back

Whitehorse, Yukon

Monday, May 16, 1988 - 1:30 p.m.

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

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

Speaker: We will proceed at this time with the Order Paper.

Introduction of Visitors?

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I would like to draw the attention of the House to John Bilawich, who is in the gallery. He will be working with the government caucus.

Mr. Nordling: I would like to introduce Claudette McCowan, who will be working with the Official Opposition as a legislative intern this summer.

Speaker: Are there any Returns or Documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I have for tabling some correspondence concerning the invasion of BC tax auditors.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I have for tabling a Legislative Return relating to Yukon College capital costs, answers to questions regarding the consulting contracts for drafting the Motor Transport Act, the Annual Report of the Protective Services Branch for 1987 and an information package entitled Broadcasting and Telecommunications outlining the government’s policy on communications.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I have for tabling answers to questions asked in the House during debate.

Mr. Phillips: I have for tabling a discussion summary of a meeting of the Yukon owned and operated tourist oriented businesses within the City of Whitehorse.

As well, I have for tabling a petition with over 200 names on it that discusses the location of a new tourism information centre in Whitehorse.

Speaker: Are there any Reports of Committees?

Are there any Petitions?

Introduction of Bills?

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

Bill No. 7: Introduction and First Reading

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I have for introduction Bill No. 7, entitled Languages Act, and I move that it be now read a first time.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 7, entitled Languages Act be now introduced and read a first time.

Motion agreed to

Bill No. 81: Introduction and First Reading

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I move that Bill No. 81, entitled Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act, 1988 be now introduced and read a first time.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Justice that Bill No. 81, entitled Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act, 1988 be now introduced and read a first time.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: Are there any Notices of Motion for the production of Papers?

Are there any Notices of Motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

Mr. Phillips: I give notice of motion THAT

this House urges the Minister of Community and Transportation Services to establish a 24 hour a day, seven day a week, telephone information service regarding Yukon road conditions.

Speaker: Are there any Statements by Ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Communications Policy

Hon. Mr. McDonald: It is with great pleasure that I rise in the Legislature today to announce the government’s comprehensive communications policy.

This policy is the result of an extensive public consultation process conducted last spring and summer throughout the Yukon. It culminated in a Communications Symposium on the 12th and 13th of June, 1987. The symposium brought together government, industry, business and consumers to provide advice on the shape and direction of a communications policy for the Yukon.

We heard from many Yukoners throughout this process and the overriding concern was the need for the government to take on a more active role in communications matters affecting the territory. This is no surprise when you realize that decisions on the costs for and level of broadcasting and telecommunication services are made several thousand miles away in Ottawa by federal policy makers and regulatory bodies.

I am pleased to say that the new policy meets this concern directly, specifically providing for Yukon government participation in all national policy-making and federal regulatory forums that affect service levels and costs for communications in the Yukon.

Another major concern was the inequity in service levels in the territory. We know that Yukoners want improved CBC television service in those communities where quality of reception is a problem. I am pleased to say that under the new policy, the government will replace the mountain-top rebroadcast translator equipment with satellite receive antenna. This means that all Yukon communities serviced under the Community Radio and Television System will have the same quality of service and opportunity to share the system to deliver a second TV channel.

We all know that the availability, quality and costs for basic telephone service is of particular concern for rural Yukoners. This is a key area in which this government will represent Yukon interests before regulator bodies. Communications staff will also work closely with the telephone company to identify methods for extending service. In fact, the government has already taken steps to include telephone service under the Rural Electrification Program and, as you know, the new VHF system will facilitate extension of basic telephone service to a number of rural areas not now serviced.

These are just a few of the key elements in our new policy. I think that the essential point is that this government recognizes communications as an essential tool in creating a modern infrastructure for the continuing development of the territory. It helps bridge distances between our communities and between us and the rest of Canada. It can bolster the competitiveness of our businesses and industries and allows us to interact with one another.

For these reasons, we have made accessibility, reliability and affordability the by-words of our policy.

I want to thank everyone who participated in helping to develop this policy. I am sure you will agree with me that it gives the Yukon a sound foundation on which to build for the future as technology develops and needs change.

Mr. McLachlan: I am pleased to see the government moving in a number of these areas. The ministerial statement is accented towards television and telephone service. There is very little mention of radio. Some communities receive one, or no radio services now, and because the government hon. as made no mention of radio services, may we then assume that it is the government’s opinion that it is up to the private sector or CBC to extend the radio services into some of these communities that have one station or none at all? Will the government also be  playing a part in extending radio services into these communities?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: For reasons of time alone, the ministerial statement dealt with the major areas of concern that were expressed by Yukoners in the consultative exercise we undertook to develop the comprehensive communication policy. The radio services have not been ignored by the government. In fact, they have been steadily increased as a result, in part, of private sector activity but, also, shared activity with the government itself. Over the course of the last few years, the government has moved to extend radio service coverage to those areas that do not currently have it and, also, to encourage the shared use of equipment for the private sector to increase the selection of radio coverage that any particular community or rural district might receive.

Speaker: This, then, brings us to the Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Territorial Court Act

Mr. Phelps: I have some follow-up questions on the matter of the Judicial Council not being able to satisfactorily resolve the dispute between the Minister of Justice and the chief justice of the territory with regard to who is telling the truth about the firing of Mr. Thomson as justice of the peace last year. Has Cabinet made a decision yet about invoking hearings whereby witnesses will be cross-examined under oath?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: It is just a small detail, but I know the Member opposite would want his questions to be accurate. We are not dealing with the chief justice, who is Mr. Nemetz, who lives in Vancouver. We are speaking of the chief judge of the Territorial Court. The issue is not who is telling the truth. The issue is ascertaining the facts of the matter.

The short answer to the question is: no.

Mr. Phelps: When can we expect such a decision, because we are not going to let this die?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: After the Cabinet decides the question, the Members opposite will know about it.

Mr. Phelps: The Cabinet knew that the inquiry invoked last December would not be adequate. They were told that by the Judicial Council. I want to know what more information the Cabinet needs before it makes a decision.

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: It is not accurate to say that the Cabinet knew the situation would not be adequate. Our expectation was entirely the other way, and that is simply not an accurate statement. The position of the Cabinet was, and is, that we wished to ascertain the facts and the particular way that the Judicial Council chose to go about that was their decision.

Question re: Territorial Court Act

Mr. Phelps: On Thursday last I asked the Minister of Justice when he started the inquiry whether the council had expressed its concern to him that it does not have the power to secure examination and cross examination under the section of the Territorial Court Act  used to initiate the inquiry, and the Minister said yes.

How can the Minister stand there now and say that he had no idea there would be a problem with the inquiry?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: The Member opposite is changing the words around in his questions in a most contorted way. The Cabinet had an objective and asked the Judicial Council to inquire into the fact with certain powers. We expected that to achieve its objective to find the facts. The situation is now different and the Cabinet will deal with the question as it is today in light of the new information.

Mr. Phelps: They were told back then that there was going to be problems with this process. There are problems. The Judicial Council cannot come down with a finding of fact because there are conflicting stories about what went on back then.

Does the Cabinet want to get to the truth of this matter?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: Yes.

Mr. Phelps: Then will the Minister invoke a process that will involve the cross examination of the witnesses under oath?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I have already answered that. First of all, it is not a decision for me to make; it is a decision for the Cabinet to take collectively. The Member opposite ought to know that we are talking about Orders-in-Councils here and it is a question for the entire Cabinet. The question has been asked and answered several times. The Cabinet is considering it and will make a decision.

Question re: Territorial Court Act

Mr. Phelps: Would the Minister of Justice agree that if a procedure is not invoked that involves the cross-examination of the witnesses under oath, that the truth will never get out?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: As a bold and simple statement, no, I do not agree with that.

Mr. Phelps: Then how is the public going to know what the truth is about who fired Mr. Thomson?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That will be the essence of the question that is under consideration by the Cabinet presently.

Mr. Phelps: Will the Minister not agree that the question will be a very simply one? It will either be by cross-examination under oath of all the witnesses or cover up.

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I definitely do not agree at all. There should never be an assumption made that cross-examination under oath will ascertain the facts in any event. It may or it may not. The proper statement is, it could, but I would make no statement about the probability of that. There are various options, and the Cabinet is considering them. A decision will be made after considering those options.

Question re: Home Owner Initiative Program

Mr. McLachlan: I have a question for the Minister responsible for housing. The two-year interim financing program for owner-builders contains a qualifier that luxury homes will not be considered for financing under this program. Will be an established upper limit on the cost of the home builders housing program beyond which the corporation will not be able to participate? Exactly what will the corporation define as a luxury home?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I am sure that the Housing Corporation will determine the appropriate definition for housing under this element of the program. The proposal would be that the home would be of such a quality, size, type and design that would meet the needs of the owner-builder. These characteristics would be considered modest or average housing for homes in a community. They would be within the financial means of the owner/builder to maintain the mortgage.

Mr. McLachlan: When the Minister was questioned by myself, as well as by the Member for Porter Creek East, about what was taking so long for the housing program to start, the Minister said that as soon as the program was announced, the corporation would be out of the starting gate, all the forms would be ready, and people would be able to apply right away for help. Why does the program for the do-it-yourself builder not start until 1989 when this is the month that the plans should be ready and the basement dug?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The preamble, in my view, is highly unfair. The Yukon Housing Corporation has moved to implement an extended mortgage guarantee program, a lease purchase program, a joint venture program. These are three major elements of the home ownership program. The one element that we have yet to finalize details on is the mortgage financing program for owner-builder houses.

In the past, with other kinds of owner-builder programs, we have experienced difficulties. The Rural Native Demonstration Program is an example of where administrative difficulties have been faced. It is the Yukon Housing Corporation’s view, and my view, that while the major components of the program are highly desirable, it is absolutely essential that the administrative arrangements be undertaken, and that the program be designed so that it not fail. We have enough experience now to know where we need to make those improvements, and we are going to make sure that things are in place so that when the program comes forward, it will be guaranteed success.

Mr. McLachlan: My apologies; I was unaware until now that some parts of it were selected. We were relying on what the Minister said in this Legislature. There are, of course, some vacancies at the moment in the corporation, which are due to natural attrition. Could the Minister advise whether additional people will be hired by the corporation to administer these programs, or whether they will be administered by existing staff?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I did explain exactly what features of the program we are going to be proceeding with when the program was announced, and which features of the program would be delayed until the administrative arrangements would be in place. I put that on the record a number of times, both in Question Period and during the announcement itself.

Regarding the staffing for the corporation, no new staff will be required as a result of the development and implementation of this program.

Question re: Territorial Court Act

Mr. Phelps: I would like to go back to what is know as the Thomson affair. The press release issued by the Judicial Council states as follows: “The study shows an irreconcilable factual conflict on fundamental points. Council has concluded that the conflict can only be satisfactorily resolved by the examination of witnesses under oath.”

My question of the Government Leader is whether he can give us one good reason why we cannot have this issue satisfactorily resolved by the examination of witnesses under oath?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I believe that the question is hypothetical. The Member is presuming a conclusion by Cabinet, which has not been reached. He is also then asking me to debate in advance a conclusion that he is predicting, which I have no reason to believe will be the consequence, whatsoever. He is making - I guess - a representation or an argument for one course of action. I think that we would want to take his representation into account when we make a decision.

Mr. Phelps: My question, of course, has not been answered. I am trying to search in my mind, and to ask people, as to what one good reason could be for not proceeding in a way that would resolve this matter, once and for all - one good reason for not invoking a procedure that would result in the examination of witnesses under oath.

Can the Government Leader just give me one good reason why Cabinet might not proceed in a just and fair manner?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: Again, the Leader of the Official Opposition is inviting me to speculate, which I will not do. The best way I can answer his question is to say that when the original request was made of the Judicial Council, Cabinet clearly believed this would be sufficient to establish the facts. It clearly was not in the Council’s opinion sufficient. We now have to deal with that conclusion.

Mr. Phelps: How can the Government Leader stand in this place and say that when he has already admitted last Thursday that Cabinet was aware of the misgivings of Council about the whole procedure because of the lack of ability to cross-examine witnesses under oath.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: All I can tell him is that we did believe it would be sufficient to establish facts, and that is why we proceeded as we did. The Member is asking me, in essence, to share with him the reasons why a collective judgment was made on that score. I think that the Minister of Justice has provided the House with enough of the relevant information on that question.

Question re: Territorial Court Act

Mr. Phelps: I would like to follow up and add a little bit. I would like to know whether the Government Leader is simply saying that he and the Members of Cabinet did not believe the representation made by the Judicial Council last December when they said they could not get to the facts without that power?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: The Member chooses to use a verb that has, I suppose, particularly in the context of this question, the most odious connotations. It is not a question of belief or not. We considered that information along with other information provided to us, and we made a decision.

Question re: Landlord and Tenant Act/Kimmerly/tenant deposit

Mrs. Firth: I have a policy question regarding the administration of the Landlord and Tenant Act for the Minister of Justice.

Is it the policy that when the department does not receive a reply to its correspondence or recommendation that they follow up on such disregard of correspondence?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That question is phrased in such a general way that I can only answer it very, very generally. I think it is the policy of all branches of the government that when they send a communication and there is no response within a reasonable time - and reasonable time would be variously defined in various circumstances - they send a follow-up communication. The question was so general I can only answer it in that general kind of way.

Mrs. Firth: To be more specific then, can the Minister tell us what the policy would be in the instance where correspondence is disregarded under the Landlord and Tenant Act? Can he tell us what the department’s policy is for the follow-up?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I am unaware of any situation where correspondence was disregarded.

Mrs. Firth: Is the Minister saying that there have been no instances of correspondence being disregarded within the Consumer and Corporate Affairs Branch when it comes to the administration of the Landlord and Tenant Act?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That is essentially the same question. I will give the same answer. I am unaware of any circumstances.

Question re: Landlord and Tenant Act/Kimmerly/tenant deposit

Mrs. Firth: Again, my question is to the Minister of Justice regarding policy questions and the administration of the Landlord and Tenant Act. Can the Minister tell us of how many instances the department would have had where they would not be able to mediate disputes within that department?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: It is a very general question again. I guess the question is, how many complaints have been made, and of those, how many were not mediated. I do not know the numbers, but I will inquire into that.

Mrs. Firth: In the event of disputes, are mediators appointed?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That is a very general question again. That could occur. The rentals person is engaged in mediation-type efforts herself. In the light of that general type of question, that is about the best answer that I can give.

Mrs. Firth: Can the Minister tell us when the decision would be made to go to court? He mentioned something last week about legal opinions and such, so I am not looking for information after legal opinions are obtained. When would the decision be made as to whether or not they are to go to court?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: The Member is asking about general policy questions. In that context, the question makes absolutely no sense, and I cannot answer it.

Question re: Clean-up program

Mr. Phillips: Last week I asked the Minister of Justice if his department would participate in clean-up week and doing their bit by having inmates from the Correctional Centre participate in the clean-up program, particularly to clean up the winter’s accumulation of litter on the highways near Whitehorse. The Minister said that he would take that under advisement. Would he announce in the House this week that they are initiating such a program and will start it immediately?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: It would be inaccurate for me to announce such a program because it already exists. The work crew at the centre has been involved for several years in various clean-up efforts, different ones in different years. Last year they cleaned up the area under the escarpment in Whitehorse and the riverbank. The work crew in the Junction was also involved in the clean-up.

I do not know anything about specific highways, but that is a part of the program now, and any announcement would be probably eight or ten years late.

Mr. Phillips: I would suggest to the Minister that it should be an ongoing program. Whenever they have time available, they should be doing that kind of public service.

Would the Minister of Health and Human Resources direct her people in charge of the young offenders facilities to institute such a program there, so they would, in their spare time, on a year-round basis, also go out and clean up the communities?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I am glad the Member has asked me the question. That has already been directed. For the information of the House, the young offenders have, in the past, done cleaning up in the area in which they live along the railroad. That takes place whether it is clean-up week or not.

Mr. Phillips: I am not just suggesting that both the Corrections people and the young offenders do it in their own area. I am suggesting they do it on an annual basis, as a policy, that whenever they have spare time, they are taken out by the supervisors and work various areas of the Yukon. Will the Minister give me the commitment that that will be done?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: Yes.

Question re: Trails and back country roads

Mr. Brewster: On March 31, 1987, in Hansard, on page 8, I asked the Minister of Renewable Resources a question regarding trails and back country roads. The Minister responded by saying, “That is a very specific question in nature and what I will do is seek a response for that question and bring the answer back to the Member.”

I am still waiting for an answer. When will I get it?

Hon. Mr. Porter: I will review that particular question with the department and see if that information has not already been put forward. If it is available within the department, I will make it available to the Member as soon as possible.

Mr. Brewster: In the same vein, when will the Minister fulfill his promise to me to return an answer to my question on calf mortality, which I asked in Hansard on page 169 on April 14, 1987?

Hon. Mr. Porter: If the information relative to calf mortality pertains to game zones seven and nine, that data is available from the studies that were conducted there. If that has not been received by the Member, I will make sure that he gets it.

Mr. Brewster: Similarly, when is the Minister going to finish his research on a question I asked him on April 15, 1987, on page 195 of Hansard, regarding his department’s policy on towing private vehicles on the highways?

Hon. Mr. Porter: As I recall, that was a particular incident respecting government vehicles being used to tow individuals out of the ditch. I think my response at that time, for the most part, would be sufficient to govern any particular situation. It would depend on the situation. For example, if it was an extreme situation, where it was absolutely cold and someone was in the ditch, the operator of the vehicle would use common sense and lend what assistance he or she could. If it was a situation where it was not judged to be a danger to the individuals involved, the course of action would be that the conservation officer, whomever that may be, would contact the nearest private operator with wrecking services.

Question re: Education/Yukon College/Faro

Mr. McLachlan: Earlier this month, I asked about funding approvals for the community campus coordinator at Faro. The answer was that a decision would be made shortly. That may be where the problem lies: his opinion of “shortly” is different from mine. Can the Minister of Education confirm if a decision has been made about where to put the campus coordinator?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Member may have hit the nail on the head with the definition of “shortly”. To my knowledge a final decision has not been made. Certainly a long term solution has not been found with respect to the relocation of the community campus coordinator.

I have asked the department to seek space within the school to see if office space can be found in the short term for the community campus coordinator.  I do know that there have been some discussions respecting the use of the day care centre in Faro, but there are apparently some concerns with the use of the basement area in that house, and some desire of the day care people to expand into that space.

In the short term, the answer is that space will be found one way or another. In the long term, if there is other office space available at the right price then that will be considered as well.

Mr. McLachlan: There is a concern on the part of the staff - since one portion of the school is shut down and cannot be used - that moving someone else into the school will exacerbate an already crowded situation. Can the Minister advise if the decision to use the school is still on the drawing board or if that possibility has been eliminated?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The possibility is not absolutely eliminated. Certainly the school administration will be consulted about available space. Obviously, the old new section is no longer usable and cannot be considered as a candidate for office space. After all, we are looking at the need for an office. One way or another it appears to me it should not be difficult to find an office in Faro.

Mr. McLachlan: Perhaps I am asking the wrong Minister. It should be directed to the Minister of Government Services, who is in charge of finding space for programs such as this. Could I direct the question to the Minister. Is Government Services actively looking for space to house the community campus coordinator?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: Yes.

Question re: Lottery regulations

Mrs. Firth: I have a question for the Minister who is responsible for lotteries.

Is the Minister prepared to announce that the new lottery rule regarding application for licence system will change back to best serve the charitable organizations and volunteer groups that it was made for?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That is an interesting wording for the question. Recently, that same Member asked me about the situation and specifically the sale by option or by bid of a Lions Club house. I am informed that the Member opposite misinformed the House about that issue and that the Lions Club in fact was always interested in sealed bids for the cottage, and no license is required. That process is continuing now.

Mrs. Firth: I would suggest that the Minister had better get his facts, because I spoke with the Lions Club. I called the Lions Club members. I believe that the individual that I talked to is with the RCMP and I am sure is not going to give me the incorrect information. He spoke...

Speaker: Order, please. Would the Member please get to the supplementary question?

Mrs. Firth: Mr. Chairman, I will get to the supplementary, because the Minister stood up and made a very serious charge. He said that I had misinformed the House. I have to have some ability to say that I had called the Lake Laberge Lions Club and I was told that that information was absolutely accurate after a telephone call had been made. That was why the issue was raised here, so the Minister had better get his facts right. I do not know who he has been talking to, but he had better get his facts correct and correct the record.

I would like to ask the Minister when he is going to announce that the system will be changed so that it will best serve charitable organizations and volunteer groups, or is he waiting for the first week of the next month to make the decision? What is the hold-up here?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That question has been asked in various perverse forms over the last two weeks. I can only repeat the answers that I have given. The system that is set up is designed with the purpose of best serving the agencies - especially charitable, educational, and recreation agencies - that apply for lottery licences. That system is governed firstly by the Criminal Code, which is essentially enabling legislation, and secondly, by our Lottery Licensing Act. The government follows the policy in that act.

Mrs. Firth: The Minister is in very serious trouble this afternoon. Could he perhaps, for the House and for the public, tell us, since he has made this promise to us several times - and it has been broken - when this change is going to be made, or if it is going to be made? The people want to know when the change will be made.

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: That question has been asked several times and I can repeat the answers ad nauseum, I suppose, but the situation is that that matter is under the control of the Lottery Licensing Board, which acts pursuant to the Lottery Licensing Act, which is empowered by the Criminal Code of Canada. The administrative provisions under that act are to best service the charitable organization that apply.

Question re: Lottery regulations

Mrs. Firth: With respect to the issue of the lottery licensing regulations, the Minister came in this House and said he would meet with the board and review it. I met with the board. I came back, and the Minister indicated he was not prepared to change his mind. We raised the issue of the Lake Laberge Lions Club missing out on its ability to get a licence to sell tickets.

The Minister stood up and again promised in this House that he would meet with the board and review it. When is he going to meet with the board again to review this issue?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: The preamble of the question unfortunately misinformed the House about two issues. The Member stated that I said here that I was not prepared to change my mind. That is an inaccurate statement. The Member again stated that the Lake Laberge Lions Club applied for a lottery licence for a cabin. It is my information that that information is not accurate, and I would ask the Member opposite to check the facts with the people who actually performed the various duties.

Mrs. Firth: So as not to confuse the Minister, I will forego my preamble and simply ask him: when he is going to meet with the board to discuss this issue again?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: I do not know, specifically.

Mrs. Firth: The Minister told us in this House that he would meet with the board to discuss the issue. Is he still going to meet with the board to discuss the issue?

Hon. Mr. Kimmerly: Yes.

Question re: Mine safety program

Mr. Nordling: On April 11, I asked the Government Leader when the transfer of the federal mine safety program to the Yukon government would take place. The Government Leader said it was in negotiation at that time. How are the negotiations going? When does the Government Leader hope to complete the transfer?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I do not believe I have been given a briefing since the Member asked the question, so I do not know if there have been any developments in the last few days. I do believe there is a significant difference of opinion between the parties in negotiation about the resources to be transferred, but I can give no further details than that.

Mr. Nordling: On the same subject, my understanding is that, based on problems and the experiences of other jurisdictions, the Chamber of Mines, the Mine Operators Association and the Yukon Federation of Labour all want the program transferred to the Department of Economic Development: Mines and Small Business. Is the government reconsidering its decision to transfer this program to the Department of Justice?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: We would want to pay very careful attention to the views of those organizations, but the Member will understand that there is still another body of opinion that argues it is no more logical to have mine safety being the responsibility of the mining department than it is to have occupational health and safety in the tourism area being the responsibility of the Tourism department, for example. We still have the matter under consideration, and we will be taking full consideration of the views of the interested organizations.

Mr. Nordling: On April 25, the Government Leader said, “My colleague, the Minister of Justice and I will discuss the matter, and at some appropriate point we may take it before Cabinet.” Will the issue go before Cabinet? If it will, when will the Government Leader expect to take it before Cabinet?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: In one form or another, Cabinet has already discussed it, but we have not made any decision that would constitute a new policy. Therefore, I have not made any announcements in that area.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Hon. Mr. Porter: I would like to give notice pursuant to Standing Order No. 13(1) that the motion to concur on the Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts will be called as government business on Tuesday, May 17, 1988.

GOVERNMENT BILLS

Bill No. 31: Second Reading

Clerk: Second reading, Bill No. 31, standing in the name of the hon. Mr. Penikett.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I move that Bill No. 31, entitled Cabinet and Caucus Employees Act, be now read a second time.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Government Leader that Bill No. 31, entitled Cabinet and Caucus Employees Act be now read a second time.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: It is my sincere hope that this is fairly straight forward piece of legislation from the point of view of all Members of the House. Members who have been consulted about this draft, principally the leaders of the opposition parties know that it has two central objects.

The first is to provide a solid statutory base for the employment of those persons who work for Cabinet Ministers and MLAs, but who are not members of the public service and two, to regularize the procedures by which the duties, renumeration, benefits and conditions of employment are determined for such employees.

In reference to the first object, it has been the experience of both the current and past Government Leaders and party leaders in the Assembly that procedures for appointing and hiring such people as ministerial secretaries, caucus research staff and executive assistants has not always been clear. Nagging questions have, from time to time, popped up about exactly how and by whom these things could be done.

Anomalies exist, for example, the Clerk of the Assembly who has absolutely nothing to do with the supervising of caucus staff, at least not to my knowledge, is the person who makes contracts with those employees. This bill will hopefully remedy this situation, providing a clear statement as to where the authorities lie or sit and as the procedures that are to be followed.

The second object is centered on the principles of fairness and equity. All full-time staff who work for the Members of the Executive Council or caucuses of the Assembly will, with the establishment of positions, have access to pay and benefits equal to those that they would receive if they were in the public service. That is what this bill does.

It is probably equally important to state what it does not do. It does not, in any way, contemplate any growth in the numbers of those employees who are often referred to as political aides or political assistants. Those numbers may increase or decrease in the future, but neither of those happenings would be as a consequence of this bill. Also, this bill does not lead to a requirement for substantial increases in the budgets of the Executive Council Office or the Legislative Assembly.

Present Estimates indicate that the Executive Council Office will be able to meet any demands occasioned by this bill through this current budget, and an increase in the rough order of $20,000 may be required in the Legislative Assembly budget to cover increased benefits principally for the staff of the opposition parties.

I would be remiss if I did not recognize the assistance and support provided by the Leader of the Official Opposition and the Acting Leader of the Liberal Party, the Member for Faro, in getting this bill finalized in Committee and brought before the House. As much as this bill contains Assembly-related matters, it has quite appropriately received all party agreement prior to being introduced.

In conclusion, I believe this bill is a most worthwhile piece of legislation and commend its passage to the House.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. Porter: I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Government House Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.

Motion agreed to

Speaker leaves the Chair

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Chairman: Committee of the Whole will now come to order. We will recess for 15 minutes.

Recess

Bill No. 50, Second Appropriation Act, 1988-89 - continued

Department of Tourism - continued

Chairman: We will continue with general debate. There being no further general debate  we will turn to the first program, Administration.

On Administration

Administration  in the amount $459,000 agreed to

On Heritage

Mr. Lang: There has been a significant increase in this area and I would appreciate it if the Minister would outline the reasons for the increase.

Hon. Mr. Porter: Yes, I am just wrestling with a reluctant briefing book. I will shortly get to the summary of the Heritage section.

In Heritage there has been a $11,000 decrease in Other, and a total increase in personnel costs of $68,000. The total increase is $72,000. The changes in the personnel costs portion of Heritage relate to the conservator position that we have in the department that was not filled last year. That position was filled this year. I believe a conservator was hired on May 2, so it will show up as an expenditure that we did not incur last year. The $22,300 is for merit increases and salary adjustments, $7,000 is for a conservator recruited at mid-range, based on recruitment process. There was a $2,500 increase in overtime, based on 1987-88 forecasts. The casual assistance that we required was $4,500 last year but is not anticipated to be spent this year.

The $11,000 decrease in other costs is made of a decrease in travel in the Yukon, to $4,900, while travel outside of the Yukon decreased by $6,000. Entertainment decreased $3,400. Postage and freight decreased $130. Honoraria paid to a participant to represent the government in the opening of the Museum of Man is a decrease of $1,000, and increase of contract services was $2,000. Increase of other expenditures was $2,000, and miscellaneous was $1,600.

Mr. Lang: Some of the grave sites in various cemeteries around Dawson are getting into a state of disrepair. This pertains to the old  grave sites above Dawson as well as the ones to the south of Dawson. This is an area that should be looked at in conjunction with the municipality to ensure that these are kept up. If we cannot take care of these things, why do we have a Heritage Branch? This would probably require some financing, but at the same time, something could be worked out with the municipalities. This may apply to other communities as well.

Hon. Mr. Porter: We will follow through with this representation and meet with the municipality. I know that in some communities the situation of the grave sites are of concern, and some of them have taken steps, through the LEOP, to obtain funding to do that work. I suspect that this is one avenue where, if funds are necessary, an organization in the community could look at. We would, however, be prepared to look at the situation and talk to the municipality of Dawson about this question.

Mr. Lang: It may not just affect the municipality of Dawson. The observation was made by one member of the Tourism Industry Association, and I felt that it required following up of. It is not just a question of capital works. It is a question of ongoing operation and maintenance costs. Those things have to be kept up on an annual basis. It is not just a question of restoring a headstone and forgetting about it for another 20 years; there is ongoing maintenance.

Is the Minister in a position to update the House on the renovations and capital works for Silver City?

Hon. Mr. Porter: We do not have any recent news on Silver City. The Department of Community and Transportation Services contacted the owners, the Victors, in Alaska and notified them of our intentions to enter into negotiations with them. They responded negatively. Furthermore, when we put in the Heritage Property Assistance Program last year, we sent them a copy of the program so that, if they wanted to do the work themselves as a private company, they could begin restoration work. Again, we received no response to that query.

It seems that the initial response, that they had no intentions of selling it, continues to be the response of the private owners of the site.

Mr. Lang: Is it the position of the government that it all falls apart and that Silver City goes into the last stages of decay?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The only avenue that would seem to be possible, and we certainly do not have the legislative power to do so, would be to expropriate the site, given the situation as I have indicated it to the Member. We continue to view it as an important historic site to the Yukon and the historic sites inventory that we are conducting in the Yukon did do a survey of Silver City. It is included in the inventory of historic sites.

Mr. Lang: It is nice it is going to be included because if things continue as they are it is only going to be a memory. It better be written down. When are they going to make a decision on expropriation? Is the government considering this, and if so when will a decision be made?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The question of expropriation is one we cannot perform because we simply do not have the legislative power to expropriate it.

Mr. Lang: I want to refresh the Minister’s memory. There is an expropriation act on the books. I agree that you may have to go to Community and Transportation Services to put it into effect, but let us not mix words here. Is the Department of Tourism recommending any further steps than they have taken now?

Hon. Mr. Porter: What I was speaking about was the Department of Tourism or Heritage specifically having the authority to expropriate. We are examining heritage legislation in the Yukon. I will not commit that the power of expropriation would be one aspect of it.

As to whether or not we would be prepared to utilize the current laws as they are in the books by another department of government, no we have not had that discussion. It would be a discussion I would be prepared to direct the department to undertake with the Department of Community and Transportation Services.

Mr. Lang: As of today, will the Department of Tourism will be sitting down with the Department of Community and Transportation Services to discuss what other steps can be taken to ensuring these particular grounds and buildings can be preserved?

Hon. Mr. Porter: For the record, as of today the department will be instructed to investigate the question of expropriation.

Mr. McLachlan: I have a question on locally-found ivory in the northern Yukon. Is it true that there is no legislation on the books of the Yukon that prohibits locally-found ivory, that artisans outside of the territory may wish to carve or work on, from being exported from this territory, and that the only legislation respecting that is the federal Customs and Exise Tax Act?

Hon. Mr. Porter: That is correct. We do not have any legislation on the books that is legislation that flows from the territorial Crown. The only legislation applicable flows from the federal Crown.

Mr. McLachlan: Does that answer apply only to the question I asked about ivory or does that apply to any heritage items?

Hon. Mr. Porter: Basically that applies to throughout the heritage area.

Mr. McLachlan: Is that wise? Are any thoughts given by the department to prohibit export of those heritage type items from this territory?

Hon. Mr. Porter: This is an issue that has been before the government for sometime. The only way which that question can be dealt with would be to bring forward specific heritage legislation. It is our intent to have by the fall a draft bill for the consideration of the Legislature.

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $193,000 agreed to

On Museums

Museums in the amount of $191,000 agreed to

On Historic Sites

Historic Sites in the amount of $76,000 agreed to

On Art Gallery

Art Gallery in the amount of $65,000 agreed to

Heritage in the amount of $525,000 agreed to

On Development

On Operations

Mr. Lang: Could the Minister tell why there is a 22 percent increase over and above salary increases?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The increase is $70,000 in Development and the major reason for this increase is that Special Events is a program that was in the Capital Estimates section. We have moved it from Capital Estimate to Operation and Maintenance.

Development in the total amount of $7,075,000 agreed to

On Marketing

Speaker: General debate?

Mr. Lang: I know that a decision was made to make less of a contribution to the Alaska and Canada’s Yukon marketing. Where is the money going to be redirected to now?

Hon. Mr. Porter: It is our intention to develop a specific marketing effort directed at the largest part of our tourism market, which is the travelling public, and specifically the recreational vehicle market. We have begun to work with former partners of the Canada West consortium: British Columbia, the Northwest Territories and Alaska. We put a proposal to each of those jurisdictions that they become involved in a multi-funded campaign. We have received a positive response from the British Columbia government and we have also received inquiries from a private operator in British Columbia, which is tentatively discussing putting $100,000 into the program, as well. I think this is Chevron oil and gas company, hoping to market their gas stations along the corridor. We have also received a positive response from the Government of the Northwest Territories.

The Alaskan government has delivered a formal response to the deputy minister in which they do not close the door completely, but there is not very much space left open, in that they reject the notion of becoming involved in this consortium. However, they did leave the door open, and it is our intention to discuss our ideas further with Alaska. There will be meeting soon with the consortium participants.

We have also indicated to Canadian Airlines International that we would like to involve them, as well as the federal Department of Tourism. Canadian Airlines International, as the Member knows, was a partner in Canada West. We hope that we can receive some further response from Alaska. It may mean that we go directly to Juneau or to Anchorage to meet with them. We have not completely given up on the Alaskans on this particular question, and we will put the issue before them and meet further on this.

Mr. Lang: I want to express my concern that we do not get too far away from the partnership with the Alaskans, regarding our marketing and other aspects of tourism that have been established over the years. From one government to another government, tourism has been a major tie, and if we start going our own way I think that we might bear some negative results in our tourism industry. I can stand up and say this today without argument, because no Member can say with certainty what will happen. In the past, prior to undertaking marketing with the Alaskans, we experienced a decline in tourism - that is many years ago now. I do not think that there was an official representative from the Alaska Visitors Association at the convention this past weekend. I think that it is important that the contacts with Alaska be maintained. Their marketing skills are well beyond those established in many parts of Canada.

Hon. Mr. Porter: Like the Member opposite, we would like to continue to foster good relations with Alaska generally. Specifically, there are projects we would like their involvement with - for example, the centenary celebrations for the Alaska Highway. We would like to discuss that specific project with them and have them be involved in the marketing of that celebration.

On the specific question of the dollars we put into the Alaskan marketing effort, over the years we have seen a steady increase of how much is required from the Yukon to enter that program. At the same time, the inquiry responses from the U.S. specifically dedicated to coming to the Yukon for information has dropped drastically. The Canadian response to the joint Yukon-Alaska ad has climbed dramatically. For example, in 1986, we had an inquiry listing of 20,000 for the Canadian campaign that Alaska and ourselves conducted in the past. That has now gone to 37,000 inquiries last year. There has been a dramatic increase in the Canadian response, but a decrease in the overall U.S. response.

It would suggest that for us to capitalize on the Canadian interests in the north, we should undertake a Yukon image advertising campaign specifically dedicated to the Canadian market. Over the years, Alaska has successfully been able to market themselves to the lower 48 and have represented themselves as the last free, northern wilderness area, and have worked on the emotion of that particular country’s view of the north. In the Yukon, we would have to begin to examine to try to duplicate what Alaska has done in the lower 48 with southern Canada. So far, the responses we have received from southern Canadian’s interests in the Yukon have been encouraging, and that is what we would like to build on.

Mr. McLachlan: How much advance notice does the department need to change its publications when you get new campgrounds, or discontinued campgrounds such as the one in the area of Faro? I notice the 1988 booklets still have the old site as not totally abandoned. They do not mention the new site, which is not totally ready yet. How much lead time does the department need?

Hon. Mr. Porter: Basically, the marketing program for 1989 is in the works now. The end of May is usually seen as the deadline for which any of the specifics of the marketing program should be nailed down, so we are able to publish the Vacation Planner and distribute it in the fall. That is when the marketing activity takes place.

On the question of the new campground in Faro, we know its location. It is just a matter of completing the work toward finishing that campground specifically. It would not be difficult to include the location of that campground in the 1989 materials.

Mr. McLachlan: Is that a mechanical change where the originating department would simply specify it to Tourism?

Hon. Mr. Porter: Usually, it is a specific change that would have to be indicated on the maps that are provided.

Mr. McLachlan: Does the department that is responsible for creating the change, advise Tourism who must do it in their books? Is that the procedure?

Hon. Mr. Porter: That is correct. There are some maps in brochures published by the private sector that we do not have a responsibility for. On the maps that we are responsible for, the changes will not be made until 1990. When we originally printed those maps, we printed enough copies to last until that time.

Mr. McLachlan: On the publications that are done outside the country, who does those changes to campgrounds, closed highways, et cetera? Is that not also a function of the Department of Tourism to advise the Milepost, Wheelers and RVs that originate in the U.S?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The department responsible for causing the change would also bear the responsibility to ensure that corrective measures are taken to advise the U.S. magazines. In this instance, I have no knowledge as to whether or not Milepost has been contacted by the Department of Renewable Resources. I would have to check on it.

Mr. McLachlan: Has the vacant position of the Director of Marketing been filled?

Hon. Mr. Porter: No. It has not been filled. We did fill the Director of Development position.

Mr. McLachlan: Does the Minister expect to fill the position soon? We are right in that season where it is important to have that individual on stream.

Hon. Mr. Porter: Yes. There is a short list of candidates. The interviews will be conducted before the end of May.

On Operations

Operations in the amount of $588,000 agreed to

On Public Relations

Public Relations in the amount of $84,000 agreed to

On Promotions

Promotions in the amount of $542,000 agreed to

On Information Services

Information Services in the amount of $1,014,000 agreed to

Marketing in the amount of $2,228,000 agreed to

Chairman: Are there any comments on Revenue and Recoveries, page 248?

Grants, Contributions, page 249?

Mr. McLachlan: The department has themselves in a bit of a bind on the marketing promotions in some areas. They have a certain amount of money to put out and then find themselves in the embarrassing position of having too many people subscribe for too little funds. Somebody has to be told no.

One of those who was told no was an individual at Kookatsoon, which in the riding of the Leader of the Official Opposition. This individual has done an excellent job of putting on the rodeo over the past two or three years. Now he finds himself out in left field. Does the department plan to do anything to rectify that situation?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The Member is referring specifically to the Special Events program we have in the Department of Tourism. We had budgeted $70,000 for that program in this fiscal year. Unfortunately, the program was over-subscribed to the expenditure level of $250,000. Obviously, there was a lot of people who did not receive funding. Yes, I can confirm that the Kookatsoon Rodeo activity, which had been funded three previous times, was not recommended for funding by the committee this year.

Mr. McLachlan: What is the department doing, if anything, to address this problem of over-subscription?

Hon. Mr. Porter: The only way you can address a problem of over-subscription to a particular program is to go back to Management Board and ask for more money. At the present time, the budget has been fixed. I suspect Management Board would not take kindly to a further proposal to increase budgets shortly after they have been presented to the House. I suspect the only time we can address that question is when we build our budgets for the next coming fiscal year, and then we can make our case to Management Board. We can say that it is a popular program, does a good job in promoting tourism and it should be increased.

Mr. McLachlan: The Minister said the Kookatsoon Rodeo was funded on three previous occasions. Do I interpret from that answer, then, that if there is an over-subscription of funds, and you had the good fortune to have been helped two or three previous times, it means one could be in jeopardy for subsequent funding? Is it significant that they were funded three previous times, or is it just the rotten luck of the draw?

The Minister has not provided any clear direction in his answer.

Hon. Mr. Porter: There are clear directions set down in the guidelines that have to be followed. Usually, what is taken into consideration when they review the guidelines is section 3(e) of that particular set of guidelines, which states that any previous events that were funded may not be looked at again for future funding. Furthermore, there is another guideline - I believe it is guideline 5 - which states that, if a specific project is applied for, the Special Events funding would only be made available to ensure that that event breaks even. My information on this with respect to the specific proposal we are talking about today is that there was an element of providing salary dollars over and above for this year’s event, which was not something that had occurred before.

So, the Special Events program is not designed to be an ongoing operation and maintenance fund for specific events, nor is it a fund that encourages events to realize a profit as a result of the injection of funds from the Special Events program.

Mr. McLachlan: I have heard a lot of what it is not. It leaves one wondering what it is. Does the department have any further thoughts about the advertising program it puts on to inform the general public that this amount of money available. In this case they have found that it is over- subscribed by almost four times the amount that is available. Will this cause the department to hold back in its advertising of money available for Special Events promotion, which it really does not have in the end, as we have seen? What will the department do now in future for advertising this sort of program?

Hon. Mr. Porter: Over subscription is something that has happened over time. The increased awareness of the program is probably one result of it and the increased awareness in tourism generally. As I stated to the Member, the only way in which we can rectify that situation is that the next time we establish our budget we will have to seek further funds for the program. That is something that will have to be done when we begin to prepare our next Operation and Maintenance request.

Mr. McLachlan: Does the department have any anticipatory feelings for the level to which a promotion like this will be subscribed? It seems to me that ads are put out for a certain amount of money made available by Management Board so that interested groups will apply, and we find we have nowhere near the amount of money that is required for competing interest groups. Some thinking ahead of time as to what the level of subscription might be would go a long way toward avoiding the problem. I have no indication that the department has any idea as to the level to which a program will be subscribed to when they advertise for people to apply.

Hon. Mr. Porter: If we did anticipate it would be a method of budgeting in government that would cause people elsewhere to shake their heads. There is no way we can guarantee applicants that they will be funded. All we can do is put the guidelines out so people know what the application process consists of, and allow people to apply for the funding that is available. Once we receive the applications, we go through them to discern which ones will be funded. There  are other programs in government that are treated the same way.

There may be an over-subscription for the housing program because it is so popular, but we still have to live within the confines of the budget we are given.

Tourism in the amount of $3,607,000 agreed to

Women’s Directorate

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I am pleased once again to present the 1988-89 Operation and Maintenance Budget for the Women’s Directorate. This total of $242,000, up from $209,000, represents a 16 percent increase over last year’s Main Estimates.

The Women’s Directorate remains committed to the specific mandate of improving the economic, social and legal status of Yukon women to achieve general equality. The budget demonstrates a very moderate increase for the initiatives to be undertaken by the Women’s Directorate in the coming year.

Apart from the annual increase in salary and benefits, there has been only slight increases under the one program of public information, policy and program development.

In February 1987, the Yukon Advisory Council on the Status of Women was established. This year’s budget continues to provide for travel expenses and honoraria for the eight council members and an additional $4,000 has been required to allow for the council representatives to travel to provincial-territorial annual meetings.

Furthermore, the budget introduces an additional $5,000 over last year’s $5,000 for independent research for the council. This total of $10,000 from transfer payments will provide sufficient funds for the council to conduct meaningful research on issues that they determine to be of necessity to further advance the status of Yukon women.

The remaining $8,000 will go towards contributions to women’s groups for activities such as conferences and special meetings on issues that are also here to help advance the status of all Yukon women. The Women’s Directorate continues its objective of increasing the participation of women in the decision-making process.

Through Women On Wheels, a very successful venture, the Directorate, in cooperation with other government departments and women’s groups, will continue its travels into the communities to consult with women. The budget shows a minimal cost of $1,500 for a successful, ongoing project.

The government-wide plan of action is one step closer to completion, with a draft copy going to women’s groups and unions for their input. The document will be brought back to the department for review and then will go to the final stage of preparation, before being forwarded by the subcommittee to the Cabinet.

The budget further contains $16,000 for research on issues identified by the Directorate. Statistical fact sheets on Yukon women and income, education, and employment are presently being researched and will be published and distributed soon. The successful career fair for young women is scheduled to be held again in the new year. Also under consideration is the development of a handbook on women employment rights. Under Public Information, $4,000 is earmarked to continue the promotion of a talent bank, which continues to encourage Yukon women to register for boards, committees, and commissions. The other area that the Directorate will continue to promote is another successful venture, the publication of the employment handbook, How To Get A Job, Women on Wheels and the Career Fair for Young Women.

The Women’s Directorate continues its work in cooperation with other government departments on issues such as child care, pay equity, education equity, labour, health and family violence. For instance, in cooperation with two other women’s groups and the Department of Economic Development, a research study is underway on Yukon women entrepreneurs.

Another commitment of the Directorate is working with other jurisdictions on issues affecting all women, through the endorsement by First Ministers of the Labour Force Strategy. Joint meetings with other ministries are necessary and scheduling these meetings with regular status meetings has allowed for the travel costs to remain the same. The Ministers responsible met with the Labour Ministers and will this year meet with Education Ministers to deal with equity education for women, which is contained in the labour force strategy.

In presenting this budget, I continue to be impressed with the Directorate’s ability to work at the community, territorial, provincial, and federal level, to advance the status of women in the Yukon.

Mrs. Firth: Can the Minister tell us something about the survey that is going on at present? I do not know if it is finished. The last time inquiries were made to me, it was still carrying on. Is the survey regarding women entrepreneurs finished yet, and how much money are we spending on it?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: The research is not completed. It will cost in the amount of $20,000. It comes under the Economic Development subagreement.

Mrs. Firth: I have heard that some business women are less than cooperative with the survey. They have declined to answer questions and have just made comments that they consider themselves business people within the community. Has the Minister heard the same concerns expressed?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I have not heard those complaints, but I would be interested if some of those were relayed to me. It has not been relayed to me through the Women’s Directorate.

Mrs. Firth: I just wanted to bring the Minister’s attention to it, because it will not make for very reliable survey statistics if women are not participating in the survey. I have had at least four women tell me that they are not participating in the survey. I gather it is exclusive to women who are owners or part-owners of businesses. Other businesses are not being asked any of the questions. When the survey is finished, I will be looking at it very dubiously. I cannot see how the results are going to be very accurate considering the numbers that we are dealing with here in the Yukon.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I would be happy to keep the Member informed. In general, the research and the questions asked of women in business have been quite positive. If there are some problems, we will certainly take those into consideration.

Chairman: Is there any debate on Public Information and Program Development?

On Policy and Program Development

Policy and Program Development in the amount of $206,000 agreed to

On Public Information

Public Information in the amount of $36,000 agreed to

Public Information and Program Development in the amount of $242,000 agreed to

Mr. McLachlan: Some statistics are presented on page 255. Is the number of people specified in the community visits, 90, 50, and 100, the number that the Minister is hoping to get in the  1988-89 season or are these the figures from previous visits to the communities?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: The Women on Wheels have visited Carcross already, and those are the actual figures. They have also gone to Carmacks. We are anticipating going to Teslin because of the interest shown. The estimate will be approximately 100.

Mr. McLachlan: That is not clear because the Budget Book was printed in January. Does the Minister mean that the figures here are from 1987-88 year or the 1988-89 year?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: They are from the 1987-88 year. Those visits have already taken place.

Mr. McLachlan: Does the Minister expect an increase in the current year over the numbers we see hear in the community visits?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: We intended to visit Teslin. They had asked to have that postponed because of other things that were happening. It is our intention, at the request of those communities, to visit Haines Junction and Mayo, so far. There has been an interest in the Women on Wheels visits to the communities.

Mr. McLachlan: That is two additional communities to the ones we see here. What about the rest of them? What about Dawson City? What about Watson Lake and Old Crow?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: Watson Lake has already been visited, and so has Ross River. Dawson has shown an interest and, as I said, there is a great deal of interest because the visits by the Women on Wheels takes in a number of workshops of interest to the communities. There is full participation from those involved.

Chairman: Are there any comments on the grants?

Mr. McLachlan: With respect to the transfer payments, was the $18,000 for one women’s group?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: Grants have been allocated to the Yukon Women’s Conference, the Yukon Indian Women’s Association, the Yukon Women’s Day Celebrations, the Child Care Annual Conference, Yukon 2000 and $5,000 to the Yukon Advisory Council and Status of Women.

Mr. McLachlan: How much went to the women’s section of Yukon 2000?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: That did not come under the transfer section. It came out of the contract, which was $1,157.

Mr. McLachlan: Is the Minister saying it did not come out of the transfer payments, but out of the contracts? Is she then referring to another line item in this budget? I am still uncertain where the $1,100 came from.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: Apparently it came out of the 1987-88 budget.

Mr. McLachlan: What particular area in the Yukon 2000 discussions were we talking about that required the $1,100? Was that in preparation for a special paper or a special discussion section?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: There was a special conference held in Haines Junction, and that included a number of women from as many communities as we could get there. That money went to pay for the accommodations of the women who were there.

Mr. McLachlan: What particular work, discussion paper, et cetera was being prepared for Yukon 2000 that was a result of that Haines Junction meeting?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: That was done under Yukon 2000 to get a women’s point of view toward the economy. It involved many women.

Mrs. Firth: Can the Minister tell us how much money the Women’s Directorate gave for the child care conference? Was that the most recent one that was held?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: We do not have actual figures. We feel it was in the area of $2,000, but I would like to be perfectly sure before I can give you that figure.

Mrs. Firth: That was the most recent child care conference, and it was in the form of a direct grant?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: Yes, it was.

Mrs. Firth: Would other child care organizations be eligible for a similar grant to put on a conference?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: We would take each application under consideration. I do not believe we have been asked by any other day care association to make a contribution.

Mrs. Firth: If it has been made available once, and if the Family Day Home Association decided that it wanted to hold a conference or information session, would they be eligible for funding?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: That would depend on the application, what is included in the application, and what the purpose of it is? I cannot give an answer right now. I would certainly consider any application that comes to the Women’s Directorate.

Mrs. Firth: Is there an official application form?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: No.

Mrs. Firth: How do people know they can apply, and what is the process to apply? I am sure the Family Day Home Association would not even know this type of funding could be available.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: We do not advertise all of these contributions that may be available. We get requests from many organizations in both my departments to do certain things. If an organization meets the criteria and everything is in order then we do consider a small grant. We do not advertise that certain money is available because we do not have a lot of money available.

Mrs. Firth: Could the Minister tell me the criteria for applying for this assistance so I can pass the information along?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: We do not have written criteria but we take certain things into consideration. We have to first of all consider whether or not a society is registered, and I believe that the one she speaks of is. We would have to consider whether or not it was of benefit to whomever was holding the conference. We would have to take into consideration our policies and then take it from there.

Mrs. Firth: What are those policies, then?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: The policies are listed under the objectives of the Women’s Directorate. It states in a long paragraph what the Women’s Directorate is here for, which includes the economic, social, and legal status of Yukon women to achieve gender equality. It includes many things.

Mrs. Firth: Policies are not objectives; objectives are not policies. I would like the Minister to give me some information about that. I want to know where applications can be made and what the criteria are. The Minister said that they would have to be a registered society. If an organization such as Real Women were to make application for assistance from her department, would it be eligible for funding, as is the Status of Women group?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: Most people, when they want to apply for money from any government department, would usually come and sit down and speak to us in regard to the kind of thing that they are going to do. I think that that is the best way to operate. If there is a reasonable request, then we would take that into consideration. Very often, if there is a conference or some request that somebody has of the department, we go over that request very thoroughly. Sometimes they seek help in putting together a proposal for funding for something such as a conference, and then the people in the department would sit down with that group and help them do it.

We do not have a lot of money, however. I think that the figure is only $18,000 and that has to last a year.

Mrs. Firth: I just want to make one more comment about this area. Perhaps if the Minister’s department had some policies, and if they had some forms for applications, or whatever you have to do to get this assistance, and if they made them public, then the small resources could be shared equitably among all groups. It just sounds as if one group of people knows enough to go to the Minister for this assistance, while the other half of the world does not even know that it exists. I think that it is a valid point. I think that it is a valid point to raise, even though the budget is small. I think that it should be distributed fairly and that there should be a fair chance for everyone to have access to it. Obviously it is not, because part of the population does not even know that it is available.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: I would like to thank the Member for her suggestions. As I said, we do not have application forms. They write us letters and they put together their proposals. There was some question from the Member for Porter Creek East on the side, but that is what we do. There are no application forms in regard to requests for contributions. If there is a better way of doing it, we will certainly look at it.

Mr. McLachlan: Could the Minister again detail the $18,000 total: who it went to and how much the amounts were?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: There was $10,000 for the Advisory Council and $7,500 for the women’s groups. That $7,500 is given to those individuals who apply and we agree we would spend the money on them. So, there is only $7,500 for that. The other is for the Advisory Council. They meet four times a year, or more often if necessary.

Mr. McLachlan: I assume this is the Advisory Council on the Status of Women. If it is, we are talking about the local group and not the national group.

Hon. Mrs. Joe: That is correct.

Mr. McLachlan: Is there no funding for the Status of Women under this line item? If there is not, do they not get funding from the Women’s Directorate?

Hon. Mrs. Joe: The Status of Women get their funding from the Secretary of State.

Women’s Directorate in the amount of 242,000 agreed to

Yukon Housing Corporation

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The budget before you shows a net request for $2,074,000 under recoveries. The total expenditure is projected to be $6,047,000, and recoveries are expected to be $3,973,000. The major single reason for the increase in that expenditure is a result of debt servicing, taxes and maintenance for capital projects to be done in the coming year.

Approximately $250,000 is slated for this purpose. Scheduled salary increases of $120,000, and additional staff of $201,000 account for the major portions of the net expenditure increase over last year’s Main Estimates.

Chairman: Could the Minister repeat that a little slower, please?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Scheduled salary increases of $120,000, additional staff of $201,000 account for the major portions of the expenditure increase over last year’s Main  Estimates. Other smaller amounts include $82,000 for office space of which $46,000 has been transferred from Government Services. Increased activity in the housing programs this past year and the next has necessitated the timely development of a management information system to improve its reporting and accounting procedures, and $42,000 has been dedicated for this purpose.

The government has placed a high priority on its housing programs and the revitalization of the Yukon Housing Corporation. We do recognize that a healthy housing market and affordable accommodations play an important role in the territorial economy. We are also mindful of the need for adequate housing for low-income persons, whether they live on pensions, work or receive social assistance. We have placed increased emphasis on repairing and increasing the rental stock, and we have initiated such programs as the Home Improvement Initiative to encourage persons to repair their own dwellings.

I am particularly pleased that the Yukon Housing Corporation Board has undertaken the direction of the Yukon Housing Corporation, while simultaneously meeting the greatly increased demand for service of both the provision of affordable accommodation for low-income, working people and also encouraging home ownership through the programs that I announced last week.

I am prepared to discuss the general expenditures after we get through general debate, and I can perhaps explain some the issues that will be undertaken by the corporation during the coming year.

Mr. Lang: We had better know where the money is coming from for the new program out of the existing budget. The budget was tabled in this House well before any announcements being made on the three or four programs that were announced. Could the Minister give us some detail as to where the money is coming from?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Is the Member talking about the Home Owner Initiative Program?

Mr. Lang: Yes.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The funding for the Home Owner Initiative comes from two budgets, the first being the Capital Budget, land banking, which had been allocated to the Capital Program in November’s Capital Budget. It has now been dedicated to the Joint Venture Fund. The balance comes from the Lands Branch funding.

The Lease Purchase Program is funded through borrowing from a bank and involves debt servicing, a major portion of which is recovered through lease fees. The mortgage guarantee program is a guarantee. Starting next year, we will be budgeting approximately three percent of the anticipated total of generated activity as a result of the take-up under the program. That depends upon how much, in the way of mortgages, are taken up. The program is completely flexible in that respect.

The conservative projections show that there will be about five units for the territory for the extended mortgage guarantee. The character of the inquiries  the Yukon Housing Corporation suggest that it may be much more than that.

Mr. Lang: If I recall correctly, there was $300,000 for land banking. Then the Minister talked about the balance for the other programs - lease purchasing as a borrowing mechanism. They talked about the balance for the remainder of the other programs coming from the development of land. What land are we not going ahead with?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I am going on memory, but a portion of Flat Creek agricultural land development was one we rededicated resources from for this Joint Venture Fund.

Another was the Upper Liard agricultural land development in the Watson Lake area.

Thirdly, the Kopper King commercial land development was projected to come in at a lesser amount of actual expenditures than we anticipated this particular year, given the discussions that have been undertaken with the City of Whitehorse, so even though we are going ahead with the Kopper King development there are lesser expenditures projected there.

Those are the three areas where the balance of the land development portion comes from.

Mr. Lang: Do I take it that the Flat Creek Subdivision is not going ahead?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I cannot give any solid guarantees largely because I have not heard from the Hootalinqua North Steering Committee on its recommendations with respect to the planning process in the Hootalinqua North District. If they suggest strongly that no development of that sort go ahead in that particular location, I will do everything I can to respect their advice. If, however, they suggest that some kind of agricultural land development goes in place in Flat Creek, maybe not the same as was originally intended but some other development, we will take that into consideration as well. Maybe development costs may be borne in future years as a result of that recommendation.

Mr. Lang: That is a long way of saying you do not know. I see the Minister nodding his head.

The new housing construction that was announced last fall brought a considerable amount of debate when it was found that in many of the communities where the Minister was going ahead with these units there were vacant units. Is it still the Minister’s intention to go ahead with the 37 new units throughout the territory as well as the 15 new housing units for low income residents around the territory as outlined on the list that was tabled in December? Have there been any revisions to that at all?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The units that are fairly certainly proceeding include 14 private non-profit units in Dawson City, 4 private non-profit in Old Crow, 15 private non-profit in Whitehorse, and the 15 social housing units for the balance.

Mr. Lang: It is the first time that I have heard that 14 new units were going into Dawson City. The information on the Capital Budget was provided to us in December, and it said that, under the low income and single parents, there would be four units in Dawson City, and there would be two new units going in under the other program, for a total of six.

I do not know if tabling the Main Estimates in this House is a joke and we are supposed to sit here and look like a bunch of fools. When was the decision to go from six to 14 made? Who made it?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Ultimately, the Yukon Housing Corporation has to bear the responsibility for making a decision like that, or reallocating the funds. In the consultations that I indicated would take place prior to this year’s construction program being undertaken, it indicated that there was a significant need for apartments in Dawson City, and the city make a request that apartments go ahead. The local housing association made the request, in recognition of the needs of that particular community. The Yukon Housing Corporation feels that, with the expressed demand, they can accede to this fairly recent request within the parameters of the program they initially undertook.

As I indicated many times before, the Yukon Housing Corporation has been directed to build units that are going to be used and meet an identifiable need and low vacancies. Those are the marching orders they have been operating under for the past many months. They have been designing the construction program in that light.

Mr. Lang: I just find it amazing that the Minister would come in here, and without even having announced it, say that there have been some significant changes in the budget that was provided to the House in December. We are talking about three months, not a year.

What housing units have been deleted that are not going up in the other communities, in order to offset the cost? How much is this going to cost?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Firstly, there is an expectation that, when Members in the Legislature ask a question, that I provide the answers. However, there is also the expectation with our major partner in this matter - Central Mortgage Housing Corporation - that there be joint announcements.

I can simply state that there are no plans until announcements are made jointly with CMHC, or I could indicate where the Yukon Housing Corporation, at least as far as this is concerned, is going.

In this particular case, there has been no announcement, because the announcement would have been joint. Nevertheless, I have indicated candidly where the Yukon Housing Corporation feels it can meet the most significant demand in this particular community.

With respect to housing construction in other communities, I have already indicated that there has to be necessary consultation with community groups and, primarily, with municipal councils, as I have promised there would be to the Association of Yukon Communities, to ensure that the housing programs in those communities meet the community needs and are also supported by the community.

Quite simply, with respect to the proposed plans for this coming year, the consultations have not been complete, and I would not venture to identify specifically, with any kind of certainty, where the capital work will be undertaken until the community consultation is finished.

Mr. Lang: Where is the Minister getting the money with which to go ahead with the 14 units in Dawson City, considering the Capital Budget that was presented to this House? Obviously you had to take the money from somewhere, in order to proceed - or is the money for this project over and above what was provided to the House in December?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The answer is no. It is not over and above, it is part of the 57 units that were initially projected as being planned for construction.

Mr. Lang: Then what got dropped? The information provided in this House was that they were going ahead with six units for the community of Dawson City. Obviously something got dropped and I would like to know what it is. I think that these communities should be made aware that certain things are not going ahead, if that is what has been decided.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I do not really take very seriously the Member’s concern about the need for building more housing in the communities, or the need to respond to those communities that may be disappointed that the housing units are not going ahead. The Member probably perceives this equation from a different direction altogether.

The allocation that I provided to the House, as I indicated when the Capital Budget was tabled, was a tentative allocation. I have tried to encourage Members to recognize that the figures were not firm, that they were only based on what the Yukon Housing Corporation, in its budget estimates, projected as being a need. The consultation with the communities is going to produce the exact figures but will not exceed 57 units. In the case of Dawson city, and after the community consultations had been undertaken, it was agreed that in order to meet an identifiable need in response to the written expressions from the community, including the municipal government, 14 units could be accommodated to meet that significant need in Dawson.

The final decision with respect to whether or not any project is going to be done will be determined by whether to not there is community support for the project. If community support does not materialize, then the project will not be undertaken at all.

Mr. Lang: I do not want to harangue, but could the Minister tell us what the 14-unit apartment block is projected to cost?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I can tell the Member that the cost will not likely exceed the maximum unit price. Discussions have not been undertaken regarding the specific design with the local housing association or the municipality, so it would be premature to indicate what the exact cost would be.

Mr. Lang: What is the projected maximum cost that could be spent on any apartment?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I will ask officials what the maximum unit cost would be.

Mr. Lang: The second in command is right there. I see that he has his pen out and I am sure that he can provide the information. I would like to know it now.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I will ask officials to provide the maximum unit price, and when I have it, I will provide it to the House.

Mr. Lang: Is the Minister telling me that he does not know how much this facility is going to cost? Does he have no projections? He has made the decision that he is going ahead with a 14-apartment block, and he does not know what the projected costs are. Is that what he is trying to tell the people of the territory? The President of the Housing Corporation, who is in attendance here can surely tell us what that projected cost is.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I resent the Member’s tone of voice, which is insulting, to say the least.

Mr. Lang: Insulting?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: If the Member could take hold of himself for a moment and deport himself in a manner that respects this Legislature, I would appreciate it.

The maximum unit price is established through CMHC, and the upper limit for an apartment complex in Dawson City would be determined by the maximum unit price. It is generally understood, when we do pass Capital Budgets and Operation and Maintenance Budgets, to be within this ballpark figure. That has always been the case as long as I have ever known it to be in this Legislature.

That was even the case when the Member sat on this side, although he did not undertake a lot of building. The housing allocations and the budget amounts were always set in the same manner. The maximum unit price was quoted as the upper limit of expenditures as determined by CMHC. The budgets were determined and based upon those figures. Some units, depending upon the location and the design, may vary a little above or a little below the maximum  unit price. In terms of the global budget, the maximum unit price is our limit. That price in Dawson would depend upon a variety of figures set by CMHC. When I have the maximum unit price for apartments, I will communicate it to the House.

Mr. Lang: Could the Minister tell us if the Housing Corporation made the decision to go ahead with a 14-unit apartment block in Dawson City with no knowledge of what the maximum cost could be? Did it put a maximum dollar figure on it?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Housing Corporation would know the range that they could work within for any Capital Project. The maximum unit price will vary depending upon the price of the land and the isolation of the community. These are set according to guidelines established by CMHC.

Mr. Lang: My question was not answered. Did the Housing Corporation, in conjunction with the second in command who is sitting right beside the Minister, make a decision to go ahead with the 14-unit apartment block without any maximum amount of dollars being allocated for the project?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Like every housing project, the Yukon Housing Corporation Board has indicated they are prepared to proceed, pending the construction price and bid prices being within budget, the budget being the maximum unit prices established for projects of this sort.

If the Member is suggesting the project will proceed, irrespective of what the price is, the answer is that that was never the intention of the Yukon Housing Corporation. It has to come in within the maximum allowable limit that is permitted by CMHC.

Mr. Lang: What is the maximum allowable limit? What are we hiding here? Is it just a charade? Surely, the people of the territory have a right to know what they are investing in or not investing in. All I want is a projected estimate cost. I will give the Minister the leeway of saying $300,000 either way, but at least there should be some estimated cost of going ahead with such a project. Were no tentative projections of estimates provided to the Yukon Housing Corporation board of directors when they made the decision?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: As I have already indicated, I will be seeking out the exact maximum unit price. I am told the range is in the $85,000 range per unit. I will have to come back with the specific maximum unit price. For this particular community, and for this kind of construction, the Yukon Housing Corporation has the figures. I just do not have them in front of me.

Mr. Lang: It is safe to say we are talking in the neighbourhood of a $1.2 million project in the City of Dawson. If that is the projected cost of that project, has the Yukon Housing Corporation made a definitive decision that they are not going ahead with 10 of the units that were indicated in December? Is that the decision that has been made?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Fourteen times $85,000 is approximately in the ballpark. As I indicated, I do not have the maximum unit price in front of me. When I get it, I will transmit it. It is in the neighbourhood of $85,000 a unit. The Yukon Housing Corporation knows it has to live within the maximum number of units that are allocated to it, and will have to adjust its building demands as a result of any building project, including this one.

Mr. Lang: With respect to renovations, I have asked the Minister on numerous occasions what the renovations are going to cost in moving into the new accommodation. Does he have those figures?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: It will be approximately $40,000.

Mr. Lang: I guess we have to live in the manner we would like to.

With respect to market value land, on the Joint Venture Program, is it the Minister’s position still that a developer has to pay a market value for the land? If that is the case, in view of the fact it is not surveyed or any of the other things done to it, how are they going to determine the market value?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: This is a lands matter, but I do know the answer. The lands regulations stipulate very clearly that lands sold for commercial purposes will be sold at market value. That is clearly enunciated in the regulations pursuant to the Lands Act. Any sale of land for purposes of resale would be considered lands sold for commercial purposes, so the procedure is to sell them for market value, if it is not currently held in private hands.

In order to maintain the integrity of the system, the procedure for selling Crown land of any sort for commercial purposes is to sell it at market value.

Mr. Lang: I do not understand how you are going to set the market for land that is strictly raw land? The way I understand the Joint Venture Program is that it will be raw land and the developer will come in and provide whatever has to be provided, power, survey, road, telephone and all those things that have to be figured in the cost. I do not understand how you are going to encourage people to go on such a program when the government is going to go ahead on their own through contracting and developing land to put on the market and charging nothing for the value of the land. How can anybody in private business think that is a good idea? I do know people were looking at the prospects of going into this type of development, but if they know that the government is doing it as well and charging nothing for the land after it has been developed it puts these people in a precarious position if the economy goes down.

I want to move on to the lease purchase. I am not sure how this is going to work. Would the Minister go through the stages of an application and outline what is going to be financed through a lease purchase program?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Firstly, if Crown land is going to be sold, it is considered raw land with no improvements, and that has an impact on the market value of that land. If there are simply rocks and trees with no roads or anything, it has an impact on its market value, and, therefore, it would certainly be less.

The government sells residential land at market value. There has been a good deal of discussion over the last few years about development costs. Certainly, the government is also interested in recovering development costs where they exceed market value. We still do sell land at market value.

The situation with respect to the lease purchase program is that families that are interested in the program will receive an initial screening from the local housing association. If their income is too high, then the family will be encouraged to move to a private home purchase, through the banks. If it is too low, and is not expected to increase at all, then the family will not be in a position to assume any mortgage in the future, and therefore would not qualify there either. If it is, however, in the $30,000 to $45,000 range, then the application will be made and the applicant will then have to select either an existing house or lot or plan, for lease purchase. They will have to research all the listing information, if the property is listed with a realtor, and the legal description of the property. That is the initial stage. If approved, the Yukon Housing Corporation then steps in and secures the mortgage from the bank.

Mr. Lang: I want to go through one step here. If the house costs $80,000, let us assume that the applicant meets the required wage earnings of between $30,000 and $45,000, and makes an offer on a house for $80,000 and it is accepted. Does the government then go in and pay the vendor the $80,000 or do they guarantee the bank that they will pay the $80,000 to the bank if it defaults? Who pays the interest?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Yukon Housing Corporation will secure the mortgage. The house will be in the name of the Yukon Housing Corporation until such time as the agreement is struck and the person leasing the house assumes the mortgage from the bank.

Mr. Lang: How many families do they project taking advantage of the program in the first year?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Our initial estimates were that we would have approximately 20.

Mr. Lang: Is there a three-year or a five-year projection for this program?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: At this time, the program is scheduled for review on an annual basis, depending upon the character of the housing market and the projected demand. We will know about the demand from our first year’s experience. I would hesitate to put the program in place for any specified period of time because market conditions could fluctuate enough to cause the Yukon Housing Corporation and the government to review its participation.

Mr. Lang: Has this particular program ever been tried anywhere else?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Yes, in Nova Scotia.

Mr. Lang: The Yukon Housing Corporation will have the outstanding mortgages. I want to put on the record a concern that I have about this program. I think that the intention is good but I really believe that the Yukon Housing Corporation is going to find that it may well have a lot of units on their hands, down the road. The question of lease purchase sounds good. I have talked with a number of people who have managed what they call lease purchases, and they say that it is very, very difficult, as time changes. Sometimes the vendor ends up with the home again. I really do not think that this is going to meet the objectives of the Yukon Housing Corporation.

I noticed the Minister’s hesitation over how long the program is going to last. It would seem to me that if you are going to have a program of this kind it should be an absolute requirement that there be x amount of dollars set up, non-refundable, so that there is a commitment to that home and that it does not just turn into another social rental situation.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: That is something we would want to avoid in this particular instance. The purpose of the program is to fix the price of a unit when it is initially purchased and make ownership affordable for a person whose income may increase only marginally, so that in year five, they will not have to face the vagaries of the housing market, and how things change in the interim between the initial transaction and the time they actually assume the mortgage themselves.

It is impossible to undertake a program such as this where the government avoids any risk whatsoever. Like the extended mortgage guarantee, there is a risk. Otherwise, if there were no risk at all, I would think it very likely the private sector would be there already. Clearly, there is a risk, and we can do what we can to minimize that risk. We have a responsibility to do everything we can to minimize the risk and make sure the client selection for this is done in a responsible way.

The difference between a rental purchase program, which I know has been tried in the Yukon in the past, and a lease purchase program is that the commitment to purchase is made by the person leasing the unit right up front. It is fairly certain that, if the value of the units continue to rise, and do not drop sharply - and that may change within specific communities - it will make it much easier and much more practical and affordable for people leasing the units to assume the mortgage themselves.

With the review that was taken, we know the incomes are such that, without some assistance and helping hands of this nature, it would be virtually unrealistic to expect them to assume a home ownership on their own. That is why we set up the program in this particular way. We will encourage people, if they have property, to put it up for sale in this way. In most cases, I think the people will be purchasing either an existing house or building a new house and purchasing the property along with it.

Mr. Lang: I want to express our reservations with some of the new initiatives that were announced. I can foresee some very major problems with this. I have already had one person come up to me and say “there goes the Yukon Housing Corporation indirectly exerting their authority and getting new housing stock through the back door”. I am just giving the perception that is also on the street in some quarters.

I can see some major problems down the road here where the government can wind up with a lot more housing than they already have now. The rental purchase program the Minister refers to was specifically designed for social housing and to allow those particular homes to be purchased.

I asked a question some time ago with respect to the purchase of stoves and fridges specifically for Ross River, where I believe seven sets were sent. Those in staff houses were told they would all be replaced, regardless of what shape they were in. Could the Minister explain what has happened there, as well as throughout the rest of the territory?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I do see the interpretation of this purchase program as being a backdoor way of increasing the housing starts. It is unfortunate. That is not the intention, and it is unfortunate if a person holds that view. Only the experience of the program will determine one way or another if this constituent will be satisfied.

There is no policy on replacing the units after two years. The policy is to replace the units when the appliances, fridges and stoves, can no longer be economically repaired. The Housing Corporation has ceased supplying washers and dryers. If anyone was given the impression that they were going to be given new appliances after two years, they were misinformed. That is not the policy.

The situation is that units were taken to Ross River, some were taken to install into the new social and staff units in Ross River. The decision was made in the community to replace some appliances in the staff units, then to take those that were removed from the staff units and put them in the social units. No. There is no policy to replace appliances after two years.

Mr. Lang: Is it true that orders went out from the Housing Corporation that any fridge or stove  in staff housing in Ross River and Faro that is two years or older would be replaced by new appliances?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The policy of the corporation is as I indicated. There is no direction, whatsoever, to replace appliances after two years.

Mr. Lang: Is it true that orders were issued by the Yukon Housing Corporation to Ross River and other communities that the fridges and stoves in the staff units that were two years old and older were to be replaced with new ones? That is my question.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: My investigation into the matter shows that there was a Housing Corporation employee who thought that was the case. He was wrong. There was not a policy before, and there is not a policy now to replace units after two years.

Mr. Lang: Is it true that fridges and stoves were sent to Ross River to replace appliances in seven of the twenty-one units?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I do not know whether or not there were seven units but I do know that any unit that was replaced was a minimum of seven years, or older.

Chairman: Does the Committee wish to take a brief recess at this time?

We will recess for 15 minutes.

Recess

Chairman: Committee of the Whole will come to order. We will continue with general debate on the Yukon Housing Corporation.

Mr. McLachlan: Is the 14-unit apartment block in Dawson City intended to be family apartments for three or two persons, or they are just one-bedroom apartments?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: They are projected to be two-bedroom apartments. I took the opportunity to find out the maximum unit price for the 14 apartments. The maximum unit price allowable for Dawson would be $86,500 for the construction, plus up to $8,000 per unit for the land. There might need to be flexibility regarding any extras.

Mr. McLachlan: If we are getting up toward $94,000 or $94,500 per unit, is there an advantage to going to an apartment block, rather than to three buildings of four units each, such as the structure built at Stewart Crossing last year for government employees?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The maximum unit price for the construction of a house would be more than $86,000. This is the maximum unit price for an apartment block, and it is projected to be a cheaper form of construction. For example, the same kind of construction in Whitehorse would allow $69,000 per unit for apartment construction, plus up to $8,000 per unit for the land. That indicates that there is expected to be a fairly significantly higher construction cost in Dawson than in Whitehorse.

Mr. McLachlan: I understand that, but is the Minister saying that the allowable price for the land, at $8,000, is the same in Dawson City as it is in Whitehorse, per unit?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Yes, there is no guarantee that it will be $8,000. It has to be up to a maximum of $8,000, whatever the actual price of the land happens to be.

Mr. McLachlan: The Minister indicated earlier to the Member for Porter Creek East that, under the extended mortgage plan, they anticipated about five units getting off the ground. They were not sure because a lot of inquiries were coming in. Did the corporation have some projection as to where those units were to go? Was there one in Mayo, two in Haines Junction, one in Dawson? Where did they get the number of five?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The conservative estimate was statistically driven. There was a determination of what they thought might be the increase given the kind of discussion that was held in the public with respect to the home ownership program. It is merely a best guess. No specific community was targeted. It was entirely dependent upon the actual take up.

Mr. Lang: How is the difference between the required 10 percent down payment and as high as the additional 20 percent that may be required going to be done by the government? Is that by second mortgage or grant? How does the recipient go about applying for it and how does the government view it in order to get their money back?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: It is a mortgage guarantee. The vehicle is still that the bank will lend the money to the individual, and the money will be secured through a CMHC mortgage guarantee. The difference between the actual construction price and the appraisal of market value would determine the level of the Yukon Housing Corporation’s guarantee. It is a guarantee, not a mortgage.

Mr. McLachlan: If, for a $100,000 all-found house with the land included, the individual puts up $10,000 and the bank will only go for $65,000, is the corporation’s liability only a maximum exposure of $25,000?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The banks will loan up to $90,000 in the particular example that the Member mentions. The individual needs a $10,000 down payment. Under normal circumstances, CMHC would guarantee up to $63,000, so the difference between $90,000 and the $63,000 - $27,000 - would be the extent of the mortgage for the Yukon Housing Corporation.

Mr. McLachlan: In the case where the owner defaults and cannot repay, the maximum exposure that the corporation is liable for is $27,000? Is that correct?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: That is correct.

Mr. McLachlan: Did the Minister say there was a projection of 16 under the lease purchase program in the initial year, or did he give a figure?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: There is a ballpark figure of 20 and probably loan money of approximately $1.62 million.

Mr. McLachlan: Is there no projection whatsoever under the do-it-yourself program since those guidelines are not developed and will not be until 1989?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: That is correct.

Mr. McLachlan: The extended mortgage plan relies on the participation of CMHC a great deal. What happens if they will not help?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: If CMHC indicated its unwillingness to help, it would be reneging on a commitment.

Mr. McLachlan: Will CMHC finance homes in the community of Elsa?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Yes. I am a little puzzled because that is one community where I would not see much in the way of private land available for any kind of construction. I doubt if there would be much opportunity to do it, but the CMHC commitment extends into communities. If the Member is going to be asking me about Faro, I would have to find out specifically from the Housing Corporation what they anticipate there.

The federal housing Minister has indicated his reluctance to get involved in towns that are deemed to have a life that is solely due to the existence of one employer. We have not had any more firm discussions on that matter. The Yukon has indicated that it has an abiding interest in it. CMHC has indicated that, if it is to get involved any more in communities like Faro, it would like to see territorial government participation. How that actually shakes down has yet to be determined, because we have not had any sense of consultation at the ministerial level to determine what is expected of the Yukon or of any province.

Mr. McLachlan: That was precisely why the question was asked, since Elsa is in the single industry category the same as Faro. They will not participate in Faro. When the corporation went into discussions with CMHC on this program, did the question of Faro come up? What happens if people want to buy under the extended mortgage plan in Faro where CMHC will not participate?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Faro is considered to be unique by being a high-risk community. In actuality, Elsa would be considered in the same light. We have been addressing the Faro situation through a different vehicle, through federal/provincial/territorial consultations on how to deal with high-risk communities.

As the Member knows, CMHC has expressed extreme reluctance to get any deeper into communities like Faro than it is currently. Under direction from the federal government, it has pulled in its horns dramatically, in terms of how much they are prepared to move in communities like Faro. As a result, there have been discussions between the federal government and provincial and territorial governments with respect to what is going to happen in the future.

The Yukon has indicated its willingness to participate, to ensure that, in the final analysis, there will be mortgage funding available to Faro, like any other community. At this point, the agreement will be negotiated on a national level. It will not be negotiated uniquely to the Yukon. We know that with certainty.

I am sure, at the same time, that CMHC is going to be interested in private sector participation in situations like this. They have indicated that where there is a private sector interest, like the mine, they will expect negotiations for mortgage assurance be shared jointly among the mine, the provincial government and CMHC.

Apparently, there are about 34 communities in Faro’s situation. I know the federal Minister wants to come forward with a national policy and would not be prepared to make any changes on a community-specific basis.

Mr. McLachlan: The Minister spent a lot of time talking about the vehicle of mortgage insurance. In the example previously quoted, where we used the example of a $27,000 second mortgage, we had decided that the simple vehicle of mortgage insurance - like one and one quarter percent on the $27,000 second mortgage - would be far cheaper to the coffers of the government than carrying the second mortgage would.

Did any discussions take place about the mortgage insurance idea with CMHC, or banks, or private insurers, rather than government carrying a second mortgage?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: We are not talking about a second mortgage. We are talking about a mortgage guarantee. There have been discussions with the banks with respect to what they are prepared to do and under under what conditions  they are prepared to operate. There have been discussions with CMHC about the extent of the limit they are prepared to go.

We have had discussions with private members and with CMHC to determine what the barrier to home ownership is outside of Whitehorse. Our objective in the discussions was to extend to the limit the private sector and CMHC participation, and see what slack there is left to pick up. It is into that area that we have introduced a program to meet the real need of the person who wants to construct new, and the construction price is well above the market value of the house.

As I indicated at the beginning, the money is lent to the individual, the CMHC mortgage insurance guarantees an amount and the Yukon government provides a mortgage guarantee to CMHC for the difference between the value of the mortgage and the market value.

Mr. McLachlan: Is the government paying a higher interest rate on this second mortgage guarantee debt, over and above the interest rate asked for on the first one, and how much?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The government would not be paying any interest at all. The only time that the government would be paying any money would be when there would be a default, and we would be held accountable for our portion of the guarantee. In terms of ongoing carrying costs, however, there would be no expenditures by the Yukon Housing Corporation to pay interest or anything else. That would be up to the individual who assumes the mortgage.

Mr. McLachlan: My previous question still goes unanswered. What about the idea of mortgage insurance? Did the corporation deem that it was not required, that this was a better deal, or, if you initiated discussions on mortgage insurance, did it come to naught?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I do not understand the Member’s question. This is clearly not a second mortgage. The program is mortgage insurance. It insures the CHMC’s participation, the portion between the purchase price and the mortgage itself. It is an insurance. The Government of the Yukon expends no money, loans no money itself. The Yukon Housing Corporation lends no money to any individual or to a bank. It merely guarantees CHMC’s participation, to a limited extent.

Mr. McLachlan: Is any money being transferred from the Yukon Housing Corporation’s budget to Economic Development to run the Venture Capital Program, or is that solely going to be contained within Economic Development?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Venture Capital Program is solely within the Department of Economic Development and has budget limits as per previously announced. The Joint Venture Fund of the Yukon Housing Corporation is a separate entity and is specifically for the purposes that I have mentioned already. The two are separate. One will be operated by Economic Development and the Joint Venture Fund will be operated with a review committee.

Mr. McLachlan: When a private land developer, who is trying to develop a block of land within the confines of the City of Whitehorse’s jurisdiction, comes to the Yukon Housing Corporation to investigate the Joint Venture Program for land development, will the corporation simply sell the land to the city, for $100 or one dollar, and let the individual deal with the city, or will the applicant be dealing, until the project is completed, with the Yukon Housing Corporation under the Joint Venture Program?

What I am trying to guard against is the situation that will lead to the escalation of the land price, from one dollar to $100,000.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I understand that the Yukon Housing Corporation owns no undeveloped land in Whitehorse. The lots that the corporation owns are considered developed. I would not anticipate that the corporation would be asked to sell land in Whitehorse.

Mr. McLachlan: If the corporation provides business financing for land developers, do you not take first mortgage on that block of private land being developed and retain it?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: A fair amount would depend on the proposal - who was coming in with the land, whether or not the land had to be transferred from government. There are a variety of things that would have to be taken into consideration. If the Member could provide a more detailed scenario perhaps I could respond.

Mr. McLachlan: The Minister previously said one of the reasons the lots are so high in Granger is because of the insistence of the city to meet the terms regarding pavement, water, sewer, underground services, et cetera. I am trying to guard against the fact where a block of land may be developed in a rural situation within the City of Whitehorse, but which would be subject to their conditions of development. It is unclear who the individual is to be dealing with: the Yukon Housing Corporation under the Land Development Joint Venture Program, or the City of Whitehorse.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: If you want to do business within the City of Whitehorse you have to follow their rules. That is the way things are. In fairness to the city, the city had certain aspirations for the Granger Subdivision for fully services lots. They would not insist on fully serviced lots in all situations. In fact, when the Yukon government develops land within the city for the city in other country residential lots there are varying levels of services provided up front.

Clearly, a private developer will have the opportunity to deal with a variety of situations if they develop in the city. If they want to develop land in Riverdale or Porter Creek they will have to abide by the community standards provided by the municipality for those areas. If they want to develop outside Wolf Creek the city would not exact the same standards in an area such as that and require less in terms of development. So the city is sensitive to the Member’s concern and would take that into consideration if it were a territorial government land development project or private sector land development project.

Mr. McLachlan: Under the assistance for upgrading existing homes programs, what was the reason behind separating federal government involvement and the RAPP from Yukon Housing Corporation involvement in RAPP?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Under the Capital Program, the Housing Corporati