalf of Yukon citizens, this House extends thanks for the work of Ducks Unlimited and its contribution towards preservation of wetlands and other essential wildlife habitat in the Yukon and across Canada; and

THAT this House encourages Ducks Unlimited to continue its work in the territory.

Ms. Kassi: Firstly, I would like to welcome Dale Eftoda, a representative of Ducks Unlimited, to the Legislature today.

This motion arises from a request by the local association of Ducks Unlimited that this House, in some way, recognize their work. I am pleased to sponsor such a motion for all Members to debate and to pay tribute to this worthwhile group.

In southern Canada, Ducks Unlimited has been active for many years. This is their 50th anniversary. In that time, they have either saved or reclaimed many square miles of wetlands that are essential habitat for ducks and other waterfowl.

Where I come from, there has been no work by Ducks Unlimited, but it seems clear to me that, if an essential habitat is threatened in northern Yukon, these people will come out and show their support.

Hon. Members are aware of the importance of Old Crow Flats to the people of my village, in terms of muskrat trapping, which is about to begin once again in the yearly cycle of my people. The Old Crow Flats are an important area for many kinds of ducks, geese, swans and other birds. We feed on these birds. They are part of our survival. It is a joyous time in my village and on the land when they return each spring. Every year these birds migrate long distances and need places all along the way to rest and to feed. They need a good place to spend their winters.

When they come to the north, they nest in the Old Crow Flats, as well as other places such as the Canadian and Alaskan north coast, the area that is being proposed for oil development.

Ducks Unlimited has worked hard in the southern parts of this continent to ensure that waterfowl have good habitat along their migration route and that they have sufficient room to overwinter before the long journey back to the nesting grounds in the north coast.

Just by looking at these birds, we can see how much the environment of the world is interconnected. This takes me back to my motion a few weeks ago on the Brundtland Report. We cannot have agricultural or industrial development in one part of the world without it affecting what is going on in another part. All too often down south, bulldozers cover over these wetlands and the birds must go somewhere else. As time goes on, there are fewer and fewer places for them to go.

Ducks Unlimited is helping to reverse that trend. I want hon. Members to join me with this motion in congratulating this group for all the good work that they have done in their 50 years and to wish them success in the future. We should encourage them to get more active here in the Yukon because as development pressures increase, more wetlands are threatened, and we should work together and do all we can to preserve this important wildlife habitat. This group is composed mainly of volunteers, and we should pay tribute to them today for their good work in many places across Canada as well as right here in the Yukon.

Mr. Phillips: I rise to support, in the strongest terms, the motion put forward by the Member for Old Crow. Ducks Unlimited has been a personal interest to me for many years. I have even had the pleasure of working on the founding fundraising committee in the Yukon several years ago. It is hard to start to describe the achievements of such an organization, but after establishing an office in Yellowknife this year, it will stretch from coast to coast and take in all the provinces and territories.

It is important to talk for a moment about the accomplishments of Ducks Unlimited. First of all, it is very significant that this is the 50th anniversary of Ducks Unlimited. Ducks Unlimited, in North America, has over 1.2 million international members. For the first time, it will exceed 100,000 members in Canada with over 400 of these members living in the Yukon.

Membership is certainly not their only goal. Their budget in Canada this year is $45 million with over 84 percent of that budget going directly to preserve, restore, develop and maintain waterfowl habitat in Canada. In the past 50 years, Ducks Unlimited, through their efforts, have secured over 4 million acres of waterfowl habitat and carried out projects and studies on millions more.

It is interesting to note that the Ducks Unlimited membership crosses all borders, national and political, and involve avid waterfowl hunters as well as non-hunters. I have always maintained that I am probably a duck’s best friend. Every year, I go out in the fall, I get skunked because I am a lousy shot, and then in the spring I show up at the fundraising convention, and I spend more money than I can ever afford.

I would like to talk for a moment about Ducks Unlimited’s official arrival in the Yukon. In doing so, I would like to commend the former government for being so receptive to Ducks Unlimited when they approached them. On January 28, 1985, Howard Tracey, then the Minister of Renewable Resources, signed an agreement with Ducks Unlimited in the Whitehorse Library. I might add that I had the pleasure that day of being a signatory witness to that agreement.

That agreement committed a $2.2 million expenditure in the Yukon. On April 1, 1985, they opened up an office in Whitehorse under the very capable supervision of Dale Eftoda. To date, Ducks Unlimited has spent over $120,000 per year in Yukon. By the end of this year, they will have spent over $500,000 in Yukon.

As well, I would like to extend a special thank you to the current Government of the Yukon and the Minister of Renewable Resources for the very cooperative way in which they are working with Ducks Unlimited in Yukon.

Significant progress has been made in increasing waterfowl habitat values on other wetlands throughout the whole Yukon. A total of 44 wetland areas of key significance to waterfowl have now been determined from Old Crow Flats to the Lewes Marsh wetland complex, to the Pickhandle Lake wetland complex, to the newly determined key area of the Needlerock Creek wetland complex which contains over 1100 wetlands in central Yukon.

I would take a few moments to talk about experiences I have had in some of these areas. One area I had an opportunity to visit was the Old Crow Flats. I went to the Old Crow Flats several years ago under the guidance of an Old Crow elder Stephen Frost. Stephen took me up to the flats to show me a place that he said is just that far from heaven. Believe me it really is a beautiful place. When we were in Old Crow, he took me to his special place called Timber Hill. This is on Stephen’s ratting area on Old Crow Flats. We were ratting and he was teaching me a lot of things about Crow Flats at that time. I had an opportunity to experience a phenomenon that I think very few people will ever see or imagine exists. Right at the foot of Timber Hill there is a lake that Stephen calls Danger Lake. It is called Danger Lake because the ice is quite thin in the winter months and could cause problems. We had a look around the shores of the lake and there were many warm springs bubbling up around the shores of this lake. There was open water. This was in May when there was three feet of ice on the Crow Flats and the caribou are moving north. When the ducks and geese come north and they are about 100 miles from the coast and they have nowhere to land. Here, in the middle of nowhere, is this Serengeti, this little opening in the water where thousands of ducks and geese gather. When they have a late spring it protects them. It was really an interesting experience to share that with the Old Crow elder, Stephen Frost. I call him an elder because he is quite a bit older than I am. I do describe him as an elder and I hear some people describe Stephen as an elder, and he certainly can teach a lot of valuable things about the Yukon.

Another area where I see Ducks Unlimited doing some work is the Lewes Marsh. As a young, boy I spent many years in the Lewes Marsh hunting ducks - not having very much success, but nevertheless hunting ducks. I can remember in the spring we used to paddle in canoes and there would be many, many ducks with their families. You do not see that anymore. A lot of that is the result of the Whitehorse hydro project and the water level being raised. It has created problems for the ducks and their nesting. Ducks Unlimited is doing an excellent job in looking at the Lewes Marsh. Hopefully, one day we will be able to go to that area that was so significant to waterfowl in the Yukon and be able to see all kinds of ducks and waterfowl raising their young within 30 miles of Whitehorse. I hope we do see that in the future.

There are some other things I think Ducks Unlimited should be credited for. They have taken initiatives to increase the security of these key wetland areas by having Renewable Resources indicate high waterfowl interest through a national notation process with the federal government. Another very important area that Ducks Unlimited is working on in the Yukon and are, again, working on with the Department of Renewable Resources and Habitat Canada, is the inventory and cataloging of existing waterfowl habitat information in Yukon. This action has now become a two and a half year cooperative program between Renewable Resources and Wildlife Habitat Canada and, upon completion, this will be a very useful tool in planning for the waterfowl habitat management in the future.

Another thing Ducks Unlimited has done for all Yukoners is, through formal and information presentations and other public relations activities, all Yukoners are now generally more aware of the importance of the wetlands and the importance of the wildlife resource.

We, in the Yukon, have recognized for many years the importance of Yukon as a major area for waterfowl use and its essential place in the well-being of North America’s waterfowl stocks. For a few moments, I would like to quote from Ducks Unlimited Conservatore that just came out. It has an article about the Yukon and is very significant of what value the Yukon is to waterfowl.

It states, “South of the British mountains lies Old Crow Flats, considered the single most important piece of waterfowl habitat in Yukon. It is also above the Arctic Circle. Major concentrations of waterfowl use, thousands of marshy lakes and streams, that cover an area more than 1.5 million acres. Old Crow Flats is considered critical to the survival of displaced waterfowl during droughts in Canada’s prairies. Though displaced waterfowl normally do not raise broods, the northern habitat helps them survive to reproduce in another year.

“In central Yukon, an ancient land fault called the Tintina Trench, a deep valley several miles wide, crosses from the southeast toward the famed gold rush region in Dawson. It is the most significant migration corridor in Yukon. In the southwest corner of the territory, the inland slope of the St. Elias Mountains is another important migratory corridor. Birds going to and from Alaska wetlands travel through this route and use wetlands associated with the Aishihik River, Kluane Lake, and several rivers like the White, Donjek and their tributaries feature riparian wetlands - flood plains that, except during spring, resemble a fine fishnet weave of shallow channels stretched across the flat riverbed.

“In the southern Yukon, between Whitehorse and the Arctic River drainage basin, many huge lakes and wetland complexes are significant staging and breeding areas. The Liard River basin has many small to medium size wetlands that host breeding waterfowl throughout. Near Toobally Lakes, the same watershed, more than half the Canadian breeding population of trumpeter swans concentrate.”

In a nutshell, 3 million ducks, geese and swans from the Mississippi, Central and Pacific flyways use the Yukon wetlands habitats and tundra. Trumpeter swans, white-fronted geese, brant and northern species of Canada geese, along with more than 20 species of ducks rely on these wetlands. As you can see, the Yukon is a central part of the habitat needed for these ducks.

Before I close, I would like to thank a few people who should not go without being mentioned. First of all, I would like to talk about a gentleman whose vision it was many years ago to stress the importance of the Yukon and its value in waterfowl management, and that gentleman is Tom Sterling. Tom is now retired, but very instrumental in bringing Ducks Unlimited to the Yukon, and he was instrumental in getting us to sign the agreement in 1985.

Again, I think special mention has to go to Dale Eftoda, who has been manning the office in Whitehorse since its opening in the spring of 1985 and who has done an excellent job. I have seen some of the presentations that Ducks Unlimited has put together recently; they are very well done and are a credit to the efforts of not only Dale Eftoda but also some of the business people in Whitehorse who donated extremely valuable time and work to put together the video that points out very well the work of Ducks Unlimited in the Yukon.

I would like to join with all Members of the House in wishing Ducks Unlimited the very best in its 50th year and thank them for the excellent job they have done, not only in the Yukon, but all over North America in their efforts to preserve, restore, develop and maintain waterfowl habitat. I would like to urge all Members in this House to support this very worthwhile motion.

Hon. Mr. Porter: If I did not know better, I would have thought the Member for Riverdale North snuck into my office last night and stole my speech. I was also waiting for that famous Donald Duck imitation the Member is known for but he seems to be shy in front of people.

When good things happen, it is good that they be repeated. I will try to edit my speech as I go along, taking out some of the similarities but unfortunately - or fortunately - we are probably going to cover the same ground.

I would like to speak in favour of the motion, both as a resident of the Yukon and as the Minister responsible for Renewable Resources. I am pleased to state at the outset that the Government of Yukon is very pleased with the contribution Ducks Unlimited has made to the protection of the Yukon’s migratory waterfowl. I am also pleased with the extremely positive and cooperative role they have played in supporting the work of my department. That cooperation does not simply extend itself to the Department of Renewable Resources, but Ducks Unlimited has, in all of its efforts in the Yukon, displayed a cooperative attitude, be it with residents of the Yukon or band members through their discussions in the Yukon. I think that will go a long way toward endearing the work the organization performs to the people of the Yukon

Since the beginning of their program in Canada, which occurred in 1938, Ducks Unlimited has contributed $305 million to the protection of wetlands and, as mentioned by the Member for Riverdale North, this has afforded the migratory species protection of over four million acres of threatened wetlands. This record represents a tremendous effort by Ducks Unlimited and it is an achievement that should be recognized and applauded.

Yukon wetlands provide essential habitat for the well-being of waterfowl, fish, fur bearing mammals and a wide variety of shorebirds and songbirds. Those wetlands are invaluable to the successful maintenance of recreational, agricultural, trapping and fishing industries in this territory. They and their adjacent meadows provide meaningful employment and pleasure and relaxation to several thousand citizens of this territory. Again, as mentioned by the Member for Riverdale North, the Government of Yukon and Ducks Unlimited signed a 10 year cooperative agreement. This agreement commits us to a team approach in achieving wise management of the Yukon wetlands. The Yukon program has two basic components: the first is a public awareness and education program, and the second is the direct protection of wetlands. We are optimistic that success will be achieved in both areas during the life of the agreement.

So far in the program, Ducks Unlimited has been involved in several projects and I will give a number of examples: firstly, in a reconnaissance survey of wetland areas that had never been surveyed before, completion of sophisticated wetland and waterfall population research in the Needle Rock wetlands near Carmacks, and the development of an experimental duck nest box program. Ducks Unlimited also chairs the Yukon waterfall technical committee, which coordinates the work of various government branches and agencies.

Ducks Unlimited is performing an extremely valuable function in the Yukon, and they are doing it with one employee, that employee being with us in the Legislature today. Mr. Eftoda has been on the project for three years and functions as an administrator, public relations person, and fundraiser. As mentioned, the work performed by the local office is performed in a very exemplary manner. Not only is Mr. Eftoda pursuing the goals of the organization known as Ducks Unlimited, but he has been very cooperative in other areas. For example, he assists the department by sitting on the Yukon conservation strategy working group and assists us in developing our conservation strategy for the Yukon. In closing, I think that it is a rarity that a person who has been involved in a specific project or program in the Yukon has the opportunity to be in the Legislature when we are speaking so nicely about him, but Ducks Unlimited can be sure that they are well-represented here in the Yukon.

All the continuing and future Ducks Unlimited projects would not be occurring if the fundraising was not being done, and if the group of Ducks Unlimited volunteers was not involved in promoting wetland and waterfall values to the Yukon public. They have become good enough at it so that the annual Ducks Unlimited fundraising banquet has become a standard fixture on the Yukon social calendar. I had the occasion recently to attend some of these dinners and if you are interested in fundraising, this is probably the best dinner that you can attend to gain some very valuable tips. From my book, those dinners are the greatest example that I have seen of community fundraising and should be attended by more people. For the limited dinners that I have attended in the last three years, they are unquestionably the most successful dinners. They not only raise a great deal of money and provide good entertainment but they also serve good food.

In closing, I would like to state that the Government of the Yukon will be represented at the Ducks Unlimited meeting in Winnipeg, at which the celebrations will occur, in June. There may be a conflict with my personal schedule at that time, and if that is the case I will ensure that a Member of the Legislature - be it from the government side or from the Opposition side - will wing their way south to make sure that they are in attendance. Ducks Unlimited will be having their annual banquet this weekend, and I would like to wish them luck on that particular event and, as well, wish them luck and another successful 50 years.

Mrs. Firth: I rise in support of this motion the Member for Old Crow has brought forward and thank her for presenting the motion to the Legislature this afternoon to give all of us an opportunity to express our support for this worthwhile organization.

The Minister for Renewable Resources quoted at some length from a speech that had been given by the hon. Tom McMillan when we debated the Brundtland Report, and I believe he knows now how Tom McMillan must have felt when he was reading his words in the Hansard from the Yukon Legislature. It is good to know that sometimes we borrow from speeches containing the same direction and expressions of support. We are all anxious to present it to the Legislature and the public on behalf of those organizations.

I would like to begin by giving recognition to Mr. Tom Sterling. Because Ducks Unlimited Canada first became interested in the Yukon because of the work done by a veteran research biologist by the name of Tom Sterling. Mr. Sterling retired from the company in 1985 after a career of 36 years. His long-time interest in Yukon wetlands brought him to the Yukon in 1982 to begin his three year study and see if Ducks Unlimited Canada might play a role in conserving the territory’s wetlands. His work led to the 1985 signing between Ducks Unlimited and the Yukon government of a 10 year agreement in which Ducks Unlimited “propose to cooperate with the territorial and federal governments to plan and undertake waterfowl habitat conservation programs”.

In a presigning report, Sterling wrote that one of Ducks Unlimited’s main objectives would be to assure that governments continue to recognize the importance of security and protection for the future needs of waterfowl within the Yukon.

After that signing, Ducks Unlimited, in recognition of the potential in the Yukon specifically sent a gentleman here to work towards enhancing and conserving the wetlands in the Yukon Territory, and that gentleman is Dale Eftoda. He is a constituent of Riverdale South, and I have had many discussions with Dale regarding the objectives and achievements of Ducks Unlimited.

Dale is a very hard worker. He has become actively involved in the community and the Yukon. He is a member of the Yukon Territorial Water Board and has chaired meetings of the Yukon waterfowl working group, and also attends working group meetings on Yukon conservation strategy and potential sites for protection.

Dale also cooperates in field research with the Canadian Wildlife Service and the Yukon territorial government renewable resources department in efforts to document the value of particular areas to waterfowl here in the Yukon Territory. He keeps the public and the government informed through forums like the Yukon waterfowl working group. I would particularly like to congratulate Dale Eftoda on his efforts and his diligence in encouraging the Indian people in the Yukon to be better informed and more participatory in the activities of Ducks Unlimited. He has established a good communication link and rapport with the Indian people.

This is so they do not feel threatened by the activities, and feel a part of the activities of Ducks Unlimited, in the total context of the picture of the territory they feel so strongly a part of.

I would like to thank Dale for a job well done, and congratulate him again on his efforts here in the Yukon, representing Ducks Unlimited.

I feel Ducks Unlimited Canada has a voice in the Yukon Territory. It is a collective voice that emanates from a concerned public, which has rallied behind Ducks Unlimited’s entry into the conservation frontier that we are discussing today.

We have over 400 members of Ducks Unlimited here in the Yukon. As the Member for Riverdale North said, they cross all political and philosophical boundaries. There are hunters, conservationists, Indians, non-Indians, people from all walks of life, different professional and trades people, who participate and work. One of the attractions I personally found about the Ducks Unlimited organization was that they refer to their organization as a family and involve people in the organization as a family. I found it an extremely positive activity to participate in for couples or for spouses. You will find that, if one spouse is involved selling tickets or on a committee, the other spouse is usually involved in some way as well, whether it be promoting Ducks Unlimited or actively involved at the executive level or selling tickets to the fundraising functions.

The editorial in the Ducks Unlimited magazine talked about Ducks Unlimited in the terms of family. The editorial was written by Matthew B. Connolly Jr., who is the executive vice president. In it, he said, “our volunteers care very much about wetlands and the future of waterfowl, and are also, not surprisingly, individuals who are doers, in both their personal and business lives. Add to this the tremendous sense of fun these people generate, and it is not difficult to imagine that our family raised more than $50 million last year.”

He mentioned a very interesting story that appeared in this publication about an 88 year old lady, who has been referred to as Miss Hazel of Huntsville, a volunteer who has been a sponsor of Ducks Unlimited for more than 20 years. The words of that lady were that she would have died 10 years ago if she had gotten lazy and laid down. There is quite an extensive article, and she talks about hunting and throwing a fly rod occasionally, and how the organization has continued to make her feel a part of something, and encouraged her to contribute and participate. Any organization that can generate that kind of enthusiasm and that kind of participation definitely deserves recognition by the whole Legislature and all the communities to whom they provide such a tremendous service.

I have been a member of Ducks Unlimited ever since they have been active here in the Yukon. My husband has, also. We have gone to all the banquets and contributed our share of finances but, last year, I was very fortunate and I, too, was rewarded by winning a couple of prizes at the Ducks Unlimited dinner. Therefore, this year my husband has instructed me I had better not buy any bonus tickets, because there are other people who want to win and it could be an election year this year.

The dinner will be on Saturday night. It will be the fourth banquet that Ducks Unlimited has sponsored here in the Yukon. They have raised $60,000 so far, and the funds are directed towards the enhancement program that is going to occur very shortly. For every $20,000 that is raised, another $120,000 is turned back into enhancement and research programs by Ducks Unlimited.

To add to the concern that was raised by the Member for Old Crow about agricultural and industrial development and these organizations working together with the conservation and environmental organizations, I would like to reassure her that as a person who is going to be involve agriculturally, I do not see my involvement in that part of the environment being a threat to waterfowl  survival. I see it as a cooperative, working-together relationship.

We already have many wildlife fowl landing at our farm, including geese in the late fall, to eat what is left of the harvest. We have had pairs of cranes, and we always have ducks and duck families using our irrigation pond as a nesting ground. We look forward to having that kind of cooperative relationship with wildlife and do not see, in any way, that we will be endangering that.

To sum up, I would like to thank the Member for Old Crow for bringing the motion forward. As the Member for Riverdale South, and on behalf of the constituents of that riding, I would like to extend congratulations to Ducks Unlimited Canada on achieving its 50th anniversary. We would like to give thanks to Ducks Unlimited and its contribution towards preservation of wetlands and other essential wildlife habitat in the Yukon and across Canada. We do encourage Ducks Unlimited to continue its work in the territory.

I would like to extend a special congratulations and thank you to Mr. Steve Morrison, who is the chairman of the fundraising committee this year, and his executive and helpers, who have been working very hard for the last year on the fundraising dinner for Saturday  night. They have been selling tickets and selecting prizes. I know that they have been having meetings. It is extremely time consuming, and they have been very active and dedicated volunteers.

Motion No. 41 agreed to

Motion No. 3

Clerk: Item No. 2, standing in the name of Mr. Webster.

Speaker: Is the hon. Member prepared to proceed with Item No. 2?

Mr. Webster: Yes.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Member for Klondike THAT it is the opinion of this House that the new federal tax on telecommunications is an unfair burden on Yukon people who rely more than southern Canadians on long distance service, and THAT it is the opinion of this House that the tax should be capped at a level which is affordable and reasonable.

Mr. Webster: As we are all aware, the federal government has introduced the telecommunications tax, effective January 1 of this year. We are all aware of this tax simply because it has appeared on our last three or four telephone bills. In my case, for example, it has meant an additional cost of $10.00 to $15.00 a month, but I consider myself fortunate because I am only reminded once a month of this increase, unlike business people who also must pay this tax a second time on long distance calls made at their place of business. However, in the end, the increased cost of doing business as a result of the sales tax has been passed on to you and me, the consumer. Thus, everybody feels a double pinch of this tax measure - on one side when paying the residential bill and on the other side when conducting or patronizing a business.

The intent of this motion is to reduce the pain of this pinch by calling for the imposition of a ceiling on this tax. I and suggesting that it be capped at a level which is affordable and reasonable, in much the same way as the ceiling of $50 is applied to the 10 percent tax on air travel in this country. After all, if the Conservative government in Ottawa could put a limit on that tax, which was introduced some two or three years ago, why will not the same Conservative government not put a limit on this telecommunications tax for virtually the same reasons that were accepted as fair and just in the case of the air travel tax?

This is an unfair tax for all northerners, especially for those living in remote areas who must use mobile phones for business and personal use. I would like to quote briefly from page four of the April edition of the Yukon Claim Sheet, the official voice of the Yukon Chamber of Mines, for the Chamber’s thoughts on this matter: “Federal government has imposed a 10 percent tax on long distance tolls. This adversely affects northern operations in two ways: first, we are widely dispersed over large land areas which means that telephone transactions requiring a local call in the south require a long distance call to accomplish in the north; and, second, due to a lack of telephone infrastructures, a disproportionate number of mineral exploration and mining operations as well as individuals in the north are dependent on radio telephones, for which every call is considered to be long distance and is therefore taxable. Once more we are taxed not on the wealth we produce for Canada but on the cost of producing that wealth. This Chamber is writing on the issue to the federal Ministers of Communications and of Finance, with particular attention to the unfairness of tax on radio telecommunications in this way.”

In consideration of northerners and others living in remote locations in Canada, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs has recommended that these telephone subscribers be subject to the ten percent telecommunications tax on long distance calls to a maximum of $3.00 a month. I suggest that the federal government accept this recommendation to indicate it is sincere about tax reform and to prove that the underlying principle of such reform of our tax system is fairness.

I ask for support on this motion by all hon. Members of this House in sending this message to Ottawa.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I want to enter this debate briefly to report the government’s position on the question of this tax.

The prospect of a 10 percent tax on telecommunications was first introduced in the White Paper on Tax Reform that appeared on June 18, 1987. The Yukon government took the position that this tax places an unfair burden on people living in the north who rely heavily on long distance, and we have taken every opportunity to advise the federal Minister of Finance of our position.

On September 21, 1987, I appeared before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance and and Economic Affairs and informed them of the impact that this tax would have on northerners. This submission obviously found some favour, because recommendation number 74, issued by the committee in November, 1987, was, “that telephone subscribers in the remote north, all of the Northwest Territories, Yukon, and other locations in Canada where year-round road, rail, or boat links do not exist, be subject to the proposed telecommunications sales tax on long distance calls to a maximum of three dollars a month.”

This recommendation was, of course, cited by our friend, the Member for Klondike. Despite this response from the committee, we were advised on December 3, 1987, by officials in the tax reform subcommittee, that the telecommunications tax was to remain as originally set out in the white paper. The reason given for the refusal to follow the recommendations of the Standing Committee is as follows: “that the federal government needs the revenue, and that to modify taxation in the north would result in a major decrease in expected revenues.”

This explanation would appear to confirm our position that the north will, and is, in fact, expected to bear a disproportionate share of the financial burden created by the telecommunications tax. After receiving the federal response to the committee’s recommendations on December 7, 1987, I wrote to the federal Minister of Finance, urging acknowledgement of the fairness of the Standing Committee’s recommendations and asking that he ensure that a reasonable cap be placed on the 10 percent sales tax initiated in remote locations in Canada. The federal Minister of Finance reacted to the recommendations no. 74 by stating, “this recommendation will not be adopted” when releasing the Ways and Means motion to amend the Income Tax Act on December 16, 1987.

Implementation of the tax on telecommunications services, other than basic charges for local services on all residential and business use - Government of Yukon, Workers’ Compensation Board, and the Yukon Housing Corporation are exempt - began on January 1, 1988. On January 6, 1988, a Ministerial Statement was presented in this Legislature expressing this government’s disappointment that the federal government did not see fit to accept the Standing Committee’s recommendation.

Members should know that estimates prepared in October of 1987 would indicate that the impact of the tax upon Yukoners would be on the order of $90 a year for the average resident. The impact on the average tax per connection, for businesses, would be in the order of $148 per year. The most recent information from Northwestel would indicate that these are reasonable estimates, although it should be noted that their information pertains to their entire operating area and is not broken down neatly into political jurisdictions.

Because they have no practical use for them, it is highly unlikely they would do so. As well, because the government does not have access to Northwestel’s records we are not in a position to do such a study either. However, we can calculate that the total tax per household connection figures from the above would result in a total tax of about $1.2 million being collected from the Yukon annually. Northwestel’s collections to date for the whole region converted to an annual figure and pro rated by the estimated Yukon share of the total operations would yield an estimate of $l.4 million being collected from the Yukon this year.

I would expect, given the growth in our economy and the increased use of telephones in our daily lives, that the dollar effect here will increase. Suffice it to say the impact is significant. In our view, this tax amounts to regional discrimination. Its application is unfair and for that reason we shall support the motion.

Mr. McLachlan: I would like to speak briefly on the motion and commend the Member for Klondike for bringing this matter forward to the attention of the House. Because of the long distances involved in telecommunications, the basic tariff charges are higher to start with. As the tax becomes a percentage of this that seems to make the discrepancy just all that much more unfair for Yukoners. I would agree with the suggestion that the clearest way to handle the situation is to cap the tax if you can make an argument that it should exist at all, at a maximum level so no matter how great the bill for the long distance charge is the additional taxation tariff cannot rise above a certain level. This is the way it is handled with the tax on airline tickets and this has proven to be without problems.

One of the things that many of us who have families in southern Canada often run up against is the cost of long distance communication on those special days. It just seems to make it a little harder to talk to families over long distances with an added price to pay for it. Because of this, it seems to be an unfair slap at Yukoners, and I will be supporting the motion.

Mr. Lang: I think it is safe to say that this is not a partisan motion. It is one that is of deep concern to all of us who live in Yukon. We did consider coming in to amend the motion to have the tax totally eliminated, but I thought it would prolong the debate. The message emanating from the Legislature is that the motion is unfair. It does have some relevancy to the statement made earlier that it is almost a discriminatory tax in that we are so far away from the major southern centres that people in businesses have to use the telephones much more than an individual who lives in Montreal or Vancouver because they do all their business within a four or five block area.

Subsequently, they do not have the long distance phone call obligations that an individual would have up here. The other aspect is the question of family and distances that we experience. There are a few in the Legislature here today who, in order to contact their immediate families, have to make long distance calls. It is not a question of going across the street and visiting your grandparents or brother. It is a very human aspect of what we face with respect to living in the Yukon. That is offset by the standard of living we have in the Yukon and by the people who inhabit the Yukon. I do not want to convey the message that we are all up here because someone sent us. We are here by choice.

Just the same, I do not think we should have to experience what can be said to be a tax by regional discrimination. I just wanted to read into the record our concerns on this side of the House.

On December 18, 1987, on behalf of our caucus I conveyed our concern with respect to the tax that was being considered at that time. It is to the hon. Michael Wilson, and I will read it into the record.

“Dear Mr. Wilson: I am writing on behalf of the Yukon PC caucus to express our objections to the recently announced 10 percent tax on long distance telephone calls. The cost of living in the Yukon is already one of the highest in Canada, and this tax will only serve to increase that burden.

“Yukoners rely heavily on long distance telephone calls for communication, goods and services. Eighty percent of the revenues for Northwestel come from long distance calls. Consequently, this tax will impose a more severe impact on Yukoners than on other Canadians. We feel this is unfair, and ask you to consider the imposition of this tax as it pertains to Yukon and northern Canada.”

It is safe to say this side of the House will be supporting the motion. We feel it is an unfair tax. We feel there are other methods that could be employed for the purposes of replenishing the treasury that the Government of Canada has to have in place in order to finance our government, as an example. Two hundred and forty million dollars is tranferred to our government so that we can take on some responsibilities in the everyday administration. Of course the Government of Canada needs to be financed or else, obviously, the Yukon will not get the benefits of such a financial transfer from the Government of Canada.

There are other methods that could be employed so that we, as Canadians, can contribute equally and fairly to the general coffers of the national government.

I just want to register our strong objections to the steps being taken by the Government of Canada on this matter. We do not think it is in the best interests of the people we serve.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I, too, thank the Member for Klondike for  bringing the issue forward for discussion this afternoon in the House. Most, if not all, of the issues of the supporting documentation and the rationale for supporting this motion have been put forward in debate this afternoon or at some earlier point since the measure was introduced by the federal government. The arguments have been made. A unanimous resolution from our Legislature will also have an impact, of whatever size, with the federal government. Hopefully, they will be interested in reviewing the federal tax on telecommunications with a view to eliminating it.

As Minister responsible for communications, I am keenly interested in the effect that this tax will have on the Yukon. I will not pass judgment on whether or not there should be a tax, but simply that it is the position of the government, as stated by the Government Leader, that the disproportionate effect it would have on northern and remote areas is something that we should take objection to and something that we have objected to.

The population distribution in the Yukon does require a normal daily use of telephones between communities and major centre. This makes the majority of our communications classed as long-distance telephone calls. Therefore, it is subject to the tax. The Member for Porter Creek East mentioned that the socio-economic structure of the Yukon sometimes means that families are frequently spread amongst communities for cultural and economic reasons. This makes much of the interpersonal communications from family to family long distance.

Many of us do have close friends and families elsewhere in Canada, and because of the natural mobility of a large proportion of Yukoners, this tax makes it more expensive to maintain normal family ties. As a result of the analysis that we have done, it is obvious that compared to southern telephone bills, a much higher percentage of the average Yukon phone bill is composed of long distance charges. This, of course, in and of itself, demonstrates that this tax applies disproportionally to Yukoners compared to other Canadians.

The effect on economic development in the Yukon has the potential of being severe. We take note of a recently conducted random survey of Yukon business firms that indicated that a high proportion, 97 percent, rated the telephone as either very important, extremely important or essential to their businesses. It was noted that telecommunications costs and phone bills for Yukon business operators are already high as a result of the fact that most suppliers are located currently in southern locations. Consequently, every supplier called is a long distance call.

Time zones frequently dictate that calls should be made during peak periods to that maximum rates have to be paid. The distances are great, and because long-distance charges are based on distance, the tax is greater. The other factor to take in to account is that quite often when telecommunications or a simple phone call is not considered to be the best method of communication between one company and another, in southern Canada there are a variety of alternatives, for example, couriers, the use of FAX machines, data pack, data links and an 800 service that are available to them. In the Yukon, there is less accessibility to those services. Consequently, there are fewer alternatives for Yukon businesses.

One other aspect of this telephone tax is the effect it will have on persons who own and use mobile phones. This is, in essence, a particularly onerous provision for persons who only have use of a mobile radio phone because, firstly, as I am sure all rural Members at least are aware, mobile phone users already pay for a federal communication licence, they pay a monthly charge and they pay a per minute charge. Now, because all mobile phone calls are considered long distance calls, they also have to pay a disproportionate share of the tax. I, too, would like to lend my voice to support the motion and hope the arguments made this afternoon will cause the federal minister to review and hopefully modify or rescind this tax measure that does discriminate against northern and remote locations.

Motion No. 3 agreed to

Motion No. 7

Clerk: Item No. 3, standing in the name of Mr. Joe.

Speaker:  Is the Member prepared to prodeed with Item No. 3?

Mr. Joe: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Member for Tatchun

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the training program arranged by the Government of Yukon in conjunction with the Freegold Road is one more way of maximizing local benefits from the expenditure of tax dollars on public works projects and should be supported.

Mr. Joe: First of all, I would like to thank the Minister of Community and Transportation Services for selecting Carmacks as the first community to be the site of this new program.

I would also like to congratulate our five people who were selected to take part in this new training program. I wish them the best in the next two months.

A program like this is needed in Carmacks where unemployment is high and where there are not many people who have the skills needed to operate heavy equipment. There are other communities in the Yukon that do not have many skilled people who can do this type of work. This was found out when consultation was done with contractors.

There was work done on the Freegold Road and other highway projects last year and nobody from Carmacks was hired. There were many complaints from local people that the contractors did not hire locally. This training program will help ensure local employment.

The experience the trainees will pick up in their co