Whitehorse, Yukon

Tuesday, April 25, 1989 - 1:30 p.m.

Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

We will proceed at this time with Prayers.



Speaker: We will now turn to the Order Paper.

Are there any Returns or Documents for Tabling?


Hon. Mr. Penikett: I have a legislative return for tabling.

Hon. Mr. Webster: I have three legislative returns for tabling.

Hon. Ms. Joe: I have three legislative returns for tabling.

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I have some legislative returns for tabling, some of which were circulated yesterday to Members.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I have a few legislative returns for tabling as well.

Speaker: Are there any Reports of Committees?


Introduction of Bills?

Are there any Notices of Motion for the Production of Papers?

Notices of Motion?

Are there any Statements by Ministers?


Yukon Hosting Housing Ministers’ Conference

Hon. Mr. Byblow: As Minister responsible for housing, I am pleased to confirm that the Yukon will host the 1989 Federal/Provincial/Territorial Housing Ministers’ Conference. This important conference will be held here in Whitehorse at the Mt. McIntyre Centre on July 4, 5 and 6. The conference was the initiative of the former Minister responsible for housing, Mr. McDonald. I am honoured to complete the task.

The provision of suitable, affordable housing for all Yukon people is a primary concern of this government. Nationally this concern is mirrored by all provincial and territorial housing agencies, who are also striving, in the face of a constantly changing social environment, to meet the housing needs of their residents.

This conference gives housing ministers and senior officials the opportunity to meet with their counterparts to discuss housing issues. Based on these conferences, short and long-term goals are set, appropriate strategies are formulated, program plans are designed, and current programs are evaluated. Conference agendas typically address social housing needs, housing trends across Canada, cost-sharing arrangements between jurisdictions, new technologies and private sector initiatives. These meetings are vital to the process of continuing cooperation among Canadian housing agencies.

During the conference, the hon. Alan Redway, Minister of State for Housing, will unveil a plaque commemorating the National Award of Excellence won by Yukon Housing Corporation for the Closeleigh Manor seniors’ building here in Whitehorse.

As hosts of this national conference, the Yukon will be accepting a leadership role in facilitating the research, development and implementation of federal/provincial/territorial housing initiatives. It will be our responsibility during the coming year to co-chair, with Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, several national housing committees. As co-chair, we will be in a better position to ensure that northern issues are given the consideration they deserve.

A conference of this stature will serve to enhance the Yukon’s national profile. Over 150 delegates will be attending the three day conference. Many have already made plans to extend their stay and take this opportunity to vacation in our territory. We believe that when the delegates return home they will take with them warm thoughts of the Yukon and its people. Their positive experience here will undoubtedly encourage others not only to consider vacationing in the Yukon but also to view this territory as a viable place for future conventions and potential business opportunities.

I am sure that you will join with me in extending a warm and sincere welcome to all the delegates and guests who will attend the 1989 Federal/Provincial/Territorial Housing Ministers’ Conference.

Speaker: This then brings us to the Question Period.


Question re: Economic development agreements, federal deficit

Mr. Phelps: I have some questions for the Minister of Finance. Apparently his colleague, the Government Leader, has been speaking out about the federal budget that is going to be tabled on Thursday and he is quoted as saying that he feels that regional enhancement programs for areas such as this will likely be hit hard by the budget cuts. To which programs was the Government Leader referring?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: Along with our colleagues in many provinces of all political stripes and along with the local Chamber of Commerce, we have added our voices to the expression of concern about the future of programs like the economic development agreements, which, in the case of Yukon, is due to expire in June following the extension. Of course, it is our earnest hope that these programs will be maintained because they are absolutely essential to the development of regions like this. We have made representations on that score as have many private organizations here for the last several months.

Mr. Phelps: Why, all of a sudden, has the Government Leader been speaking out scaring people who live in Yukon? I am wondering what exactly he is referring to with respect to the regional enhancement programs. Does he have some special information that the economic development agreements are not going to be negotiated once they expire?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: No. This may come as a surprise to the Leader of the Official Opposition, but Mr. Wilson has not consulted with me or any of my colleagues about his budget that is coming on Thursday, but we, along with many people in many parts of this country, are expressing great concern about what may be coming in the budget since it is completely the opposite to the commitments that were made by the national government during the recent general election campaign.

Mr. Phelps: The Government Leader says he has not been consulted which, perhaps, is a good thing for Canada, but I am wondering on what is he basing all this gloom and doom verbiage?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I do not know if it is a calculated campaign. I do not know if you could call it disinformation or group therapy, but for some weeks and months now Canadians right across the country have been warned by various politicians, by the media, by statements from the Prime Minister and from the Minister of Finance, nationally, that all of a sudden following an election campaign in which child care, the environment, regional economic development and so forth were the priority, the greatest priority in the country is the deficit. The Leader of the Official Opposition may have heard just recently that the president of the Chamber of Commerce, a non-supporter of my party, expressed a concern about the future of programs like the EDA and the impact of the national sales tax on an economy like ours. We are joining the many voices of concern about the kind of federal budget that may be coming on Thursday.

Question re: Economic development agreements

Mr. Phelps: The issue of the deficit was not really spoken to by any of the federal parties during the federal campaign. They did not seem to place a high priority on the problem of deficit. Is the Government Leader telling us the federal deficit is not a problem for all Canadians, as it presently stands?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: No, quite the opposite. It is a problem. I think we may have some disagreement among the people in this country and the political parties as to the extent to which it is a problem. We do not assert the notion that somehow the deficit is the problem that ought to totally consume the national government. The commitments it made during the recent national election campaign and the kind of mandate it sought, and won from the Canadian people for an attack on problems like environmental problems and child care and so forth, should not be now sacrificed for a new attack on the deficit.

Mr. Phelps: I am sure Mr. Wilson and his colleagues will very carefully read the comments of the Government Leader and take advice from those comments.

In the negotiations regarding devolution of programs from the federal government to this government, has there been any indication there is to be cutbacks in some of those programs, such as the federal health care program, as it applies to the Yukon?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: Not as such of late with respect to the health program. In a matter of days, we are seeking meetings with senior officials in Ottawa to find out exactly what may be the impact of the new budget on the health programs.

Notwithstanding an agreement with the federal Minister of Indian Affairs that there would be no cutbacks or staffing or program reductions during the time we are negotiating the devolution of programs, there are reports that have reached my office that some cutbacks and reductions in staff are being carried out in the federal programs, namely forestry. If the facts are as claimed by the people corresponding with me, that would be in violation of the understanding we have with the federal government.

Mr. Phelps: Could the Minister of Finance tell us if anything is occurring right now with regard to negotiating a new economic development agreement in the Yukon?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: As I indicated in answer to approximately the same kind of question last week, the federal authorities have indicated they are not willing to enter into active discussions on a renegotiation of the agreement until such time as the federal budget is tabled in Parliament and the budget plans for the various departments are known.

Question re: Economic development agreements

Mr. Phelps: I wonder if the Minister of Finance could enlighten us and tell us exactly what the situation is in the Northwest Territories regarding the Economic Development Agreement?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The Northwest Territories signed an extension of the Economic Development Agreement on a 70/30 cost-sharing basis recently. This was a change from the previous agreement. The term of the agreement escapes me but I can certainly have that matter checked.

Mr. Phelps: So the NWT moved rather quickly. They have a bird in the hand and are not faced with the uncertainty that Yukoners are faced with.

Perhaps the Minister of Finance could enlighten us as to where we are with regard to negotiating a new financial formula package for transfers of money from the federal government to this government once the present agreement runs out at the end of this year?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Well, the primary reason the Government of the NWT signed an extension of the EDA recently was that their EDA had expired long before ours and it was time for them to sign new ones. In the last couple of months the Yukon government has been pursuing active negotiations, until, as I indicated a couple of weeks ago, those negotiations would be terminated until such a time as the federal budget has been tabled.

The formula negotiations are equally on hold until the budget is tabled and the active discussions are scheduled to take place at the end of May. They will take place jointly with the federal government and the Government of the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Phelps: Can the Minister enlighten us as to what the position is with regard to the formal financial agreements in the Northwest Territories?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: The formula negotiations will be undertaken between the federal government and the Yukon and NWT governments. Their situation is much like ours. They will be seeking a renewal of their agreement and we will be discussing our positions with the federal government at the end of May, as will the Government of the Northwest Territories, I presume.

Question re: Trapping Awareness Week

Mr. Phillips: I have a question for the Minister of Renewable Resources. It is regarding the announcement that was made last week declaring April 17-23 as Trapping Awareness Week. This government has made several strong statements in the past supporting Yukon trappers and we in the Legislature have passed several motions in support of the trappers as well.

I would like to ask the Minister who they consulted within the trapping industry before they decided to declare April 17-23 Trapper Awareness Week because my understanding from the trapping industry is that they did not consult with anyone.

Hon. Mr. Webster: That is correct.

Mr. Phillips: If they did not talk to the local trapping association who did they talk to before they announced that there would be a Trapping Awareness Week April 17 - 23?

Hon. Mr. Webster: No one.

Mr. Phillips: Can the Minister tell the House what information was made available last week during Yukon Trapping Awareness Week to Yukon school children, the Yukon general public and others to make people more aware of the value of the trapping industry?

Hon. Mr. Webster: There was none.

Question re: Trapping Awareness Week

Mr. Phillips: It begs the question. A great deal of commitment has been made by many, many Members of this House in support of the Yukon trappers and the Yukon trapping industry. The government had an opportunity last week to address this issue by making Yukoners more aware of the value of the trapping industry. Why did the Minister announce the Trapping Awareness Week and then not carry out any campaign in any way, shape or form other than declare the week Trapping Awareness Week if they were not serious about it?

Hon. Mr. Webster: We are, indeed, serious about it, despite not making very many people aware of it. This is the first year of declaring Trapping Awareness Week. It was done so because there were three major events taking place in Whitehorse during that week. The Western Fur Managers’ Council had their meeting here, as did the Northern Fur Bearers Conference, the first time it has been held outside of Alaska - it was held here in Whitehorse - as well as the Yukon Trappers Association Annual General Meeting. That was the reason why Trapping Awareness Week was officially declared for that week.

When making the announcement last week, I indicated that once we adopted Project Wild Program in the Yukon Conservation Strategy that conservation matters will be discussed in our educational system, at which time the whole matter of trapping will be addressed as well.

A point I would like to make is that I, too, was disappointed that we did not have a proclamation to the effect that it had been officially been declared Trapping Awareness Week in the territory. I noted that late in the week and made my apology in my address to the Yukon Trappers Association Annual General Meeting Saturday morning.

Mr. Phillips: It seems like the Trapping Awareness Week announcement was certainly an afterthought. I guess they saw the motion on the Order Paper by the Member for Kluane and tried to one-up him by announcing it and then doing absolutely nothing. I hope the Minister plans that every year they will hold a Trapping Awareness Week and they will certainly make people a little more aware of the importance of the trapping industry.

Hon. Mr. Webster: It was not a case of one-upmanship. As I mentioned last week, I appreciated the efforts of the Member for Kluane in bringing this matter to the forefront. It had stood unattended on the Order Paper for two years. I was not happy, myself, with the efforts that we had made to promote this Trapping Awareness Week, but I can give every assurance that we will do a better job next year.

Question re: Trapping Awareness Week

Mr. Brewster: My questions are going to be similar. We better straighten out what happened. My questions are to the Minister of Renewable Resources.

Like my colleague, I am disappointed that nothing more has been done to promote Trapping Awareness Week. I have had a motion on the Order Paper for the last two years that, unfortunately, was never dealt with. I do not mind being upstaged by the Minister, providing that when he does so, he has done his homework. Why was the Minister not better prepared for Trapping Awareness Week?

Hon. Mr. Webster: I think I have already given the reasons why we were not better prepared. We saw the motion on the Order Paper yet for another year. We saw the three meetings taking place during the same week in Whitehorse. We thought it was an appropriate time. I have already indicated that we did not have enough time to put some proper procedures in place to adequately and properly give it the attention it deserves.

Mr. Brewster: Did you rush it through because you knew that we would be bringing the motion forward the following Wednesday, on our motion day?

Hon. Mr. Webster: Not necessarily, considering that it had sat on the Order Paper for two years. I wanted to get a start this year. I have already admitted it was inadequate. We will change it next year.

Mr. Brewster: “Not necessarily” usually means “maybe”.

The Minister appears to be paying lip service to motions passed in this House and then proceeds to do nothing.

Does the Minister sincerely support the trapping industry or does he have, as in the case of Kluane Park, his own personal beliefs that prevail over the ministerial responsibilities?

Hon. Mr. Webster: I take great exception to the comments made by my hon. colleague and friend from Kluane. I am not paying lip service. I took the time to address the Northern Fur Bearers’ Conference. I took time to address the membership at the Yukon Trappers Association annual general meeting and to answer their questions. I do not feel that letting this go by for another year unattended would have done anyone any good. The press covered a number of stories enamating from those three meetings. The attention it is getting today will raise the profile of trapping in the Yukon.

Question re: Logging/trapping

Mr. Devries: My question is for the Minister of Renewable Resources.

Trapping is a very important industry in Watson Lake. All the people involved help stabilize the economy during the slack season for the town, and especially the local flying service. Does the government have a monitoring project in place to determine the effect on fur resources of logging large blocks of forest in the Liard Basin?

Hon. Mr. Webster: I am not aware of any such study or monitoring of the effects on trapping. I can research that information and bring it back to the Member.

Mr. Devries: It would be nice to know when this will take place, if it takes place.

Will the trappers have access to compensation or retraining if the logging does have an effect on their livelihood?

Hon. Mr. Webster: There is a Trappers’ Concession and Compensation Review Board that looks at situations such as this where lands used by a trapper traditionally have been alienated by a third party. That is a proper place for such agreements to be heard.

Mr. Devries: If and when the new sawmill comes on stream, are there any restrictions in place regarding the logging of poplar in areas where beaver are active?

Hon. Mr. Webster: I do not know the answer to that question. I will bring it back to the Member.

Question re: Litter

Mr. Phillips: At lunch time today, I had an opportunity to take the Minister of Renewable Resources for a “litter” drive into Riverdale. We drove past some of the schools in that area and around a couple of buildings. After the Minister had an opportunity to go with me and have a first-hand look at the problem, is he now willing to admit the problem is a little more serious than he previously thought when he was in the Legislature, and is he willing to address the problem and have people do something about it immediately?

Hon. Mr. Webster: I want to begin by thanking the Member opposite for his tour and the litter drive around parts of Riverdale. It was enough of a drive to see the devastation of the landscape, so to speak. I do admit the problem is worse than I thought. I do not have occasion often to go to Riverdale, coming from Dawson City. I am pleased to say I do not think its problem is that bad, but I have said in this House a number of times that we do definitely have a problem throughout the territory. Yes, I will be talking to my colleague, the Minister of Education, to see if he can implement the suggestion the Member for Riverdale North made today during our tour.

Mr. Phillips: Will the Minister of Education consider immediately initiating a school challenge to clean up all schools in the Whitehorse and Yukon area, to get the students involved in the clean-up campaign immediately and not wait until clean-up week before we take any action?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I see the Member’s mind has been working since I discussed the matter with him this morning and indicated to him that principals in Whitehorse had already shown some enthusiasm for the project to clean up the school grounds at various schools and had given the student population the challenge to make their school ground amongst the most attractive in the city. That idea, emanating from various enterprising principals, is one that I have already encouraged the department to adopt.

Mr. Phillips: I want to assure the Minister that my mind is always working. The Minister did not really answer my question when I asked him if he would immediately ask all the schools in the territory to initiate a school challenge program, where they would all go out and clean up the areas around the schools. It could possibly be a competition, or something of that nature. These areas should be cleaned up immediately, not two, three or four weeks from now when we have litter week and the rest of this litter is blown all over the streets. They should do it now, when the litter is there and should be cleaned up.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Whether the matter is a school challenge or some formal event of that sort, or whether it requires resources or anything else, is a matter that has yet to be determined. The point of the matter is that the word is out that school principals and school staff should encourage the students in the positive meaning of the campaign to clean up the school groups, to make the school grounds attractive places, so the students and the school can be proud of their environment.

That word is out. Whether there is a program in place in the future has yet to be determined.

Question re: Lot sales, mortgage financing

Mr. Lang: I have a question for the Minister of Community and Transportation Services. It has to do with the Robinson homestead subdivision that we discussed previously in the week. I have, since that time, received a copy of the letter sent by the Minister to the land holders of the properties. It is the question of the ability of these people to get the necessary mortgage financing to proceed with building. There is obviously a difference of opinion of whether or not that financing is available. In the letter the Minister states: “I am assured that adequate legal arrangements can be made which will enable the registration of mortgages against the agreements for sale advanced to the earned equity provision actually being fulfilled and title being issued. It is, therefore, not necessary to buy out the earned equities simply to obtain a mortgage.” Can the Minister here today assure us that the banks are prepared to provide financing under the conditions that he has outlined in his letter?

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I can advise the Member that my officials have received assurances from more than one bank, I believe two, that mortgage financing can be secured on the strength of the agreement for sale. We have agreed to allow the mortgage to be registered, which effectively would permit us to turn over title in the event of foreclosure; so there is a conditional title waiving under the agreement. I have received, through my officials, every assurance that the banks will honour that.

Mr. Lang: It is going to be interesting, because I have been told the exact converse so we will see what happens. Under the provisions that the Minister has outlined, is it going to cost landholders more legal costs in order to register their mortgages, and if so, is the government going to be picking up those costs?

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I am not sure what the Member means by “additional legal costs”. If the residents are attempting to secure a mortgage, there is a natural process of registering such a mortgage and monies borrowed against property. I do not anticipate that there would be any additional costs related to that exercise other than in any ordinary transaction.

Mr. Lang: In respect to this issue that is outstanding, it is one that is going to have to be resolved, I hope satisfactorily for those who would like to start building this year. I understand that the meeting has been scheduled for May 1. I would ask the Minister if he would make a point of attending that meeting. Time is of the essence, and if there are further problems, they are going to have to be sorted out very quickly. Could the Minister undertake to attend the meeting to hear, for at least a brief period of time that evening, what the concerns are and if they are valid?

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I certainly intend to attend the meeting to learn first hand how the resolution is going to be applied. As I indicated to the Member, we have received every assurance that the problem does not exist, that one can secure the property, or that money can be borrowed on the property and the question of title has been resolved. I expect that officials of my department will have at least one bank official at the meeting in order to assist with the details of explanation.

Question re: Territorial Court judges

Mrs. Firth: I have a question for the Minister of Justice with respect to the judges. In the budget we just debated there was provision for three judges, one chief judge and two others. With the appointment of Heino Lilles, the position of Chief Justice has been filled and the council is advertising for the second judge, which still leaves the outstanding issue of the third position which remains available for the chief land claims negotiator.

I would like to know if the Minister has an answer yet on how long this job will be held for this person?

Hon. Ms. Joe: I do not have an answer as to how long, but as I mentioned before with regard to that extra position, it has always been there and never filled. It was a position created when we took over the responsibilities of the Young Offenders Program. They thought there was a need then for another judge to deal with those cases. As far as I know, that has never been established, but that is what I understand is the reason.

Mrs. Firth: Perhaps the Minister could tell us why we need the position. Why does her department not delete the position if they do not have the need for it?

Hon. Ms. Joe: As I mentioned, it has never been entirely established whether or not that position was needed. We are not entirely sure whether or not we are going to be dealing with more young offenders and that position will be used. It was not we who established the position. It was there a few years ago and has been there for a number of years. It has been used to bring in deputy judges to do some work up here. The appointing of a new judge will allow us to better determine whether or not that position can be used.

Mrs. Firth: Well, the department either needs the position or they do not. If they need it, it should be filled. We spent $183,000 on deputy judges and now the Minister tells us they have a person year but are just using it for deputy judges. Does the department need the position or not?

Hon. Ms. Joe: As I mentioned before, when we have a new judge in place, we will be better able to determine whether or not that third position is needed. If it is not, then we will get rid of it but we do not have that information yet.

Question re: Territorial Court judges

Mrs. Firth: I want to re-direct another question to the Minister of Justice. We will sit again in about six months, around November and December. It will be well over four years ago when one position was seconded to land claims, but held open. That process was supposed to take 18 months. When we sit again, it will have been well over four years that we will have held that position open.

I raised the issue in this session and the Minister tells me they do not even know if they need that third judge. Yet they continue to hold the position. Either the department does need a third judge or they do not. If they need one, they should have the Judicial Council advertise the position and hire a third judge so they have their full complement of judges. Or they should just delete the position.

I would like to ask the Minister when we are going to have an answer regarding the third judge and is that position still being held for the chief land claims negotiator? Is that the function of that position?

Hon. Ms. Joe: I believe that position was in existence prior to the judge being seconded as the land claims negotiator. I also told the House we would be able to determine whether or not that third position is needed. We will be able to determine that when we have two judges in place. Now we are using deputy judges. There was a time we had no judges and used deputy judges all the time. There just has not been a normal court procedure for judges in the last while. I would like something stable in place before making a decision on that.

Mrs. Firth: I do not want to appear unreasonable, but let us be serious. This has been going on for four years and the Minister said that the position for a third judge had been there even before that. We have just approved the Minister’s budget. The position is either turned back if not needed or used. When is a decision going to be made on this matter?

Hon. Ms. Joe: When we have two judges in place we will be better able to determine whether that third position is needed. Then we will make a decision. I do not know when we are going to be appointing a new judge.

Mrs. Firth: Can the Minister tell us: should the chief land claims negotiator decide to go back to being a territorial court judge would he automatically fit into the position as the third territorial court judge?

Hon. Ms. Joe: I cannot answer that question.

Question re: Territorial Court judges

Mrs. Firth: Perhaps I will direct that question to the Government Leader who is responsible for the Executive Council Office and for Land Claims.

Should the chief land claims negotiator decide to go back to being a territorial court judge will he be filling the position that is being held for the third judge?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I believe the Member is asking a hypothetical question, and according to strict observance of the rules I would be unable to answer it. If the Member were to ask me if the land claims negotiating process were to come suddenly to an end, then my view is that the land claims negotiator would be returning to the bench, the position from which he is on leave. I cannot speak precisely about what will happen in the future. The Member has made representations that we have heard. The Minister of Justice has indicated conversations that she wishes to have with the named party and me about these matters. I am sure there will not be any announcement of any change in the status of anybody until those conversations have taken place.

Mrs. Firth: We are not just talking about conversations. We are talking about special privileges and positions being held for unduly long periods of time. The Minister of Justice told us there were some things being contemplated that she could not speak of. I do not know what those could be except more privileges. How long is the Government Leader prepared to hold this position open for the individual to make up his mind as to whether he is going to go back to the bench or not?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I suspect that anybody who has been involved in land claims negotiations, and especially people who have held the position of chief negotiator, would be appalled at the notion proposed by the Member opposite that this office involves any special privileges whatsoever. I would think that, relatively speaking, that position on the bench would seem like heaven as compared with the daily grind of land claims negotiations.

The person involved, who was chief judge of the Territorial Court at the time, and who agreed to take on the onerous and extremely demanding and frustrating task of land claims negotiations, did so in the anticipation of all the parties at the time that the negotiations would move more expeditiously than they did.

As Members opposite know, we had to wait 18 months for a new federal policy, which substantially slowed the progress on these matters and, therefore, extended the time it took to complete agreements. My view is that settling these land claims negotiations is the most important business before the territory. If that is the most important task of the government, I continue to want to have the best people available in the territory working on that task.

Mrs. Firth: In the best interest of justice, the job should either be given up on the bench or the land claims negotiator should assume that position. We should be getting on with justice in the Yukon Territory. We should have our full complement of judges and justices so the Minister can make the decisions she has to make. It has been four years.

Is the Minister saying this job is going to be left open forever, as long as it takes for land claims to be settled?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: The Member is making representations opposite. She seems to carry a certain kind of bias, even malice, toward the individual involved. There is probably no greater project in the history of the territory, and no greater service to justice in the history of the territory, than can be made by settling the aboriginal claims of the people of this community.

In my mind, justice will be well served by the present chief negotiator continuing in the task until we at least get the first final agreement with the First Nation in this territory.

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



Motion No. 39

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

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Community and Transportation Services

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Alaska Highway has been and continues to be an international transportation corridor of vital importance, both in peace and war, to the United States of America and Canada;

THAT the House supports the preparation both countries are making to celebrate, in 1992, the 50th anniversary of the construction of this historic highway;

THAT this House is concerned about the level of funding for the Yukon portion of the Alaska Highway currently being provided by the Government of Canada;

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Alaska Highway currently is in such poor condition that it is adversely affecting the economies of the Yukon Territory, the Province of British Columbia and the State of Alaska particularly with regard to tourism;

THAT this House supports continued efforts by the Government of Yukon to increase the Capital and Operation and Maintenance funding for the Alaska Highway;

THAT this House supports the formation of intergovernmental working groups with the Province of British Columbia and the State of Alaska to develop plans for upgrading the Alaska Highway in British Columbia and the Yukon respectively, and to lobby the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America as appropriate for suitable financing for the completion of the reconstruction of the Alaska Highway; and

THAT a copy of this resolution be forwarded by the Speaker to the Parliament and Government of Canada and to the respective legislatures and governments of the Province of British Columbia and the State of Alaska.

Hon. Mr. Byblow: Once again, this House addresses the issue of the Alaska Highway. Once again, Members will reiterate their concerns about the condition of the highway, the importance of the highway to the Yukon and the urgency to do something about it.

Once again, this House will attempt to formulate a strong message about the concern that Yukon people have about the highway. It is my hope that today’s motion will assist us in getting that message across emphatically to the responsible parties on both sides of the Canada/U.S. border.

The motion that is before us, which was drafted in consultation with both sides of the House, outlines the growing concern with the deterioration of the highway. It suggests an international option to begin addressing this issue much more rigorously.

It must be noted that the issue of the Alaska Highway has been the subject of many meetings, considerable communication and much effort involving various levels of government here in Canada and across the border over the years.

The most recent activity was less than two weeks ago. The Deputy Minister of Community and Transportation Services of the Yukon government met with the regional director of the public works department of the Government of Canada. They addressed the growing urgency that is building in the Yukon with respect to the highway. They established some guiding principles that, I believe, this House can build upon to provide a much higher profile for the entire issue than we have been able to do in the past.

It is recognized that we must balance the expenditures on the highway between the Yukon and the B.C. portion. As Members are aware, and has been noted in previous discussions, during the last fiscal year, approximately 87 percent of the funding on the Alaska Highway was earmarked for the B.C. portion. Only 13 percent was spent on the Yukon portion. In 1986-87, our portion of expenditure on the highway on the Yukon side was nearly 50 percent.

The officials at the April 14 meeting also recognized that there had to be discussions initiated between the United States government and the Canadian government respecting the Shakwak Project. As Members are aware, progress on the rebuilding of that section of the highway, which is now well within the Yukon in the area of Haines Junction, the Member for Kluane’s riding, has been virtually stalled. The urgency of starting discussions with our American colleagues must begin immediately.

Members will recall the visit and exchange that took place between this Legislature and the Legislature of Alaska. A number of discussions took place and the subject of the Shakwak Project was a prime topic. We have to increase the offer that we received at those meetings, which indicated that while the Americans were not prepared to pay for 100 percent of the cost of the Shakwak Project they were prepared to pay for a portion. We must begin discussions in that regard.

At the same time, we have to have some in-depth analysis done on the costs related to the highway. Where should it be reconstructed first? Where is it absolutely necessary? How much will it cost? What are the long-term costs related to the highway? What is the effect of these upgrading costs related to the effect on tourism and the general economy of the Yukon?

In the last round of discussions two weeks ago the officials also agreed that it was necessary to place the Alaska Highway profile again at a national level. In anticipation of that, I am expected to travel to Ottawa to meet with my federal counterpart sometime in June to address this among other issues facing Yukon and transportation.

It should also be noted that a week earlier the Yukon deputy minister met with the British Columbia deputy minister and the issue of the Alaska Highway was again discussed, recognizing that the BC government appears reluctant to take over the full responsibility of the highway. Yet we have indications from the federal government that in terms of devolution BC has priority over the Yukon section. Again, I received a copy of a letter from the federal minister on February 23 in which he outlined his position on several issues. In that correspondence, Mr. MacKay advised that the federal government would continue to concentrate its efforts on the completion of the BC portion of the highway because he felt that devolution of responsibilities to BC had the best chance of proceeding. Certainly, in our recent meeting with B.C. there appeared to be a difference of opinion about the priority of devolution of the BC portion of the highway.

In February my deputy minister met with Mr. MacKay’s deputy minister and there were discussions relating to the procedure that is going to take place respecting the Alaska Highway on the Yukon side. There is a recognition all around that the funding level has to be restored to maintain the level of the highway at a state that will prevent it from eroding and to prevent further deterioration to the point where we can question the safety of the road.

Throughout the past number of years there have been many meetings between various levels of Yukon government and Ottawa. The previous Minister responsible spent many hours in communication by phone, letter and in meetings respecting the Alaska Highway. The previous Minister of Tourism, Mr. Porter, also made that case respecting tourism. A year ago the issue came to light at the heads of government meeting held in Fairbanks, where Yukon, BC and Alaska agreed to lobby their national governments to increase the funding level and provide the necessary funding for reconstruction and maintenance of the highway.

The Government of Yukon made its representation to the Prime Minister in correspondence from Mr. Penikett to Mr. Mulroney, again stressing the need for an increased commitment to complete the highway.

A year ago, a motion was before this House on the very subject. It was at that time that the invitation was extended to the federal minister to come for a ride along the highway. I suspect it will be the Member for Kluane who feels he has been the one who has been riding the highway.

The road of upgrading the highway has been a rocky one. The funding has been cut from an average of $23,000,000 in 1982-83 to less than $15,000,000 last year. This represents a serious loss to the purchasing power for upgrading the highway.

The greatest benefactors from the highway are tire companies and shock absorber manufacturers, as well as windshield manufacturers.

The motion at hand is to the point. It says that there is no doubt that the Alaska Highway is vital to Yukoners. It is vital to Canadians. It is vital to Americans. We have an anniversary coming up. It is going to be difficult to celebrate 50 years of highway development when the highway can hardly be driven. The motion recognizes that funding levels provided are a concern. It states that we must continue our efforts on both the operations and the capital side regarding the highway.

The governments in the Yukon, British Columbia and Alaska have stated, many times, their concerns about that highway. We know that the road is critical to the territory. We must develop an upgrading plan immediately. We must do it cooperatively. The lobbies that can be mounted in Ottawa and Washington to drive home our concerns can be further advanced by the creation of the working group suggested in this motion.

I submit that this motion is urgent and critical to our needs in the territory, and I seek unanimous support for it and look forward to its passage.

Mr. Devries: I wish to say that I agree with the comments of Mr. Byblow regarding the importance of this motion. I wish to add the following comments.

Last weekend, in Watson Lake, I listened to endless complaints concerning the sawmill. The last straw was when someone noticed the “I Support Project 92" button presented to me in Alaska. He asked me if I supported that. I answered yes. This person had just driven from BC a few days before. He is a local businessman. He said he could not support Project 92 because he felt we did not have anything to celebrate. He asked me how we could celebrate the anniversary of something that does not exist. He said it was not a road, but a wagon trail, and a poor excuse for one.

This could have been one of the more critical observations. As I went from business to business, this was a concern. Watson Lake is presently a town where you could not get credit if you had money in the bank for collateral.

The mill is still shaky in everyone’s mind and the threat of the Cassiar Highway being upgraded hangs on the horizon. I want to support Project 92. We need the Alaska Highway fixed. We cannot afford to have people missing Watson Lake and going up Highway 37. We cannot afford to wait. You only have to drive through the half completed project near Transport to get a good idea of what you will find south of the border. The Yukon’s history is based on the gold rush and the Alaska Highway. We cannot afford to let this important part of our heritage deteriorate to where there is nothing to celebrate.

While we still have some wind in our sails, let us pass this motion. This motion is the future, the life and the blood of the Yukon. You even have to drive on the Alcan to get to Dawson. You have to drive on the Alaska Highway to experience the Yukon. Let us make this memory an enjoyable one, one where the tourists remember the clear clean air, the quiet lakes, and the gently flowing rivers, and above all, the good, safe roads. Pass this motion for progress in tourism.

Hon. Mr. Webster: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the importance of the Alaska Highway to the Yukon and tourism in particular. One of my first tasks in office was to meet with the hon. Tom Hockin, Minister of State for Small Businesses and Tourism. The first agenda item of this meeting was the declining condition of the Alaska Highway. During that meeting and in follow-up correspondence, I expressed the highway’s importance to the Yukon. As Canada’s overland connection to both Alaska and our own Arctic, it is a major artery for business and tourism travel into and through the territory.

Relative decreases in federal funding and consequent deterioration of the highway over the past several years have been substantial. While we appreciate that funding approval for the highway would come from Public Works Canada, we request Mr. Hockin’s interest and support to find solutions to this most serious situation.

The Alaska Highway carries the lifeblood of our tourism industry. Although our tourism base is broadening as a result of our efforts to develop new markets, 59 percent of our visitors are still highway travelers. The majority of tourism services offered in the territory are aimed at travelers on the Alaska Highway. We recognize the enormous contribution of the highway to Yukon tourism. In fact, I am pleased to use this opportunity to announce that highway travelers are the target of a new joint tourism marketing program recently finalized with the Province of British Columbia and the State of Alaska. This new marketing initiative, Tourism North, is a result of the March 1989 agreement between the Government Leader, the Government of Alaska, and the Premier of British Columbia to cooperate in such a marketing program. Tourism North will see over $600,000 aimed at selling the Yukon, northern British Columbia and Alaska as tourism destinations. We are laying a solid foundation for the Alaska Highway anniversary celebrations in 1992, with our most important segment of visitors, the individual RV camper market in Canada, the United States and overseas. This will allow the three jurisdictions to build on an established awareness of northern British Columbia, Yukon and Alaska regions as a unique travel destination.

Yukon tourism has long recognized the contribution made by the highway traveler. This year marks the publication of a 48 page Yukon highway travelers guide that gives prominence to the Alaska Highway. The same pages appear in “Yukon: The Magic and the Mystery”, our 70-page 1989 Yukon vacation guide. The Yukon highway travelers guide was mailed to 147,000 people who have indicated plans to travel our way this year. I expect these and other initiatives now underway, such as the anniversary commission’s plans for Alaska Highway celebrations and the Kluane regional tourism plan, will increase traffic on the Alaska Highway to accentuate its importance to not only the Yukon, but Alaska and northern BC as well.

As the Department of Tourism completes its cooperative work with communities in the Kluane region on a tourism plan for their area, there is considerable optimism that Kluane, with the world heritage site at its centre, will take its place as one of the Yukon’s major visitor attractions. Kluane’s spectacular scenery, remote wilderness, world class mountains and glaciers and unparalleled wildlife habitat are an irresistible draw for those from more developed parts of the world.

With the plan as a guide, with enthusiastic regional tourism operators, and with the assistance of the Departments of Economic Development and Tourism, we expect to see the Kluane region establish itself over the coming years as a world class tourism destination. In the coming years, Kluane’s wilderness appeal will complement Dawson City’s heritage appeal for visitors who make the Yukon their vacation destination.

I share the enthusiasm of the people of Kluane for the tourism prospects of their region, but there is a fly in the ointment. Ninety-nine percent of the people who visit the Kluane region use the Alaska Highway to get there.

The stretch of the Alaska Highway between Haines Junction and Beaver Creek is the most highly travelled section in the Yukon. The 1987 visitor exit survey found that 80,000 to 85,000 people travelled east on the Alaska Highway through the Kluane region. Between 90,000 and 100,000 travelled the same section going west. I imagine some pass through beautiful Dawson City via the Top of the World Highway route.

However, one cannot help but wonder if many of our efforts to foster Yukon tourism will be undercut by continued deterioration of the highway artery on which they depend. As the Members have heard and will hear this afternoon, much has been done to remind the federal government of its responsibility to maintain and upgrade the Alaska Highway. I will be the first to admit that all these efforts by the Ministers and officials of this government, by our Member of Parliament, by town councils up and down the highway, by the tourism industry and by this Legislature have, to date, met with little success.

We in the Yukon are not the only ones to experience the results of the federal government’s neglect of its responsibilities. As you may be aware, for example, the Trans Canada Highway in New Brunswick, between Edmonston and Fredericton, part of our major coast-to-coast link, has been neglected to the point that it is now a national embarrassment. It is obvious that a major cooperative effort is going to have to be made if we are to make those who govern us from Ottawa sit up and take note of the impact of their policies on the regions of this country.

To that end, I would like to encourage the private sector to work with us to raise the voice of all Yukoners in one loud shout of protest.

When I met with the board of the Tourism Industry Association of Yukon recently, I suggested that members of that organization consider sponsoring a petition calling for action by the federal government. I proposed that the Tourism Industry Association members in each of our communities seek the signatures of all Yukoners of voting age. It seems to me that a petition signed by all taxpaying voters in the Yukon ought to bring some national attention to this part of the country and to the problem of a deteriorating Alaska Highway.

As I mentioned to the TIA board members, such an initiative would also help to raise the profile of the Tourism Industry Association of Yukon as an organization, remind all Yukoners of tourism’s importance to the territory, and serve to promote our Alaska Highway 50th anniversary celebrations.

By working together - senior and junior levels of government, the private sector and Yukoners from all walks of life - I believe, we can get results.

In conclusion, I am in support of this motion and compliment the spirit of cooperation among Members of this House who saw this brought forward today for debate.

Mr. Brewster: Firstly, I would like to make it clear that the Alaska Highway is not just in the Kluane area. If you cannot get from Watson Lake to Haines Junction, you are not going to use the Kluane area.

Also, I did not take the Minister out last night for dinner so I did not bribe him, but I thank him for the compliments.

I am very pleased to see this motion back in this Legislature. I do not think I have to caution anyone in this House if we are not unanimous in this vote. It is a waste of time sending it down to those in Ottawa, because if we do not stick together for the good of the Yukon, there is no point in going any further.

Everyone, including myself, has talked about this for years. I am running out of things to say. Unfortunately, I have decided to go in another direction now. I thought I would give a little history about the highway and how it started. I think some people might be a little shaken to discover what kinds of things could have happened to the Yukon without some good fortune.

There were originally four proposed routes for the highway. One was a western route from Hazelton through Telegraph Creek, Atlin, Whitehorse, Dawson and Eagle to Fairbanks. The second route was the Rocky Mountain Trench from Prince George to Watson Lake, Dawson and Eagle to Fairbanks. The third route was from Edmonton through Dawson Creek, Watson Lake, Whitehorse, Haines Junction and Beaver Creek to Fairbanks. Thank God that one won out. The fourth one and the one that maybe could shake a lot of people was the Mackenzie River route from Great Slave Lake through Great Bear Lake, Canol to Eagle to Fairbanks. That one would have shut down the Yukon. I think we all know what could have happened if the powers that be had decided on that one. The Yukon, including Dawson City, could not even make that one and our history would have been completely different.

The agreement to build the highway was signed on March 17 and 18 in 1942. The decision to build the highway was made after years of debate, often with many arguments about whether or not it was needed, and arguments about the four proposals were equally charged with emotion. These discussions had begun in 1938. Most of the discussions regarding the starting of the highway were between President Roosevelt and Prime Minister King. In a meeting in Ogdenberg, the two leaders set up a permanent joint board of defense. At that meeting, Prime Minister King made it very clear to the president that, while Canada was prepared to give facilities to the U.S., it was not prepared to sell or lease land.

In 1940 the permanent joint board of defense agreed that a road to Alaska was of no military value. The Canadian chiefs of staff agreed. But delegate Dimond of Alaska continued to fight for the overland route.

The late days of 1941 brought about a great deal of re-thinking. Now that the U.S. was at war, the Alaska Highway was thought to be essential. Before formal agreement was reached with Canada, President Roosevelt, on February 11, 1942, authorized work to begin at once to construct a pioneer road by the United States Army Engineer Troops. The President of the United States, secretaries of war and the navy had come to the conclusion that the highway was needed. The committee agreed that there were no objections to the survey even though it had not been authorized by Canada.

The recommendations were approved on March 5, 1942.

The United States War Department had directed the chief of engineers to proceed with the survey and to construct the highway. President Roosevelt had considered the agreement with Canada an accomplished fact and had allocated $10 million from his emergency funds. The President had assumed arrangements had been made with Canada through the permanent joint board. It was five days later that the informal discussions began between the United States and Canada, with a view of securing rights-of-way through Canada. With surprising speed the permanent joint board of defense of the United States and Canada recommended the construction of the highway.

The conditions recommended were:

1) The United States would pay the entire cost of building the road and maintaining it during the war. At the end of the war, the highway would become part of the Canadian highway system.

This was on March 5. On March 6, 1942 Canada announced that it approved of these recommendations.

On March 18 joint statements were issued:

1) The United States Army would make the necessary survey and construct the primary road by use of engineering troops. The highway would be completed under contracts made by the U.S. Public Roads Administration with a view to finishing the project with all possible haste. The U.S. would maintain the highway for the duration of the war and for six months thereafter unless the Government of Canada preferred to assume responsibility earlier for the maintenance of the Canadian section.

At the conclusion of the war, the Canadian part of the highway would pass to Canadian control with the stipulation that the citizens of the U.S. would not be discriminated against in subsequent use.

In consideration of these understandings the Canadian government agreed to:

1) Provide rights-of-way for the highway;

2) Waiver all import duties, sales tax and license fees on equipment and supplies required for construction;

3) To remit income tax on the income tax of U.S. citizens employed on the construction and maintenance of the highway;

4) To permit the use of timber, gravel and rocks along the route required by the highway;

5) An exchange note between the two governments took place on March 17.

On March 18 the United States Army engineers were moving into Canada. The building of the Alaska Highway had begun. There were three practical points of access to the 1,500 mile route - namely Dawson Creek, Whitehorse and Fairbanks. There was an existing winter trail from Fort St. John to Fort Nelson that was impassible after the spring thaws. The 35th Engineers were ordered into Fort Nelson, a rigorous 325 mile march; they reached Fort Nelson on April 5th.

The 95th and 341st Engineers were assigned to the task of the road between Fort St. John and Fort Nelson. Other engineer troops arrived in Whitehorse in April. The 18th Engineers started working north to Beaver Creek. The 93rd worked toward Teslin. The 340th were transported to points on Teslin Lake and the Teslin River to begin construction toward Watson Lake. The 97th was sent to Valdez and transported overland to Slana to begin construction to the international border to meet up with the 18th. It was decided it was necessary to follow the route that would connect with all the previously constructed military airports.

What had seemed an impossible feat became a reality on November 20, 1942 when the Alaska Highway was officially opened at Soldier Summit on Kluane Lake. It was -30 degrees when the ribbons were cut. The pioneer road was completed. In 1943 the private contractors moved in to make a highway.

An idea of the hardship that the men went through is clearly stated in the following ad that was circulated for hired help and it states as follows: “Working and living conditions on this job are as difficult as those encountered on any job ever done in the United States or foreign countries. Men hired for this job will be required to work and live under most extreme conditions imaginable. Temperatures will range from 90 above zero to 70 below zero. Men will have to fight swamps, rivers, ice and cold. Mosquitoes, flies and gnats will not only be annoying but will cause bodily harm. If you are not prepared to work under these and similar conditions do not apply.”

By 1943 the word, “Alcan”, as some had calmly called the Alaska Highway, was disliked by everyone who worked on the project. One of the reasons for its unpopularity was due to the name being twisted to “oil can”.

On July 19, 1943, the Government of Canada agreed to call it the Alaska Highway. I hope some government agencies note that. It is not the Alcan Highway. Tourism and other departments should note this. Some still call it the Alcan Highway.

In 1943, four quarter-master regiments consisting of 16,000 men were assigned the problem of transporting and moving 60,000 tons of supplies per month. At the peak of construction, 11,107 pieces of equipment were in use. Six thousand of these were units of heavy equipment. Three thousand, nine hundred and eighty three were contractor owned and rented. Seven thousand, one hundred and twenty-four were government owned. During the first 10 months of 1943, 497,560 tons of supplies were moved over the highway. Four hundred and twenty-nine thousand, eight hundred and thirty tons of this was for highway construction. Sixty-seven thousand, seven hundred and thirty tons were supplied for army camps and the air corps.

A conservative estimate put the cost of the pioneer road at $17,221 per mile. The final road was $66,160 per mile. The estimated maintenance of the road was $663.06. Compare that to what happens today.

By October 31, 1943, the improvements had been made and construction camps were moving out. To facilitate transportation of personnel, the North West Service Command operated a bus line from Dawson to Fairbanks. The run from Dawson Creek to Whitehorse was 34 hours and 55 minutes. The run from Whitehorse to Fairbanks was 21 hours and 10 minutes.

In closing, I would like to mention a few people whom I knew and had the honour of working with. Some are alive; some are dead. I will start out with Mr. Williscroft, Alex VanBibber, Sam Johnston, Moose Johnston, George John, Dick Dickson, Pardne Kane, Bill Jamieson, Jacquot Brothers, James Quong, Dave Hume and Sam Williams. The Speaker will not forgive me if I do not include his father. Mr. Speaker was only seven, therefore he is not entitled to be included in this group.

These people were the main people who made this crooked road. They had the task of escorting people through on trails that they had made. The surveyors were completely behind. They could not even catch up to the Cats that were going ahead. One story says that a new Cat driver asked the foreman where to go. The foreman told him to follow the black spot up ahead. It turned out the black spot was a moose. He had a problem, but he got through it.

A little note has been sent to me which says, “Anybody can be on the working group. It is assumed and implied that we are on it and part of it. We are leading the pack.”

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I would like to thank Members who have spoken this afternoon, especially the Member for Kluane, who has provided a useful perspective that had not been mentioned in previous debates on this motion. It is probably a perspective that only he could provide, as it is probably only recent memory for him. It is a perspective that adds credibility for the motion and credibility to the debate.

I would like to add one point to the history lesson. As the Member mentioned in his closing remarks, many of the people he cited as having played a significant role in the construction were aboriginal people who were encountered by the American military when they came through during the construction and played a significant role in ensuring the progress was as smooth as possible. It was testimony to the incredible patience, as well as goodwill, that native people have traditionally showed when significant events like this have happened in their history.

I wholeheartedly support the motion. It is the latest reaffirmation of this government’s and this Legislature’s strong commitment to seeing the improvement of one of the most significant transportation corridors in the territory. It travels from southern Canada and the lower 48 states into Alaska, as well as through the heart of the Yukon. Just so I do not alienate anyone from northern Yukon, I would like to remind Members that Yukon has a very big heart.

The highway is very important for local traffic, as well as for tourism. It remains an important transportation corridor for freight into the territory and a major underpinning of the territorial economy. As Members have mentioned, it is the only land link to Alaska. That is of significant importance to the Alaska economy, as well.

On numerous occasions, both today and in the past, in this Legislature and the previous ones, representations have been made to the Department of Public Works and to a series of ministers responsible for that department. At those times, commitments were made to review the expenditures on the highway and to speak to U.S. authorities, including the American ambassador. Representations have been made to state officials, both bilaterally between governments, as well as through exchanges between Members from this Legislature and Members of the Alaska House and Senate regarding the US/Canada Treaty. All this has been in response to the funding decline we have experienced for this major arterial route through our territory.

The capital upgrading to transform this gravel winding road to a surfaced road has been in decline in the last five to 10 years. The operation and maintenance funding required to ensure the road is maintained to a safe travelling standard has also declined. The Members in the Legislature are aware of the issue, and it is up to us to encourage the federal government to feel the issue is of concern to Canada, as well.

It is an international road. It has territorial, national and international implications, and it behooves all partners to ensure the necessary work is done to see the road upgraded and improved so it can be a transportation corridor we can be proud of and can meet the objectives this Legislature and the Canadian Parliament at one time have adopted.

Once again, I wholeheartedly support the motion and look forward to its passage.

Mr. Phelps: I am pleased to rise and give my full support to the motion. It is an extremely important motion and right now the fate of the Alaska Highway seems more critical than ever to Yukon’s future at a time of some economic uncertainty in the Yukon and a time when some mines have been shutting down and the future of others is being questioned, at a time that we are concerned about what cuts may be made in the federal budget, and at a time when the actual number of tourists last year declined for the first time in many years, the improvement of this highway is extremely important to all Yukoners.

I am very pleased with the nonpartisan approach taken here today to this important issue and I would like to thank the Member for Watson Lake for originating this subject in the Legislature and give special thanks to the Minister of Community and Transportation Services and to the Member for Kluane for overcoming the bipartisan nature of the debate last week and reviving the motion in its present form.

I did enjoy the speech given by the Member for Kluane and in that speech he gave credit to many people who played a very important role in building and maintaining the highway in the early years. I must gently chide him for neglecting to mention Johnny Johns, from Carcross, who guided the road engineers through a very important part of the highway. After he had taken credit for establishing and locating the vital part of the road, when asked by some tourists why the road was so crooked, he said that there are a number of lakes between Johnson’s Crossing and Whitehorse that he liked to visit because of the fishing potential and he thought that if he built the road from lake to lake he would be able to get there more easily once the road was completed.

In supporting this motion I think of the significance of the highway in so many ways to all Yukoners. I think of the independent breed of men and women who built the road and maintained it during the early years. I think of the hard working men and women who own and operate - and have operated - the lodges on the highway, people with dreams about the future, people who have provided such an essential service to travelers on that road - which is often a lonely road, particularly in the dead of winter - and I hope that this motion will assist the effort to obtain suitable financing for the completion of the reconstruction of the highway so that our future in Yukon may be more secure and so that the dreams of so many will finally be realized.

Speaker: The hon. Member will close debate if he now speaks. Does any other Member wish to be heard?

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I will be brief. I believe Members from both sides have spoken knowledgeably and at length on the importance of the motion before us, and I want to thank all Members who spoke of their support of the motion and the issue at stake, particularly the Member for Kluane, who provided us all with a useful history lesson.

We look forward to your role, Mr. Speaker, in carrying this resolution to the responsible jurisdictions called for in the motion.

Motion No. 39 agreed to

Speaker’s Ruling

Speaker: Order, please. I would like to point out to Members that the House has debated and carried Motion No. 39, dealing with the Alaska Highway. The Chair notes that Motion No. 34, now standing on the Order Paper, deals with substantially the same subject matter. As the House has made a decision on this topic, I would order the Clerk to drop Motion No. 34 from the Order Paper.

Motion No. 45

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Pursuant to an agreement between the House Leaders, I will request the unanimous consent of the House to deal with the following motion:

THAT this House recommends to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development the appointment of Gerald Isaac to the Yukon Territorial Water Board for a three-year term.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Government House Leader

THAT this House recommends to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development the appointment of Gerald Isaac to the Yukon Territorial Water Board for a three-year term.

Speaker: Is there unanimous consent to deal with this motion?

All Hon. Members: Agreed.

Speaker:  I declare unanimous consent has been granted.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: In December of last year, a vacancy was created on the Yukon Territorial Water Board with the expiration of the appointment of the territorial appointee, Millie Pauls. The Territorial Water Board serves an important function in determining the impact of development on the Yukon’s environment. Thus, the individual chosen for this board must be one who understands the territory well and the broad issues that affect all northerners.

Gerald Isaac is such an individual. Born and raised in Dawson City, Mr. Isaac has intimate knowledge and understanding of the Yukon. Through his involvement with the land claims secretariat over the past three years, he has also acquired a deep appreciation for the challenges facing all Yukoners in the years ahead. Mr. Isaac has a unique contribution to make to the Yukon Territorial Water Board in that his interests encompass both that of a conservationist and a placer miner. He exemplifies that these interests can indeed be compatible.

Mr. Isaac serves and is co-chairperson of the Yukon Wildlife Management Board and, in that capacity, he has actively pursued the environmental concerns facing the territory. As well, Mr. Isaac has personal knowledge and experience with the placer mining industry. Given these perspectives, he understands the importance of balance between resource development and environmental integrity in the Yukon. I am very pleased to request that this House recommend to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development the appointment of Gerald Isaac to the Yukon Territorial Water Board.

Motion No. 45 agreed to

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

Motion agreed to

Speaker leaves the Chair


Chair: Committee of the Whole will now come to order. We will now have a recess.


Chair:  I will now call Committee of the Whole to order.

Bill No. 51 - First Appropriation Act, 1989-90 - continued

Yukon Development Corporation - continued

Mr. Phelps: There are a few issues arising from the interesting discussions we had last night with the officials and directors of YDC. I look forward to receiving the materials promised by the Minister.

I have some questions regarding the electrical rates issue and the Public Utilities Board. I note that interim approval of the new rates was announced by the board. There was a press release.

Is there going to be full hearings on the issue of the electrical rates?

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I am sorry that I am not current on the date. My recollection is that the board had given interim approval pending a full hearing in May or June. I understand the fullness of the hearing is partly determined by the number of registered interveners. At this point there are only two interveners, other than the two utilities that are making application.

Mr. Phelps: There is some concern regarding the independence from government of the Public Utilities Board. A letter was sent out with all the bills, signed by the Minister, announcing the rate decreases at election time. This letter was sent before the Public Utilities Board had met and made any determination about rates. The previous Public Utilities Board was left in limbo, with no appointments being made for a considerable time by the Minister of Justice. These are things that should be given some thought. There is a problem when political advantage is sought by a Minister in charge of a corporation such as YDC and when announcements are made with no indication of what position the Public Utilities Board might take. It seems that some thought ought to be given to the advisability of this kind of action. It reflects upon that essential independence of the board and whether or not we have, in the board, a really competent watchdog guarding the interests of consumers of electrical energy in the territory.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I hope that Mr. Phelps will forgive me for saying that in the last several weeks I have had some trouble in discerning any political advantage to be obtained in my job as Minister responsible for the Yukon Development Corporation.

Let me deal seriously with the substance of this question. First of all, the communications sent to electrical consumers were about the rate policy adopted by the Government of Yukon, not rate decisions that may be handed down by the board. It was the application the utility that we own is making to the board, which is in accordance with the policy adopted by Cabinet. I would agree that the timing of the communication, which I instructed to go out last fall following our policy decision, did not happen in some cases until after the writ had dropped. I hope the Leader of the Official Opposition will understand that many reasons he would agree that were he in my position he would want to avoid such occurences because it leads inevitably not to political advantage in this day and age but to cynicism about the purpose and intent about the decision advanced in the communication.

I am on rather firm record in terms of the signing of the communication to the officials that it was to have gone out much earlier; there were mechanical reasons why it did not.

Let me deal with the question of the board. Every jurisdiction in this country where the electrical utility is under provincial public ownership has had to face at one time or another the wisdom of continuing with a public utilities board. Clearly, there is the power and, in some cases, the legal right for the provincial cabinet or publicly-owned utility to set rates without reference to a third party. Once the assets of NCPC were transferred to this government, we clearly had an ability at that point to make our own rate policy - being elected people, we could instruct the board of directors of the electrical utility to make its own policy according to its perception of the public interest.

We are cognizant of the fact that in recent months, during the time we have been considering this question, the Conservative Government of Saskatchewan, for example, decided after a spat between the provincial government and the public utilities board, to simply abolish the board. They decided in the end that it was more trouble than it was worth.

We decided differently. We decided that the appropriate division of labour was for the Cabinet to set broad rate policy, have the electoral utility we own make an economic rate application and subject that to a public review that would be carried out by an independent, appointed body. I hope that the Member would note the quality of the appointments to that board in that I think the majority of the members have some experience with utility matters, electrical rate questions or energy issues.

I would not for a moment claim that the board is nonpartisan, that all the people on it are free of political associations, but I think the Member would note the significant break in tradition from the public utilities boards as we used to know them, which all consisted of appointees of the government of the party of the day and were all very partisan. There is a considerable balance on this body between supporters of the party opposite and supporters of the party on this side of the House.

The final point I would make in terms of communications in people’s electrical bills, I believe I can tell the House, is that the Public Utilities Board has recently instructed the utility to include some instructions or information in the power bills about the rates and charges, including a temporary further reduction, which will be taking place in the next few months. The board has in this respect asserted itself and the utility will accept and will follow the instructions of the Public Utility Board in that regard.

Mr. Phelps: The transfer of the assets of NCPC to Yukon Development Corporation has been on the political agenda of our party for a considerable time, and it was a high priority of Mr. Nielsen and of myself in the years leading into 1985 and the start of the serious negotiations to transfer those assets. In discussions, speeches and consultations throughout the Yukon, the independent board with teeth, the Public Utilities Board, a powerful board, was seen as essential to those people who supported the devolution of the assets over to Yukoners - a Yukon-owned corporation.

Electrical energy is one of the main items of importance to businesses here, to families, and the proper management of our energy resource is vital to the future of the Yukon. I feel that the mandate that the government had to move on the devolution of the NCPC assets was founded on the promise that there would be an independent public utilities board in place, a board that would be the watchdog of the energy corporation, on behalf of all consumers in the Yukon. I must say I take issue with the Government Leader to the extent that he has made a statement that it was not incumbent upon this government to continue with the Public Utilities Board, that they did it intuitively. The political support for the transfer itself was founded on the understanding that there would always be a watchdog in place in the form of what we know now as the Public Utilities Board.

A discussion such as this is useful. It is important that the board is protected so that it is seen as independent and operates in an independent fashion and does good work on behalf of consumers. That is really why I raise the subject.

Hon. Mr. Penikett: I hesitate to rejoin this debate for fear that the Leader of the Official Opposition and I might continue what is in fact, I should think, a furious agreement. The fact is that I would argue that the board is independent and has demonstrated its independence in a number of ways. The guarantee of its independence is in the bipartisan nature of the appointments of this government. I would argue that it has incisors, it has molars; it has very health teeth.

The Leader of the Official Opposition will have noted my observation about the Boards instructions to the utility already about its communications with the public. I believe the Leader of the Official Opposition may have noticed as well that it has retained counsel who is on public record as having absolutely no affection whatsoever for this party nor this government, and can count himself as a irritating non-conformist in respect to our philosophy.

The point I was making earlier about the options to the government was not to suggest that we have seriously contemplated anything other than an independent board, because I believe this party in opposition, and in government, had not proposed any such thing. The only point I was making to the Leader of the Official Opposition is that it was at least an intellectually legitimate option given the recent experience in other jurisdictions. I want to emphasize to him that it was not one that we considered very seriously or very long. If he is arguing that there has been a broad consensus about an independent board for a long time, I am not going to defend or depart from that consensus now any more than I have in the past.

Chair: We will proceed with line by line.

On Gross Advances

Gross Advances in the amount of one dollar agreed to

On Less Internal Recovery

Less Internal Recovery in the amount of one dollar agreed to

Chair:  Any questions on Allotments?

Yukon Housing Corporation

Hon. Mr. Byblow: The estimates of the Housing Corporation as outlined on pages 357 and 358 reflect an anticipated expenditure of $6,360,000. As indicated, the expenditure is offset by recoveries of $4,037,000 resulting in a required estimate of $2,323,000. On page 360 of the budget book is indicated the breakdown of those amounts.

Perhaps, by way of a brief introduction, I could indicate some of the priorities of the corporation in this coming budget and coming year. Many of these items have been dealt with during previous estimates debate in the capital portion as well as in the supplementaries that we discussed in this House previously. An emphasis of the corporation in this fiscal year will be to address a number of administrative matters. The corporation is in the process of rewriting its bylaws, rewriting its policies and refining a number of procedures. As I indicated in previous debate also, the board of directors recently approved a contracting bylaw. This work has been taking place since last fall. It involved considerable consultation with the industry and it appears that the policy is being quite well accepted within the industry, and we should see a more refined set of procedures from that bylaw. Members will recall that I circulated to them a copy of that bylaw.

One of the features of that contracting procedure will be a standing committee, consisting of members of the board of directors as well as representatives from the industry. This committee will serve as a dispute agency for contracts. The settlement panel under the bylaw will provide for direct participation by the industry with the board of directors to deal with any problems that may come up respecting the various contracts or tenders.

The activities within the department will also address the other item I previously mentioned of a turn-key approach to housing construction. This approach will consist of the corporation calling for proposals from the private sector, from developers, for the construction of units that would be purchased by the corporation. Those calls for proposals will stipulate the rules surrounding the type of development. It will speak to the size of units, to the standards that will have to be met. It will require the developers to submit designs, select the locations and price the units for sale.

Earlier today, I mentioned the hosting of a national conference, which will be under the auspices of the corporation.

There may be some further detailed questions pertaining to the budget, and I would be quite prepared to answer specific aspects on budget detail in line-by-line discussion, unless Members have general questions.

Mr. Devries: I had a few comments. I found the schedule of invitational contractors very interesting and the fact that they can build a shed in Watson Lake for $2,500. They also build it in the right location so that they do not have move it later. I am very happy to see that the majority of maintenance contracts in Watson Lake were awarded to Watson Lake contractors. I would like to again say that it is very important that any time a new housing project is put on stream, whether it be in Whitehorse or in a community, it is important that the town councils be approached to make sure it fits within their plans and the plans of the community, in order not to have a housing glut, and also so these projects would not force the price of housing down.

Are there any major renovation projects planned in Watson Lake? Actually, I think I may have the list.

Mr. Phillips: I thank the Minister for the information he provided to us regarding the social units and the breakdown for each community. At the same time, I asked the Minister for a list of all the Grey Mountain Housing units, community by community. There must be a list so they can coordinate building the units and not build too many on one street or side by side.

Hon. Mr. Byblow: Through the corporation, I have sought the authority to provide that information. If and when it arrives, I will undertake to provide it directly to the Member.

The Member for Watson Lake raised the issue of consultation. It is the policy and practice of the corporation to spend considerable time consulting with the community, specifically through the housing associations in those communities, to assess the needs as identified within the community. The further initiative is that where the communities have specific identified authorities, whether it be a band or a municipality, communication and consultation takes place at that level as well.

On Gross Expenditures

Gross Expenditures in the amount of $6,360,000 agreed to

Chair: Are there any questions on Allotments?

Are there any questions on information pages 360 or 368?

Mr. Phillips: Before we leave this item, I would like to say that although I do not always agree with the policy of the side opposite with regard to some of their social housing programs, I do commend Mr. Albert, the Director, for helping a constituent in trying to find some affordable housing. I found him extremely cooperative. The constituent, who was going through quite a dilemma at the time, is now in an affordable house. Mr. Albert was very cooperative. I would like to publicly thank him.

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I am sure the president would wish to acknowledge those remarks. The corporation is often caught in the position of having to mediate numerous situations of housing shortage. There is a considerable effort put forward by the staff and the administration, and particularly the senior administration of the corporation, to address the general objective of providing affordable housing to all Yukon people.

Yukon Housing Corporation in the amount of $6,360,000 agreed to

Yukon Liquor Corporation

Chair: We will go to page 372, Yukon Liquor Corporation.

Hon. Mr. Webster: There is little change in the O&M of the Yukon Liquor Corporation so there is little to record. I do have a few opening remarks. For the first time since its incorporation, all capital expenditures related to the operation of the Yukon Liquor Corporation will be included in its annual report in the coming fiscal year.

Other jurisdictions in Canada, where the organization responsible for the distribution of liquor products has been incorporated, record their capital expenditures in a similar manner. This practice better informs the public as to the true cost of operating the corporation, as both the expenses related to operation and capital are documented in the same report.

The net income resulting from operations will reflect the cost to replace any equipment and buildings required to maintain the operational efficiency of the corporation. In order to implement this change, the reporting method of 1989-90 estimated revenue was presented net of estimated capital expenditures.

Mr. Phillips: I have many constituents raise the issue of being able to go to the local liquor stores to buy cold beer or wine. I wonder if there are any plans in the future for the Liquor Corporation to put in coolers in some of the main liquor stores so that people can utilize this service?

Hon. Mr. Webster: That is the intention of the Liquor Corporation in an effort to provide better service to the customers who have, over the last several years, made repeated requests for this service. Unfortunately, the situation in most of our rural stores is that we just do not have enough floor space to accommodate the coolers necessary to provide that service.

Mr. Phillips: Are there any plans in the future to look at commercial outlets for the sale of beer and wine other than the government liquor store? Perhaps a private individual?

Hon. Mr. Webster: My silent partner informs me that with the limited dollars of the new Minister responsible for this corporation, he is without a clue on that matter. I really do not know.

Mr. Devries: An attempt at this was made in Watson Lake last year and it did not work well. It was in the grocery store and, at the same time, in a restaurant where children went for doughnuts. There was drinking in the same area where children were going for doughnuts and it did not go over well with the community. If they are going to do this, it should be done in a very careful way.

Hon. Mr. Webster: As a matter of fact, we have no plans at this time to introduce private sales of liquor in the territory.

Mr. Phillips: What was that little voice that told the Minister the first time that there might be something? I saw him lean over and speak to the Chair then he gave us a different answer.

Hon. Mr. Webster: Those comments were emanating from my colleague, the Minister of Education, and were far to my left.

Chair: Is there further general debate? If not we will proceed with line by line.

On Gross Advances

Gross Advances in the amount of $500,000 agreed to

On Less Internal Recovery

Less Internal Recovery in the amount of a recovery of $500,000 agreed to

Yukon Liquor Corporation in the amount of one dollar agreed to

Loan Capital and Loan Amortization

On Loan Capital

On Loans to Third Parties

Loans to Third Parties in the amount of $2,500,000 agreed to

On Loan Amortization

On Interest

Interest in the amount of $1,290,000 agreed to

On Principal

Principal in the amount of $832,000 agreed to

Loan Amortization in the amount of $2,122,000 agreed to

On Recovery

On Interest

Interest in the amount of $1,060 agreed to

On Principal

Principal in the amount of $941,000 agreed to

Recovery  in the amount of $2,001,000 agreed to

Chair: We will go to Schedule “A” and carry each line.

On Schedule “A”

On Operation & Maintenance

On Yukon Legislature Assembly

Yukon Legislature Assembly in the amount of $1,857,000 agreed to

On Executive Council Office

Executive Council Office in the amount of $5,308,000 agreed to

On Community and Transportation Services

Community and Transportation Services in the amount of $49,040,000 agreed to

On Economic Development: Mines and Small Business

Economic Development: Mines and Small Business in the amount of $2,343,000 agreed to

On Education

Education in the amount of $51,253,000 agreed to

On Finance

Finance in the amount of $4,066,000 agreed to

On Government Services

Government Services in the amount of $17,367,000 agreed to

On Health and Human Resources

Health and Human Resources in the amount of $46,915,000 agreed to

On Justice

Justice in the amount of $20,000,000 agreed to

On Public Service Commission

Public Service Commission in the amount of $7,277,000 agreed to

On Renewable Resources

Renewable Resources in the amount of $9,510,000 agreed to

On Tourism

Tourism in the amount of $4,043,000 agreed to

On Women’s Directorate

Women’s Directorate in the amount of $319,000 agreed to

On Yukon Housing Corporation

Yukon Housing Corporation in the amount of $6,360,000 agreed to

On Yukon Liquor Corporation

Yukon Liquor Corporation in the amount of one dollar agreed to

On Yukon Development Corporation

Yukon Development Corporation in the amount of one dollar agreed to

On Loan Capital

Loan Capital in the amount of $2,500,000 agreed to

On Loan Amortization

Loan Amortization in the amount of $2,122,000 agreed to

Subtotal Operation and Maintenance in the amount of $230,280,000 agreed to

On Capital

On Executive Council Office

Executive Council Office in the amount of $22,000 agreed to

On Community and Transportation Services

Community and Transportation Services in the amount of $49,024,000 agreed to

On Economic Development: Mines and Small Business

Economic Development: Mines and Small Business in the amount of $12,391,000 agreed to

On Education

Education in the amount of $15,940,000 agreed to

On Government Services

Government Services in the amount of $8,188,000 agreed to

On Health and Human Resources

Health and Human Resources in the amount of $2,235,000 agreed to

On Justice

Justice in the amount of of $156,000 agreed to

On Renewable Resources

Renewable Resources in the amount of $1,709,000 agreed to

On Tourism

Tourism in the amount of $1,868,000 agreed to

On Yukon Housing Corporation

Yukon Housing Corporation in the amount of $12,191,000

Subtotal in the amount of $103,724,000 agreed to

Total sums required in the amount of $334,004,000 agreed to

On Schedule B

Schedule B agreed to

On Schedule C

Schedule C agreed to

Clause 1 agreed to

On Clause 2

Clause 2 agreed to

On Title

Title agreed to

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I move that you report Bill No. 51 without amendment.

Motion agreed to

Chair:  We will take a brief recess at this point.


Chair: Committee of the Whole will now come to order.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I move that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.

Chair: It has been moved by the hon. Government House Leader that the Speaker do now resume the Chair.

Motion agreed to

Speaker resumes the Chair

Speaker: I will now call the House to order. May the House have a report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole?

Ms. Kassi: Committee of the Whole has considered Bill No. 51, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1989-90, and directed me to report same without amendment.

Speaker: You have heard the report from the Chair of Committee of the Whole. Are you agreed?

Some Hon. Members: Agreed.

Speaker: I declare the report carried.


Bill No. 37: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 37, standing in the name of the hon. Mr. Byblow.

Hon. Mr. Byblow: I move that Bill No. 37, entitled Act to Amend the Home Owners Grant Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Community and Transportation Services that Bill No. 37, entitled Act to Amend the Home Owners Grant Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 37 has passed this House.

Bill No. 70: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 70, standing in the name of the hon. Ms. Joe.

Hon. Ms. Joe: I move that Bill No. 70, entitled An Act to Amend the Insurance Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Justice that Bill No. 70, entitled An Act to Amend the Insurance Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: I declare that Bill No. 70 has passed this House.

Bill No. 79: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 79, standing in the name of the hon. Ms. Joe.

Hon. Ms. Joe: I move that Bill No. 79, entitled An Act to Amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Minister of Justice that Bill No. 79, entitled, An Act to Amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: I declare the motion carried and that Bill No. 79 has passed this House.

Bill No. 51: Third Reading

Clerk: Third reading, Bill No. 51, standing in the name of the hon. Mr. McDonald

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I move that Bill No. 51, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1989-90, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Minister of Finance that Bill No. 51, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1989-90, be now read a third time and do pass.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: I declare the motion carried and that Bill No. 51 has passed this House.

Speaker: I wish to inform the Assembly that we will now receive the Commissioner, acting in his capacity as Lieutenant-Governor, to grant assent to Bills that have passed this House.

Mr. Commissioner enters the Chamber, escorted by the Sergeant-At-Arms

Commissioner: Please be seated.

Speaker: Mr. Commissioner, the Assembly has at its present session passed certain Bills, to which, in the name and on behalf of the Assembly, I respectfully request your assent.

Clerk: Act to Amend the Home Owners Grant Act; An Act to Amend the Insurance Act; An Act to Amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act; First Appropriation Act, 1989-90 and An Act to Amend the Students Financial Assistance Act.

Commissioner: Thank you very much Mr. Speaker and Mr. Clerk. I am pleased to give assent to these Bills as enumerated by the Clerk.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that I do listen to the debates when I am in the office. This afternoon it was very difficult to restrain from running over when you were debating the motion on the Alaska Highway. At any rate, I am with my colleagues next week on Project 92, the fiftieth anniversary celebration. It is extremely timely that we will have that resolution before us when we meet.

I wish each and every one of you a very pleasant and very prosperous summer.

Commissioner leaves the Chamber

Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I move

THAT the House at its rising do stand adjourned until it appears to the satisfaction of the Speaker, after consultation with the Government Leader, that the public interest requires that the House shall meet;

THAT the Speaker give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time; and

THAT, if the Speaker is unable to act owing to illness or other causes, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Government House Leader

THAT the House at its rising do stand adjourned until it appears to the satisfaction of the Speaker, after consultation with the Government Leader, that the public interest requires that the House shall meet;

THAT the Speaker give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time;


THAT if the Speaker is unable to act owing to illness or other causes, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.

Motion agreed to

Hon. Mr. McDonald: I move that the House do now adjourn.

Speaker: It has been moved by the hon. Government House Leader that the House do now adjourn.

Motion agreed to

Speaker: This House now stands adjourned.

The House adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

The following Legislative Returns were tabled April 25, 1989:


Human Rights Commission - Moving expenses of executive director (Penikett)

Oral, Hansard, p. 425


Kluane Wildlife Sanctuary - road access (Webster)

Oral, Hansard, pp. 199-202


Kluane Game Sanctuary - incorporating into Kluane National Park (Webster)

Oral, Hansard, p. 399


Environmental Protection position and “non-consumable asset” fund (Webster)

Oral, Hansard, p. 457


Mine Safety at Faro (M. Joe)

Oral, Hansard, p. 355


Tribal justice coordinator (M. Joe)

Oral, Hansard, p. 439


Positive Employment Program, and persons with disabilities (M. Joe)

Oral, Hansard, p. 441


Ross River Community Centre - rental costs (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 221


Sewage Lagoon at Destruction Bay (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 452


Hazardous Waste Disposal (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 356


Yukon Housing Corporation - Schedule of Invitational Contracts, April 1, 1987 - March 31, 1988 (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 39


Yukon Housing Corporation - Houses build under project management (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 188


Yukon Housing Corporation - employee termination (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 188


Yukon Housing Corporation - Social Housing Units by Civic or Legal Addresses (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, pp. 188 and 189


Yukon Housing Corporation - List of Lease-Purchase units by addresses (Byblow)

Oral, Hansard, p. 190


Placer Support Program (McDonald)

Oral, Hansard, p. 349


Rancheria Lodge Micro-Hydro (McDonald)

Oral, Hansard, p. 341


Economic Development Agreement Lapsed Funds (McDonald)

Oral, Hansard, p. 239


Canada Yukon Tourism Sub-Agreement Approvals (McDonald)

Oral, Hansard, p. 352


Alternate Energy Studies (McDonald)

Oral, Hansard, p. 351