Whitehorse, Yukon
Thursday, June 3, 1993 - 1:30 p.m.
Speaker: I will now call the House to order. We will begin with Prayers.
Prayers
DAILY ROUTINE
Speaker: We will proceed with the Order Paper.
Introduction of Visitors.
Are there any Returns or Documents for tabling?
TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I have some legislative returns.
Hon. Mr. Fisher: I have for tabling three legislative returns relating to Community and Transportation Services.
Hon. Mr. Phelps: I have for tabling a batch of legislative returns pertaining to Health and Justice, as well as the annual report for Health and Social Services.
Hon. Mr. Devries: I have a legislative return for Government Services.
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I have a few legislative returns for tabling.
Speaker: Are there any Reports of Committees?
Petitions.
Introduction of Bills.
Are there any Notices of Motion for the Production of Papers?
Are there any Notices of Motion?
NOTICES OF MOTION
Motion No. 47
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I give notice of the following motion:
THAT the Yukon Legislative Assembly, pursuant to section 8 of the Northern Inland Waters Act, nominate Jean Gordon to the Yukon Territory Water Board.
Speaker: Are there any Statements by Ministers?
MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
Gender equity in the education system
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I rise today to advise Members that the Department of Education and the Women’s Directorate are developing a policy of gender equity in the education system. Gender equity means providing equality of opportunity and the realization of equality of results for all students, based on individual aptitudes, abilities and interests, regardless of gender.
A number of recent national and international studies have addressed the subject of young women and the gender bias they face in their daily lives. In 1990, the Canadian Teachers Federation produced a report entitled, “A Cappella”, which concluded that many young women feel quite positive about themselves. Many others, however, are facing problems that can seem overwhelming, from sexual abuse and pregnancy to feeling depressed and alienated. Alcohol, suicide, drug use and abuse were reported high on the list of their concerns.
The health implications for girls who suffer from low self-esteem are alarming: eating disorders, such as anorexia and bulimia; the fastest growing group of smokers; the number of suicide attempts; adolescent pregnancy; and substance abuse. The list goes on.
Other reports conducted at approximately the same time in both Canada and the United States verified the findings of the “A Cappella” report. The picture these reports have collectively painted is disturbing. Adolescent women face gender inequities in the school, family and community on a daily basis. At the same time, young women are conditioned to believe they have the same chances as young men to achieve success in life.
In response to this alarming information, the Women’s Directorate and the Department of Education have struck a working group to develop a policy of gender equity, guidelines for implementation and a four-year action plan of initiatives that will ultimately improve the quality of young women’s lives.
Some of the initiatives that will be implemented or continued are: developing a public awareness strategy for youth on healthy relationships to increase respect and decrease incidents of dating violence; developing curricula that emphasize the value of both genders in today’s world and the contributions made by both in the past; reviewing resource materials to ensure that they are gender equitable; ensuring that instructional and assessment practices offer equal opportunity to both genders; promoting a gender-equitable school environment so that students and school staff of both genders are given a wide range of opportunities and treated with the same dignity and respect; providing student and teacher development programs, which are gender equitable; making gender equity a part of the school’s relationship with the community through involving the community in planning and implementing gender-equity programs and providing leadership in this area; and, assessing and documenting progress through achieving gender equity in the education system.
In closing, I would like to advise Members of this Assembly that the community-based steering committee, A Cappella North, is also working toward improving the quality of life for girls in Yukon schools. This committee was established by the Yukon Teachers Association in response to a call from the Canadian Teachers Federation, which was conducting a follow-up to its initial “A Cappella” report. Through teachers associations in each jurisdiction, community representatives attended regional conferences to brainstorm strategies to improve the lives of young women.
Some organizations that were invited to participate in the A Cappella North community include the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the Yukon Indian Women’s Association, the Yukon Status of Women Council, the Canadian Congress of Learning Opportunities for Women, the First Nations Education Commission, the Department of Education, the Women’s Directorate and a young woman from F.H. Collins.
As one of its first initiatives, this committee is planning to conduct an A Cappella North survey to hear from young Yukon women. As most of the national studies have not included data on the Yukon, the committee believes that this is a very important first step. I am pleased to advise this Legislative Assembly that the Women’s Directorate, the Department of Education and the Yukon Teachers Association are participating on the community-based committee and will be funding the study. The Yukon Bureau of Statistics has agreed to provide assistance as requested.
Ms. Moorcroft: I rise today to respond to the statement on gender equity and education. As the Minister stated, numerous studies and reports indicate some very alarming facts about discrimination against girls and women in our society. It is also a common assumption that girls and boys are treated equally in our public schools. I believe that girls are not receiving the same quality, or even quantity, of education, as their brothers. Gender bias in our schools short-changes girls.
A well-educated workforce is essential to the country’s economic development, yet girls are systematically discouraged from courses of study essential to their future employability and economic well-being. Girls are still being steered away from the very courses required for their productive participation in the workforce.
There are fewer and fewer decently paid openings for the unskilled. By the turn of the century, more jobs will require strength in science, mathematics and technology, subjects girls are still being told are not suitable for them.
A significant exception is the Women Do Math program, which has taken place for many years in the Yukon, but I do not believe a consistent method is given to young girls in our education system.
One way of addressing this concern would be to set certification standards for teachers and administrators requiring course work on gender issues, including new research on women, bias in classroom interaction patterns and the ways in which schools can develop and implement gender-fair, multi-cultural curricula.
The Yukon Education Act does set the goal to develop an understanding of the historical and contemporary role of women and the reinforcement of the principle of gender equality and the contribution of women to society. Work must continue on improving the curricula to improve more of the lives and history of all women, of all ages and races, in all Yukon classrooms.
Our Land, Too: Women of Canada and the Northwest, 1860-1914 is one example of a beginning to this process, and this ministerial statement seems to confirm the continuation of the direction the previous government was taking.
School curricula should also deal directly with issues of power, gender politics and violence against women. Better informed girls are better equipped to make decisions about their futures. Girls and young women who have a strong sense of themselves are better able to confront violence and abuse in their lives.
Another healthy way to improve gender equity in Yukon schools is to improve the representation of women in principalships, vice-principalships and in the senior administration of the Department of Education. I trust the Minister responsible for both education and the Women’s Directorate will ensure the employment equity plan for the Department of Education will include measures to achieve this.
I would also be interested to know what proportion of primary teachers are women, who do very important work but at the low end of the pay scale compared to how many principals and administrators are women.
Perhaps the Minister could explain what he means by providing student and teacher development programs that are gender equitable. In my view, considerable progress toward achieving gender equity in the education system would be provided by a full-time women’s studies program at Yukon College. I hope the Minister will also support this initiative that many women from the community have worked many hours to prepare.
In closing, I have heard that some women have dropped out of the local “A Cappella” group because they were dissatisfied with the political direction it was taking. While I support the work toward further gender equity in education, I would like to ask the Minister what he will be doing to bring these groups back on board and restore their faith in the process.
Speaker: This brings us to the Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Yukon Party, defeated election candidates
Mr. Penikett: Yesterday, I asked the Government Leader about his failure to consult with Opposition Members about board appointments and public policy, although I understand the government does caucus with defeated Yukon Party candidates. As a matter of policy, I would like to ask the Government Leader how he squares this practice with the principles of parliamentary democracy that require the executive to listen to the elected representatives of the people.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I think we are making every effort to make the parliamentary system work. My understanding is that, in the seven and one-half years of the previous administration, they never consulted with the Opposition at all about who to appoint to the boards or committees.
Mr. Penikett: That is actually nonsense, and I can prove it.
Let me ask the Government Leader a question. Due to the fact that the government has a minority government, the majority of those attending the Yukon Party caucuses might be defeated candidates - people whose views were rejected by the voters - which raises the question about whether or not the non-elected caucus members actually vote on public policy matters at these meetings. Would the Government Leader agree that to be advised on policy and board appointments by defeated candidates rather than elected MLAs is not only somewhat undemocratic, but might also be insulting to the constituents of Opposition Members?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I do not know where the Member is getting his information. He is again making assumptions that are not true or valid.
Mr. Penikett: My information comes from people attending the meetings. I want to say that, of course, the idea of meeting with defeated candidates is a good idea; we just want to know how much power they have.
My question to the Government Leader is this: regarding the caucus of defeated candidates, do those attending have access to Cabinet documents, if they swear oaths of secrecy, or do taxpayers cover any of the expenses of those attending the meetings?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: It seems like the Member opposite has had his feelings hurt because he is no longer making all the decisions in government, and he thinks he still should be.
We meet with our extended caucus once a month to keep them informed of what government is doing.
Our elected caucus members do not have access to Cabinet documents, let alone the extended caucus.
Question re: Wolf control program
Mr. Harding: I have a question for the Minister of Renewable Resources.
A news story reported yesterday that the Minister has asked the Fish and Wildlife Management Board not to review the wolf conservation and management plan, as was suggested by the Council for Yukon Indians.
Can the Minister confirm whether or not this is the case and if it is, could he tell us why?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: That is not true, as I stated in the House several days ago. That document has been turned over to the board so they can make a decision on it at their next meeting.
Mr. Harding: Could the Minister attempt to explain what communication breakdown would have resulted in this - according to the Minister - obviously erroneous news reporting about the situation with regard to that plan?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: No, I cannot. The Member will have to ask the reporter who gave him that information; I do not know.
Mr. Harding: Can I ask the Minister if this is indeed his plan to allow the Fish and Wildlife Management Board to take a look at the wolf conservation management plan, make some recommendations and then come back to the Minister, wherein he will accept the recommendations of the board regarding that plan?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The recommendations will be put before the public, the same as the other recommendations, and if the recommendations do not interfere biologically or in some other way - which I do not think they will - then they will be accepted.
The recommendations also have to be accepted by all 14 First Nations.
Question re: Government employee layoffs
Mr. Cable: I have a question for the Government Leader.
When the Government Leader returned from his meeting with Finance Ministers in Ottawa, he was reported as saying that many of the measures that Ministers were discussing with respect to deficit reduction and cost of government were already being implemented in the Yukon.
Can the Government Leader tell the House whether or not layoffs in the public service were one of the salient measures discussed at this meeting?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: To answer the Member opposite, yes, it most certainly was. There were layoffs in the public sector in many jurisdictions. There were also rollbacks of wages - in some cases legislated. All of these issues were discussed and reported on by various Finance Ministers from various jurisdictions.
Mr. Cable: We have heard in the House that the public service will be downsized through attrition.
Does the government have a long-term, strategic goal for the size of the public service, either in absolute numbers or in relation to population? Or are we playing the downsizing by ear?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: We are certainly not playing the downsizing by ear. To say that we have a magic number at which we want to level off the civil service would not be a very responsible way to go. We are going through the exercise of realigning and adjusting the departments, eliminating positions that are no longer required and, when the exercise is finished, we will see what size is a sufficient size for a civil service for the Yukon Territory.
Mr. Cable: In order that our public servants will be able to appreciate their job security, could the Government Leader indicate the time frame for the stabilization of the size of the public service?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I do not think people employed by the civil service have to worry about job security. We have talked about downsizing through attrition, and only layoffs as a last resort. If a position is to be eliminated, and it is filled, the last step we take is to find another position for that person.
I do not believe the civil service should have anxieties about their tenure.
Question re: Maternity/paternity/adoption leave
Ms. Moorcroft: Yesterday, the Minister responsible for Economic Development said that, by leaving a position vacant when an employee is away on maternity leave, they can determine whether or not that position can be discontinued.
My question is for the Minister responsible for the Women’s Directorate, who said I asked a silly question. Can the Minister tell the women of the Yukon what his position is on paid maternity leave, and why he does, or does not, support it?
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I support the policy that is in place now. The reason I said it was a silly question was because I do not anticipate, in my wildest dreams, that if a woman went away on maternity leave she would not have her job when she came back. I suspect she would have her job with the government. The Government Leader just said that if that particular job - not the person - was deemed not to be an essential position, then an attempt would be found to find another essential position for that person.
Ms. Moorcroft: I do not understand why the Minister thinks it was a silly question for me to be legitimately concerned about workers who take parental leave having their jobs abolished while they are on leave, when another Minister of his government said in the House yesterday that that might happen. They may or may not be able to find another job for the person who returns to work.
Would the Minister tell us his position on paid paternity and adoption leave, and why he does, or does not, support it?
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I do not believe there has been any change in the policy of the government from the previous government’s position. That is our policy today.
Ms. Moorcroft: Does the Minister favour a tiered system of bureaucracy, where one group of employees are entitled to such benefits as paid parental leave and others are not, or does he believe that all employees should be able to benefit from progressive policies, such as paid parental leave?
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I think all policies that pertain to that should be fair to all individuals. It would be silly for me to answer the question otherwise.
Question re: Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre, rental space
Ms. Moorcroft: I have another question for the Minister responsible for the Women’s Directorate.
Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre is a volunteer organization that offers many essential services for community members. In fact, although the centre can only afford to pay one full-time salary, volunteer efforts contribute a second full-time position at the centre. Some of their programs include survivors of sexual assault counselling, referrals to other agencies, a reference library, community programs such as assertiveness training and crisis counselling, mini-mechanics and an annual women’s conference. I would like to ask the Minister what suitable location he has found, since he offered to find them space to rent at $1.00 a year when the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre funding was cut in the new budget.
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I will get back to the Member on that. I am not certain if the people from the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre have met with my officials to discuss that matter. If they have, I will get back to the Member on that.
Ms. Moorcroft: I would appreciate it if the Minister could come back with some answers about who was working on it. The Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre would like to know when they can move in.
Has the Minister considered what it would cost the government to replace these services, or does he think these services are dispensable?
Hon. Mr. Phillips: No, I do not think the services are dispensable. In fact, there is $5,000 in the budget this year for the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre. Along with that, there are funds within the budget for specific projects. We have had meetings with the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre and urged them to apply for specific project funding and, if they wish, to put in for an administrative fee along with that fund. As was the policy with the previous government, the policy of this government is not to core fund. We will not core fund.
Ms. Moorcroft: I would just like to ask the Minister when he will be able to come back with an answer about the space for the Victoria Faulkner Women’s Centre?
Hon. Mr. Phillips: As soon as I can sit down with my deputy. I understand she is leaving tomorrow or the next day for a conference in New Brunswick. As soon as she gets back - I believe it is next Tuesday or Wednesday - I could have an answer for the Member shortly after.
Question re: Conflict of interest, Government Leader
Mr. Harding: I have a question for the Government Leader. There have been some serious suggestions made in the local media regarding the Government Leader in an apparent conflict of interest; this is the second Cabinet Minister now, since his government has come into power, about whom these suggestions have been bandied about. I would like to give the Government Leader an opportunity to clear the record today.
I would like to ask the Government Leader if he declared a conflict of interest surrounding any discussions he or his Cabinet Ministers had concerning the granting of moose hunting permits to outfitters in the area surrounding the wolf kill zone.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Following the sale of Mr. Ostashek’s area two years ago, he has no interest in any outfitting area at all.
Mr. Harding: I am disappointed the Government Leader has not stood today to clear the record. I believe I am giving him that opportunity and I would like to ask the Government Leader once again - I think he owes it to the people to set the record straight: does the Government Leader think it is appropriate to take part in decisions, as an elected official, on issues that an immediate family member has a major economic interest in and declare no conflict of interest?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I made the decisions on the zone, and it was taken into Cabinet and the consensus was reached. All three outfitters were treated exactly the same, by biologists and by the review committee of the department. All three were treated exactly the same.
Mr. Harding: It was taken to Cabinet with the Government Leader. The Government Leader participated on a consensus basis, or unanimous basis, whichever the case may be, and he owes it to the people of the Yukon to clear the record at least. Is the Government Leader aware that the Public Government Act, which is presently sitting on the shelf, would make the failure of a Minister to declare a conflict of interest while making a decision on an issue - which an immediate family member has an economic interest in - illegal, and will he now proclaim the Public Government Act to strengthen conflict-of-interest guidelines for the future?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: There is no conflict of interest.
Question re: Land selection, Whitehorse
Ms. Joe: My question is for the Government Leader. The Government Leader has stated in this House that the problems regarding the land selections with the Kwanlin Dun Nation will be worked out at the table, and that this is the proper forum to negotiate these matters and that, without a negotiation table, there can be no progress. Is the Government Leader aware that the negotiations with Kwanlin Dun have broken down?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Our negotiators are meeting with Kwanlin Dun on an ongoing basis, so I do not know how the Member opposite could say that negotiations have broken down.
Ms. Joe: He should ask his negotiators for an update.
It has been three months since Kwanlin Dun tabled their maps with the government negotiators. The government recently returned to the table dictating what will happen and I quote, “We will show you selections which will meet your needs and aspirations”. Has the Government Leader actually seen the land selection map tabled by the Kwanlin Dun Band on February 24, and is he aware of his government’s response to them in that they do not appear to recognize the proposals put forward by the Kwanlin Dun First Nation?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Yes, I have reviewed the maps.
Ms. Joe: This past weekend the Government Leader signed, on behalf of his government, the umbrella final agreement in a very important ceremony.
Now, through the actions of his department, he is turning his back on his commitment to come to the table prepared to negotiate, not dictate. This creates a very serious situation.
Is the Government Leader aware of the tension that has been created by the government’s actions and what does he intend to do about them?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: As I said in answer to the Member’s main question, we are meeting with Kwanlin Dun on an ongoing basis. The Member has wrong information and she does not have her facts straight on this issue.
We are meeting on an ongoing basis with the Kwanlin Dun people; we are trying to resolve the situation and in fact I am meeting with them personally tomorrow. We are dealing with this issue in a very serious manner. As the Member opposite knows, it is probably going to be one of the most difficult First Nations to come to an agreement with on land selections.
Question re: Downsizing government
Mrs. Firth: My question is for the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission and for the Government Leader.
I asked the Minister of Finance and the Government Leader for his policies regarding auxiliary and term positions and I did not receive any. Yet, the Minister and the Government Leader keep standing up and talking about attrition. Yet, when I ask the Government Leader about a $70,000 intergovernmental relations officer position and why attrition did not apply, he said that it was because, “If we kept it, we must have needed it.”
Since it has been established that there are no policies in place, I would like to ask the Government Leader how Cabinet makes decisions regarding employees’ status and downsizing of government.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Here we go again around the mulberry bush.
I said when the question came up that the position was required and that is why it was being filled.
We downsized the Executive Council Office; we have got rid of eight managerial positions; we got rid of four non-managerial positions. A person decided to tender their resignation. Government can be downsized only so far in one department, so therefore the position was refilled because it was required.
Mrs. Firth: The Government Leader is spreading the downsizing of the Executive Council Office pretty thin. Yesterday, when I asked the Minister why he was picking on auxiliary and term employees, he went on to say that they were looking at management areas - middle to upper income jobs. When I went back to my office, the first thing I found on my desk was another employment opportunity here for another $100,000-a-year ADM, the second one in two months.
How does the Minister explain this obvious contradiction in policy?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: There is no contradiction in the policy. It takes a certain number of people to run government. As the Member knows, and as we have reported to this House, there were 194 managerial positions in government. I believe only around 160 of them are filled at this time. The only ones that are being filled from now on are ones that are essential, or where people have resigned and that position has to be refilled. We are not expanding the number of people in management.
Mrs. Firth: More interesting, the Department of Economic Development has two $100,000-a-year ADMs, yet they have just created another management position. It is going to go to competition very soon. How does the Minister explain this increase in management staff?
Hon. Mr. Devries: I am not aware of any position being created.
Question re: Downsizing government
Mrs. Firth: I obviously know more about the Minister’s department than he does. I want to ask another question to the same Minister I was asking questions of previously - the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission.
Yesterday, when I asked the Government Leader why he was picking on auxiliary and term employees, he complained about what a dilemma downsizing government was, and how there had to be some displacement somewhere. It is obvious it is not at the management level.
I would like to ask the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission and the Government Leader when his government is going to have some concrete policies in place regarding the downsizing of government.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: My Cabinet colleagues and I, during this excruciatingly long session of 45 days, have said time and time again what our policy was on downsizing the government. If the Member does not have it by now, I will write her another return.
Mrs. Firth: Yesterday, the Minister said that there were 3,241 employees working for his government. Yet, in the third quarter statistics, it lists 3,122. The Minister has just stood up this afternoon and said that of the managers in government, only 160 of 194 positions are filled.
In light of these tremendous contradictions in the government’s own statistics, how does the Minister explain this? How can there be 3,241 employees now, two months later, and he is downsizing government. This is completely inconsistent.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Just as I came back from lunch I happened to have it pointed out in a newspaper article that the Member for Riverdale South said that she was not very good at math. I can see examples of this now. This is the time of year when auxiliaries are being hired for the summer season. There is bound to be more people on staff now than there were in the third quarter.
Speaker: I would remind Members that the questions should seek information. The answers should be relevant to the question. We should not simply be calling each other names.
Mrs. Firth: That saves me having to call someone a name; I would never do that. I know that I am stirring up a hornet’s nest here with the Minister. That is why he is attacking me personally. I know that he disagrees with me. I can hear him shaking his head over there.
I want to ask this Government Leader when he is going to have some specific policies in place regarding downsizing of government, instead of picking on auxiliary and term employees and increasing the management positions in this government?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: This government is not increasing the managerial positions in government. There are about 30 or 35 fewer positions than there were. The effect on the auxiliaries has been very minimal at this point, and it will continue to be that way.
Question re: Curragh Inc., Asian investors
Mr. Harding: I have a question that seeks information. I am trying very hard not to be ruled out of order on possibly the last Question Period of the year. I would like to ask the Government Leader a question. I hope that it is not too excruciating. I would like to ask him if he knows whether or not Mr. Frame or any of the Koreans are coming to the Yukon next week to have discussions and exactly what will be going on.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: After 45 days in this Legislature and having to deal with questions from the Member for Faro, this one is not too difficult to answer. I am not sure when the technical people from Korea are coming. I was talking to Mr. Pelly last night and he has not had a final word yet. I have not heard from the chief executive officer of Curragh.
Mr. Harding: Could I ask the Government Leader if anything has been planned or arranged for meetings with Frame and/or the Koreans on a bilateral or trilateral basis with the government to discuss the court arrangements, the power and Grum stripping needs, or is there is pretty much a total hold on that until more discussions have been carried on?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I think that I pointed out to the Member when I came back from Korea that the people who are coming over here are not the people who signed the agreement. They are technical people who are coming to do due diligence on the company and report back to their officials in Korea.
Mr. Harding: I am incredibly worried about the future of my community and although I know that all the Members in this House, the public and the media are quite sick of this session, I am a little worried about leaving it, so I would like to ask the Government Leader a simple question today and that is this: will the Government Leader commit to briefing myself and other Opposition Members on the status of the situation regarding the mine and loan guarantee negotiations once this session ends?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I do not have a problem making that commitment. At any time that the Member would like to call me, I would be happy to update him.
Question re: Northern Accord, benefits to Yukon
Mr. Cable: I have a question for the Minister of Economic Development on the Northern Accord. Last weekend the government signed the Northern Energy Accord and I appreciate that the decision to sign has been the subject of some debate in the House, but today I want to ask the government about the application of the agreement. Given that there has not been, to my knowledge, an oil or gas exploration well drilled in the Yukon for some time, how does the government propose that we benefit from this agreement?
Hon. Mr. Devries: Beginning April 1, the Yukon government will receive royalties from the existing wells in the Kotaneelee fields and that money will be put into a trust until the policies are developed. Half of that money would be following to the First Nations upon completion of the land claims agreements. There are many benefits for us in the Northern Accord.
Mr. Cable: Has the government been involved in any discussions with the Canadian Petroleum Association about their members’ interest or lack of interest in further drilling in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Devries: We have not necessarily had no discussion with them, but we are aware that there is some interest been shown in the Eagle Plains area, and there is also some interest been shown for some additional drilling projects in the Kotaneelee field - it is a matter of land claims having been settled, especially at Eagle Plains.
Mr. Cable: With respect to his interest, what policy initiatives or proposals is the government considering to stimulate oil and gas exploration and production in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Devries: Immediately upon funding of the Northern Accord, we sent letters to various parties that were interested. As well, we will immediately be beginning policy development and attempting to second a couple of people who are very familiar with this to assist us in setting up the offices, et cetera, and administering the Northern Accord.
Question re: McLean Lake zoning
Mr. Penikett: Regarding McLean Lake zoning and the country-residential lifestyle of the residents there, I would like to ask, as the Minister responsible for the administration of the Municipal Act and a former community advisor, is the Community and Transportation Services Minister familiar with section 309.(1) of the Municipal Act, the section that requires zoning bylaws that are consistent with the official community plan designations?
Hon. Mr. Fisher: I believe I am familiar with those particular sections, yes.
Mr. Penikett: The Minister has signed off an amendment to the official community plan, which changes the designation of the McLean Lake area to urban residential, the same designation as Riverdale and Porter Creek. Does the Minister acknowledge that, when he approved the change to the plan, by virtue of section 309.(1), he was putting a one-year time limit on city council to change the zoning for McLean Lake to make it consistent with the amended community plan?
Hon. Mr. Fisher: Yes, I was aware of that, and I am also aware that the designation in the official community plan will allow the zoning designation of the McLean Lake residential area to become country residential.
Mr. Penikett: Is the Minister not prepared to concede, at the very least, that he was mistaken when he suggested that his signed amendment to the official community plan did not amount to rezoning McLean Lake and changing the lifestyle of the residents there - an error that is compounded by the failure to consult with area residents prior to the change he made?
Hon. Mr. Fisher: No, I will not concede to that at all. The people in the McLean Lake area have now and will continue to have their country-residential zoning designation. If that is changed, I ask the Member opposite to certainly berate me in the House, but it is my understanding that the country-residential zoning designation will not be changed for those existing residences.
Question re: Humane Society, animal shelter
Mr. Penikett: I would like to follow up on that, but I have to ask another question today, which concerns another matter. In response to my May 17 question to the Minister about the status of the Humane Society CDF application, the Minister stated quite unequivocally that the decision to postpone the processing of the application was a bureaucratic decision, not a political one. He said that they did not see the application.
Can the Minister confirm that he met with the Humane Society on April 27 in his office to discuss the application at that time?
Hon. Mr. Fisher: I cannot remember the date. I did meet with Andrea Lemphers, who I believe is the chair, or at least on the executive of the Humane Society. Prior to meeting with her - and I cannot remember the date of either of these meetings - I did meet with the Mayor of the City of Whitehorse and Ms. Lemphers.
Mr. Penikett: At that meeting, the Minister reportedly indicated that the application was in order and should pass the technical review without any problems. He basically gave the society his assurances that he was in agreement with the application. Can the Minister confirm that that was the position he presented to the representatives of the Humane Society in his meeting with them?
Hon. Mr. Fisher: Yes, that was essentially the gist of the conversation.
Mr. Penikett: Given that the Minister has discussed the application and apparently approved of it in general at the April 27 meeting, could he explain to me why he told the House on May 17 that he had not seen the application, when he had already discussed it with the Humane Society.
Hon. Mr. Fisher: I also sit on the CDF selection committee. I had not seen the application come forward to that committee. That is what I was referring to on May 17.
Question re: Monetary policies
Mr. McDonald: I have a question for the Minister of Finance.
The Governor of the Bank of Canada has consistently criticized large-spending and large-taxing governments, and the Minister, yesterday, expressed sympathy for his views and used reductions in some departments as examples of reduced spending.
Given that the government has introduced a record-spending and record-taxing budget, how can the Government Leader claim common cause with the Governor of the Bank of Canada?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Maybe we should draw diagrams in this House and pass them across to the Members opposite. We have stated time and time again during debate of the budget that the large amounts of money are coming from Ottawa and from other jurisdictions, resulting in a huge capital budget this year of $129 million.
We have the extended care facility that we took over from the Members opposite. We have to open it, and we had to have that planned into the budget.
The actual cost of government is going down under this administration, even in the short time we have been here.
It is only because of the devolution of other departments that it is starting to increase.
Mr. McDonald: Mr. Crowe does not care where the money is spent, but how much money is spent. This government has a record budget on the table.
They said that they would downsize government, reduce the role of government and reduce the number of employees and, in the first three months of the government’s mandate, government employment has clearly increased, even under the glare of a hiring freeze.
Can the Minister tell us how he is going to square his rhetoric with his actions when he goes east and talks to other Finance Ministers?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I was well received at the Finance Ministers conference. The Yukon was one of only two jurisdictions in Canada that came in with a balanced budget after record deficits by the previous administration.
Mr. McDonald: They do not know the Government Leader like we know the Government Leader, and the budget is not balanced.
The government talked about no tax increases and then they raised taxes. They have talked about less government spending and they have delivered bigger government spending, less dependency on the federal government and now we have more dependency on the federal government.
What possible message can the Government Leader deliver to other Finance Ministers that will square with his actions, back on home soil in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The message is very, very simple - there will not be the record deficits that there have been in the Yukon during the last two years - $13 million in 1991-92; $71 million in 1992-93; those types of deficits have come to an end in the Yukon.
Question re: Forestry burn at Red Ridge, sheep habitat
Ms. Moorcroft: I have a question for the Minister responsible for Renewable Resources.
Last week, there was a fire set in my riding by Fish and Wildlife to improve the quality of the sheep habitat along an area that is known as Red Ridge. Apparently, there were some poplars that were inhibiting the growth of the grass for the sheep.
When asked about it, Forestry said that the Department of Renewable Resources had prepared a plan that included informing people about the fire. Could the Minister tell this House who knew this fire was going to happen?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I talked with my deputy minister this morning, and we were unaware that the fire was there. We would also like to point out that, with the fire hazard the way it is at the present time, we could not start a fire.
Ms. Moorcroft: Perhaps the Minister then can confirm exactly who it was who set that fire. This fire got out of control. Although the slopover only burned four hectares of land, several of my constituents were worried when they saw smoke pouring off the mountain.
What kind of advance planning or contingency plan was in place for this burn project? Were the residents in the area informed?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Before a burn will be carried out there will be consultation with the people in the area. To my knowledge, the fire that started out there was not theirs. This morning they told me they could not even get a permit from forestry to burn at this time of year.
Ms. Moorcroft: That certainly contradicts the information I received from the Department of Forestry. This is a very precarious and dangerous situation. Two years ago, we had Haeckel Hill go up in smoke, and this one got out of control. What assurances can the Minister give this House that these kinds of projects would only go ahead under the most controlled circumstances?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I will give the assurance of my own word. I will also check to be absolutely sure how that fire started and who started it.
Question re: Game farming
Mr. Harding: It is surprising. There are a lot of questions today. I have another question for the Minister of Renewable Resources.
This week, I questioned the Minister regarding the proposals for the new proposed game farming regulations and spoke a little bit about the wildlife viewing aspect of the regulations. The Minister said that these regulations would allow exotic species at this time and would also allow the sale of viewing species’ offspring. Could he tell us when they plan to come in with regulations to control the viewing animals aspect of game farming?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I am not quite sure what he means by viewing animals.
Speaker: Perhaps I will allow the Member to ask the question again.
Mr. Harding: Proposals made by YTG state that game farm animals will be subject to certain regulations but viewing animals will be allowed to be kept. There is no criteria that exotic animals cannot be kept under the auspices of viewing animals, and viewing animals’ owners are being allowed to sell their offspring. Obviously, there is a problem because we are not addressing what we are trying to address with the game farming situation. Could the Minister tell us when viewing animals will be regulated?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I am presuming that he is talking about exotic animals. At the present time, the only way that we can regulate them is by putting certain conditions in the permits when they come into the area.
Mr. Harding: Perhaps the Minister should hone up a little bit on the proposals that the government has put out on game farming. Proposal number 2 clearly states that owners can keep viewing animals. They can be non-native to the Yukon and offspring can be sold. Could the Minister tell me what the difference is between that and game farming? To me they are the exact same thing.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Game farming comes in strictly under the regulation that they have to be checked by vets. They have to be inside a certain sized fence. They all have to be tagged so that each one is a specific animal. With viewing animals, at the present time, they do not need that.
Mr. Harding: That is exactly my concern. That is what I am trying to say to the Minister. Does the Minister not realize that somebody who is not very scrupulous could perform the act of game farming under the auspices of wildlife viewing, bring in animals and sell the offspring, and bring in exotics and not be regulated. My question is this: will the Minister undertake to look at that right now and come up with some plan for regulating this? We are not tackling the problems of escape, cross-breeding, the spread of disease or anything for wildlife viewing animal owners.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I am very glad to hear the Member say that. I am sure that when we bring the regulations in, he will support us solidly.
Speaker: Time for Question Period has now elapsed.
Hon. Mr. Devries: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order?
Speaker: The Minister of Economic Development, on a point of order.
Hon. Mr. Devries: I just would like to read into the record very clearly that it is not true that the Department of Economic Development has any new positions.
Hon. Mr. Phillips: On a point of order, inadvertently I neglected to table the original copy of the legislative return and I would like to do that now.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Hon. Mr. Phillips: While I am on my feet, I would like to move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve in Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: There being no further points of order that are not points of order, the Government Leader has moved that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Chair: I will now call Committee of the Whole to order.
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I wish to advise the Chair that, by agreement of House Leaders, we have decided that we are really going to get down to work today and we would ask the Chair not to authorize any breaks today until we complete the budget, which we think should happen later on this afternoon.
Chair: Are you agreed?
Mr. McDonald: I would just like to remind all Members that even though we have been working for 45 days, we do not feel that at this time we require a break, because we are not tired, none of us are tired, and we do not require a break. We would like to just go straight through.
Chair: Are you agreed?
Some Hon Members: Agreed.
Chair: Members are agreed.
Bill No. 6 - First Appropriation Act, 1993-94 - continued
Public Service Commission - continued
Chair: We are on general debate of the Public Service Commission.
Ms. Moorcroft: I feel I would be remiss if I did not at this time express my personal congratulations and those of our caucus to the Public Service Commissioner on her 10-year appointment, effective next month. I have stated on the record that I believe the new commissioner is a woman of integrity and very well qualified for the position she holds. Our caucus believes there should never have been a probationary six-month appointment. Last night, the Government Leader said appointing the Public Service Commissioner for 10 years seemed the right thing to do at the time, but our caucus was always of the view that the right time for a tenured appointment was in the first instance.
In the debate on the supplementaries for the Public Service Commission, I had asked the Minister if he could table the contract listing that would show all of the contracts for secretarial, research and support work that were carried out by contractors from outside the government during the time of the hiring freeze.
I was quite concerned to note, when I went through the contracts for the Department of Community and Transportation Services, that over $10,000 was spent on contracts for various forms of secretarial research. To me that seemed inconsistent with a policy of a hiring freeze. Does the Government Leader have any response to that? Has he been able to find out how much secretarial work was performed on contract, as a dollar figure globally in the government, during the time of the hiring freeze?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The Member opposite has to forgive me because I thought her question yesterday was about casuals, not about contracts. I do not recall the term contract coming up in the debate last night. If I missed it, I will get the information back to the Member, as I do not have it here now.
Ms. Moorcroft: That is fine. Just to clarify, it was a question that I had raised during the supplementary estimates debate some time ago. I am ready at this time to move on to the line-by-line debate for this department, if none of my colleagues have questions.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Just before we move onto line-by-line debate, last night the Member opposite did not understand the meaning of the terms “arbitration” and “conciliation” because she asked me for an explanation. I would like, at this time, to give to the Member this booklet that I happened to find this morning, Canadian Labour Terms, eighth edition, 1984. It is a dictionary of words and phrases commonly used in labour relations. Perhaps in the future we will not have to waste time in debate explaining clauses that are in this book.
Ms. Moorcroft: I will thank the Government Leader most sincerely for that addition to my collection of labour publications, and I can assure the Government Leader that I do have an understanding of arbitration and conciliation and other labour terms, but I enjoy collecting reference materials. My purpose in asking the question last night was indeed to seek information and to test the knowledge of the Government Leader. I am glad that he has been able to now understand the difference between arbitration and conciliation. I would also like to say that I hope that the negotiations between the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the government proceed well and on good terms between the parties.
Chair: Is there any general debate on Finance and Administration?
On Finance and Administration
On Administration
Amendment proposed
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: This is one of the areas I propose to amend.
I move
THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Administration on page 217 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $6,000; and
THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.
Chair: Is there any debate on the amendment?
Amendment agreed to
Administration in the amount of $401,000 agreed to as amended
On Staffing
On Staffing Administration
Staffing Administration in the amount of $490,000 agreed to
On Staffing Operations
Amendment proposed
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move
THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Staffing Operations on page 218 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $2,000; and
THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.
Amendment agreed to
Ms. Moorcroft: I am sorry, Mr. Chair. I was a little slow jumping to my feet, but I do have one question and I am not sure which lines it would apply to. In the Minister’s introductory remarks, he said something about the reduction being due to decentralization.
Can the Minister clarify that for me please?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Yes, there has been a 53-percent decrease in other costs attributable to the removal of decentralization initiative reductions in cost to communications, advertising, house hunting and removal. I believe that was a decentralization officer for Dawson City.
Ms. Moorcroft: I would also like to ask, since I believe it was stated when we were debating the supplementaries that there were 10 term positions in the employment equity branch, how many of the employees in the employment equity branch are on term positions?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The term positions in employment equity are the native training corps.
Staffing Operations in the amount of $82,000 agreed to as amended
Staffing in the amount of $572,000 agreed to as amended
On Employee Records and Pensions
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $496,000 agreed to
Employee Records and Pensions in the amount of $496,000 agreed to
On Labour Relations
Chair: Is there any general debate?
Ms. Moorcroft: I believe, in the introductory remarks yesterday, the Minister said that the increases here were due to the collective bargaining with the Yukon employees union and the Yukon Teachers Association. I am wondering why there is a 900 percent increase for the Yukon Teachers Association and an 82 percent increase for the Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: It is because of the higher percentage on the teachers. We went from $3,000 to $30,000.
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $377,000 agreed to
On Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada
Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada in the amount of $182,000 agreed to
On Yukon Teachers Association
Yukon Teachers Association in the amount of $30,000 agreed to
On Managerial/Confidential Exclusion
Managerial/Confidential Exclusion in the amount of $5,000 agreed to
On Long Service Awards
Long Service Awards in the amount of $39,000 agreed to
On Indemnification
Indemnification in the amount of $10,000 agreed to
Labour Relations in the amount of $643,000 agreed to
On Workers’ Compensation Fund
Ms. Moorcroft: The Minister, in introducing this branch of the Public Service Commission, explained that there is still money in this year’s budget, although the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board is now an independent agency, because there are some outstanding claims, prior to January 1, 1993.
I would like to know how many claims there are outstanding, and if the Minister knows when they will be resolved.
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I will have to get the numbers for the Member opposite on the amount of outstanding claims. The problem with this is that, because we were self-insured up until December 31, 1992, we have to keep a contingency. We do not know when someone will come back to us for an old injury. We still have to face the liabilities for that, since the Workers’ Compensation Board will not accept it.
On Workers’ Compensation Fund
Workers’ Compensation Payments
Ms. Moorcroft: Are these ongoing payments to workers that will continue?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: That is a combination of the premiums that will have to be paid every year, plus the ongoing contingency we will have to keep for indemnification of workers.
Workers’ Compensation Payments in the amount of $1,507,000 agreed to
Workers’ Compensation Fund in the amount of $1,507,000 agreed to
On Compensation
Chair: Is there any general debate?
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $552,000 agreed to
On Classification Appeals
Classification Appeals in the amount of $22,000 agreed to
Compensation in the amount of $574,000 agreed to
On Corporate Services and Employment Equity
Chair: Is there any general debate?
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $373,000 agreed to
On Native Training
Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister explain the higher salary classification for the native training corps? Since this program was suspended, could he explain what is being offered now?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: Routine expenditures include the following - as the Member sees, it is up to $322,000 from $266,000 last year - this is salary and benefit costs for nine term full-time staff. The increase results from salary increases and position vacancies during 1992-93, training course costs and related expenses for native trainees, as approved in the native training corps plan, and employment equity information sessions for all government departments.
Native Training in the amount of $322,000 agreed to
On Disabled Job Entry
Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister describe how they are going to implement the disabled job entry please?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: The funding here is to facilitate the entry of persons with disabilities into the Yukon workplace. This project was developed in consultation with community organizations representing persons with disabilities and the vocational rehabilitation unit of Health and Social Services, who will provide the training and employment opportunities.
Ms. Moorcroft: How many new employees do you anticipate will be added to the public service under this program in the next year?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: That is pretty hard to classify right now. At the start, it would probably be short-term positions that require monitoring. We do not really know how many it will be in total after a year.
Ms. Moorcroft: I will just ask the Minister to keep me informed of the progress on this program.
Disabled Job Entry in the amount of $42,000 agreed to
On Corporate Services
Amendment proposed
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move
THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Corporate Services on page 228 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $14,000; and
THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended according.
Chair: Is there any debate on the amendment?
Amendment agreed to
Ms. Moorcroft: Could the Minister explain something that he said yesterday about there being no cost for The Sluice Box in this program area?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I believe that there would be reduced costs for The Sluice Box. We have changed the format and made some cost-saving measures. There will still be some cost.
Ms. Moorcroft: In a legislative return regarding The Sluice Box, the acting Government Leader said that the Public Service Commissioner makes the final decision regarding the publication content and when an employee is featured in an article the employee approves that article. Did Merv Miller approve the article that was written that, from the point of view of our caucus, contained partisan material about government finances?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I cannot answer for Merv Miller, but the article was run by him prior to publication.
Ms. Moorcroft: And is there any fee or honoraria paid to an author of an article who has published in The Sluice Box?
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: No, there is not.
Corporate Services in the amount of $24,000 agreed to
Corporate Services and Employment Equity in the amount of $751,000 agreed to as amended
On Leave Accruals
On Leave Liability
Leave Liability in the amount of $3,800,000 agreed to as amended
Leave Accruals in the amount of $3,800,000 agreed to
On Staff Development
On Administration
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: I move
THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 10, Public Service Commission, by reducing the line item Administration on page 232 in the operation and maintenance estimates by $14,000; and
THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.
Amendment agreed to
Administration in the amount of $622,000 agreed to as amended
On Operations
Operations in the amount of $707,000 agreed to
Staff Development in the amount of $1,329,000 agreed to as amended
Operation and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to
Chair: We will move on to capital expenditures in the other book.
On Capital Expenditures
On Finance and Administration
Chair: Is there any general debate?
On Prior Years’ Projects (Computer Workstations)
Hon. Mr. Ostashek: We have put in a $1.00 line item to have the line there in case some emergency came up. We do not feel we will need anything for capital this year.
Ms. Moorcroft: That is the explanation I wanted to ask the Government Leader for. He has anticipated it. I have no further questions.
Prior Years’ Projects (Computer Workstations) in the amount of $1.00 agreed to
Finance and Administration agreed to
Capital Expenditures agreed to
Public Service Commission agreed to as amended
Department of Renewable Resources
On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures
Chair: Is there any general debate?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I have copies of my opening remarks I would like to submit to the critics.
I am pleased to outline today the highlights of the O&M estimates for the Department of Renewable Resources for the 1993-94 fiscal year. You will note that the estimate reflects an decrease of six percent in the department’s vote. This decrease has not been accomplished without some pain and belt-tightening, but I do believe it was accomplished largely by addressing those areas that have very little direct effect on services to the public.
These estimates call for the department to spend $12.7 million in the coming year. You will see that the funding priorities for the department reflect this government’s commitment to the provisions of good government, settling land claims, implementing self-government, transferring Yukon land and resources, protecting the environment and managing the wildlife, all of which are commitments outlined in our four-year plan.
To support this government’s land claim commitment, we are planning to spend almost $1.7 million for negotiating and implementing the land claim agreement in the Yukon. This includes a total of slightly more than $1 million for the implementation of the Inuvialuit final agreement, all of which is recoverable from the federal government.
There was a slight decrease in the amount earmarked for a Yukon First Nations claim. This attributed to the fact that, with the conclusion of a number of individual final claims, the emphasis in the program departments will be switched to information activities, with the bulk of the negotiations actually being carried out centrally through the ECO’s land claim office.
The YFN portion includes the provision of $270,000 of this government’s initial payment into the fish and wildlife enhancement trust fund, as well as some continued expenses of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board and the Mayo Renewable Resource Council, which will be fully addressed by federal implementation funding.
One of the major commitments of this government is the transfer of Yukon land and resources. I am sure that the Members opposite will have noticed that the line item for the program transfers unit in the policy, planning and assessment program reflects a decrease from $195,000 in the 1992-93 fiscal year to zero dollars in the 1993-94 fiscal year and are somewhat puzzled by this.
Negotiators recently signed an agreement in principle with respect to the transfer of the forestry program, and the final agreement is imminent. This will conclude the first phase of the transfer process, which is the intensive negotiation phase. We now will have roughly one year to undertake the transition work involved for the actual transfer.
The agreement in principle provides some one-time funding for this transition process. However, at the time our budgets were prepared and approved, the agreement in principle was still under negotiation, and transition funding had not been determined or agreed upon.
The transition funding amounts to slightly more than a half million dollars to be paid for by the federal government. This federal funding will have to be addressed by supplementary in the new year, once Yukon and federal Cabinet approval is achieved.
Included in this transition funding are such items as First Nations consultation; development of forestry, policy and legislation; assessment of buildings and equipment assets; organizational planning, including position description, writing and classification reviews.
We will be undertaking several important new and changing initiatives that reflect our commitment to protect the environment and manage wildlife.
Firstly, in respect to protection of the environment, the Members will note that there is a decrease of $204,000 in the line item opposite Environmental Protection. This is due to the one-time cost of establishing a recycling fund in the 1992-93 fiscal year. There is funding in this budget for the development of further regulations under the Environment Act.
If the government is going to proclaim this new legislation, then that legislation and attendant regulations have to be properly managed and enforced.
The nucleus of the staff in the environmental protection section has been largely concerned with the development of the legislation and attendant regulations, and with public education.
However, we have not had any enforcement capability. The primary responsibility for enforcement will be assigned to our field service branch and will be carried out through the services of our conservation officers.
The advent of this new legislation will add additional duties to this position, and we have provided for the establishment of two additional enforcement officer positions, one in the 1993-94 fiscal year, and one in the 1994-95 fiscal year. These positions will be environmental protection officers, who will be environment protection specialists and will be responsible for providing training, advice, guidance and assistance to the conservation officers and taking a lead role on major enforcement issues.
The major reason for the increase of $164,000 in the field service branch is to cover the additional expenses of enforcing this new legislation.
The $500,000 that the previous government had earmarked for the establishment of an environment fund under the Environment Act has, out of necessity, been reduced to $100,000. This will still provide some seed money for this fund, which will also be open for contributions from other sources, such as third-party contributions or fines that are specifically designated for use for environmental purposes.
Turning now to our commitment to the management of wildlife, the Members will note that there has been a decrease of $356,000 in the line item opposite Fish and Wildlife and will be asking how it is possible to meet this commitment while suffering such a decrease. The decrease is largely attributed to the fact that the figures reported in the 1992-93 fiscal year include approximately $515,000 for the cost involved in the first year of the Aishihik caribou recovery program, whereas our budget for 1993-93 includes only $250,000 for this program, as the first year is the most expensive year. In addition, there were a few projects in 1992-93 fiscal year, such as habitat studies, which were funded by Habitat Canada. These were one-time projects, the cost of which were recovered from outside sources.
The estimates provide for grants to both the Institute of Wildlife Resources and the Fur Institute of Canada as our contribution to research and promotion of the fur industry. We are also continuing to assist the Yukon Trappers Association through funding for trappers’ education workshops.
I hope that this pretty well covers the highlights and major changes in my department and I will welcome any questions from the Members.
Mr. Joe: I do have a few questions. I would like to talk about outfitters. What is the government’s position on people from other countries who buy outfitting areas?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are not actually too comfortable with having outside outfitters; however, we are in the position where 51 percent of the shares must be held by a Yukon outfitter under the Charter of Rights. At the present time, we do not seem to be able to stop the other 40-some percent from going to them.
We are now working with the Yukon Outfitters Association to see if there is some way that they can help us rectify this.
Mr. Joe: Another problem that I have is with the control that the government has over outfitters. Some people in my riding have been given a hard time by outfitters because they have gone into their areas and hunted. We must look after the people who were here first of all. We must make sure that there is enough game for all Yukoners. We need this for food for our families. I would like to find out from the Minister what he has in mind to make sure that there is enough game for people here and how he is going to make sure that outfitters respect the rights of Yukoners first.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The umbrella final agreement provides for the creation of a basic-needs level, if there is any shortage in the area. We are also now working with the outfitters to try to get them all onto quotas, which I think will help solve the Member’s problem. We certainly will cooperate in any way that we can in order to do that.
Mr. Harding: I thank the Minister for his opening comments. They do clarify some questions that I had. I thank him for his answers that he just gave to my colleague. I know that he has some concerns about outfitting. We have talked about them quite a bit during this session.
I have a few questions for the Minister in general debate. I do not intend to be too long. I would like to ask the Minister about what we talked about in Question Period today, and that is the wolf conservation management plan. The co-chair of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board was reported in the paper to have said that the Minister had asked for the board not to bother dealing with the plan. This runs contrary to the suggestion make by CYI. He said that that is not the case. He said that in Question Period today. I just want him to give me an explanation on that. I would also like him to give me an idea of his plan for the implementation of this wolf conservation management plan. He now tells me that it has to go through all 14 bands. That could take some time. Could he tell us the plan for that and just basically tell me if he supports the plan in principle?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We can provide the Member with the correspondence, if he would like, that we sent to the CYI. I understand from my conversations with some of the representatives of CYI that that represents what all 14 First Nations agree on, so I presume we are already over that hurdle. They are meeting on June 24 and should be able to come up with their recommendations at that time.
Mr. Harding: Yes, I would like a copy of that letter. Is it going to the board? Okay, I gather it is.
I have a question on high-quality management waters and the newly proposed waters that were mentioned in the synopsis of the fishing regulations, on which I had some dialogue with the Minister. I was wrong; the waters were mentioned in one part of it but they were not mentioned as waters having certain regulations, as of yet.
There is a lot of debate in my community as to whether or not, for example, Frenchman Lake is or is not now considered to be high-quality management waters, so could the Minister give me an explanation on that and then tell me how he plans to try to clear up the confusion as to whether or not they have been implemented?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: What happens there is that the bunch the Member and I looked at had been passed. The others are passed but they have to go through federal regulations; until they go through them, they cannot be declared high-quality waters.
Mr. Harding: Is there any idea of a ballpark figure? I told someone in a coffee shop on Sunday who had just been to Frenchman Lake and had thrown some big fish back that I was glad they did but they did not need to have done that, and they were a little cheesed off. So, I want to know this: can I safely tell them that - I guess the answer to that is yes - and when does he expect that the federal fisheries’ approval to make them high-quality management waters would come into effect?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I hope by the middle of this summer, at the latest.
Mr. Harding: Is there any plan in place for posting or mailing this out to Yukoners so that someone does not get dinged - a little bit of discretion in the early period, or that sort of thing, to deal with this?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We will have the signs all ready to go just as soon as we get the approval.
Mr. Harding: I want to talk about a really controversial issue. I looked in the document - I forget the exact title, but it is the second one on infrastructure investment that has come out of Economic Development. I think it is dated April 16. In it, there is reference made to Kluane Park access. I would like to ask the Minister his views on that subject. I think he has stated in the House several times where he stands on that.
What I would like to ask him are his views, now that he is in government. Whether he believes it or not, some of them have changed slightly. Is he firmly committed to it? If so, how will he get the permission from the feds? Has he worked on that? What kind of consultation has he undertaken, or will he plan to undertake, to find out if the people of the Yukon really want that?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The road that the territorial government will be responsible for is actually in the game sanctuary. It just goes to the border. I can safely say that the people in that area have been lobbying for many years to get a controlled access in there on an old mining road that continues on down to what we call Pearson’s Bear Camp. The Village of Haines Junction and all the people in that area are still lobbying to try to get that.
Our responsibility now, as a territorial government, is to put the road to the boundary, which goes through the game sanctuary. It is 3.5 or four miles. For the rest, we need permission from the park. We will all ask for that to be tightly controlled access.
Mr. Harding: The Minister appears to be strongly committed to that. I am concerned about this. Perhaps I am ignorant of some past consultation on this. Can the Minister tell me what past consultation there was? The Minister seems to feel confident that the people in Haines Junction want it. I think there is also a larger public out there that may want some input into it. It is, after all, a Yukon resource. Perhaps he could tell me what past consultation there was to come up with the view that this must go ahead.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Personally, I have lobbied the government for six or seven years on this. Tourism, as well, has asked for it. The Chamber of Commerce in Haines Junction is solidly behind it. The town council is behind it, as are the business people all up and down the road.
We have gone to every meeting there has ever been to lobby our side. It is quite obvious that we have not won, but we have not given up. There is another five-year hearing to come up, I believe, in one year from now. They have done nothing on the commitments made to us in that five years. We are very doubtful that another hearing is of any use because, if they do not do what they agree to in the hearing, what is the point of it?
Mr. Harding: I bet he means the feds. So the government is not going to build any roads until they get some kind of approval from the feds, is that the correct understanding?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: No, there would not be any sense in us putting that money in, because we would be putting in a fairly nice and expensive road, and if it only goes another three miles we have not gained anything toward getting access into the park. There would not be much use in putting that road in unless it goes all of the way. Controlled access, as we saw it, would be from the boundary into the park; people would be able to drive into a parking area, inside the Kluane Sanctuary, and get on buses or vans, or whatever they have for access into that area.
It is nine miles up to Pearson Camp.
Mr. Harding: Has there been any formal proposal made by the new government to the federal government? I may be wrong, but I do not believe the previous government made any proposals; has the new government made any formal proposals to the feds on that?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The department has had conversations quite often with national Parks. The Minister of Tourism and I have written to Ottawa inviting Jean Charest out here to travel with us to see the park. Of course, he is a little busy right now, so I am not sure when he will visit.
Mr. Harding: Prime Minister, eh - Jean Charest? Another four or five years of misery - you just got me all depressed there; it hit me like a ton of bricks.
I guess that I can conclude that the new government has taken the position that they support this. I would like to express the concern that if something concrete is contemplated, it would seem like a good policy for the government to implement a formal consultative process with the general public.
I have said in the past that I may be ignorant of some of the efforts that have gone on before, but I do not know if such a proposal, as outlined by the government, has been specifically put to the people of the Yukon yet.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The original nine miles was agreed to in the other plan; that is the only concession we got. I could also point out that the Kluane Management Plan asked for access into there and that is a plan that cost around $4 million. I think that we should be looking at that plan when the time comes.
Mr. Harding: I am just warning them because this is not going to be a unanimously popular undertaking by any means. Although I have not been in this House long, I have learned a few things, and it is going to tough.
In its four-year plan, the government has talked about streamlining environmental regulations. I would like to ask the Minister what has been done to streamline environmental regulations thus far, what the plans are and what they have changed from the previous government’s environmental regulations that the Yukon has control over. If they are federal regulations, could he tell us what influence they have had over them. According to the Economic Development Minister, we really do not have a lot of say over the feds decisions regarding committees.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: There has not been much change since the former government was in power. What we have been trying to do is to work with the different government organizations and businesses so that when these regulations come in, we do not bring them in too fast and cause a lot of hardships - some of them will cost businesses some money. We have been working slowly on it, much in the same way as the former government. We are bringing them along slowly.
Mr. Joe: There appears to be some concerns about the importance of the recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Management Board. What is the government’s position about any future recommendations they may make to the government?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I think that one problem that we have is that there are two interpretations of what is going on. My advice, from my officials, tells me that they are an advisory board, which I accept and respect, and that there are certain regulations and terms of reference that we have to follow; we are doing our best to follow them.
I must also point out that any board that comes in here has to be, to some extent, responsible to the government. If they go against what the government’s internal advice is, particularly the biologists and other professionals, then we could be leading ourselves into trouble.
I think that the problem right now is that the interpretations are different and that we have not gotten together to straighten it out. I personally feel that we do not gain anything by washing our dirty laundry in the newspaper - but that is my own opinion, and no one else’s.
Mr. Harding: On this issue, I would just like to state clearly to the Minister that to me the issue is not so much the government’s ultimate responsibility. To me, the issue has been what I have witnessed living in this territory under the previous administration and the message from the present government concerning one particular issue. To me, that is the disconcerting thing about what has happened with the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board recommendations.
I can see instances where the Minister may have to give some direction. I have commented on the blue blazings that the Member gave when he was in Opposition to the actions of the previous Minister. I have closely documented and followed them. I say they are there and they are real. That has been my major concern. One thing is said in Opposition and one thing is done in government.
I am concerned about the number that the Minister has overruled, but I could see situations where there may be some direction having to be given. I have also read documents from officials whose opinions differ on the issue of whether or not the Minister should move away from the regulations, or change, alter, deny or refuse the recommendations of the board.
I read the minutes from a January 1991 meeting of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board where a presentation was given by Hugh Monaghan. He made comment that there has only been one recommendation of the board officially turned away at this point. That was the Art Webster situation and they immediately began planning for a wolf kill. This is what he said.
He also said that the Minister is expected to uphold the recommendations of the board. The Minister is not going to get an argument from me that there may be times when he disagrees with them, but I am concerned about the number, and I am frankly angered about the beating that was taken by the previous Minister. No recognition was given by the present Minister to the need or the actions of the previous Minister. Now, he is in the same boat. He is finding out that there are times when there may be situations.
I know that sometimes there will be situations where Ministers feel they must give direction to a board. I have heard the Minister responsible for the Yukon Energy Corporation say just that same thing here in this House. I am sure that there are going to be many situations where that will occur. As far as I am concerned, I have milked that issue and made the points that I feel I have to make.
I do not have any other questions for the Minister - oh yes, I do as a result of what happened today. One is on the wildlife viewing regulations in the game farming proposals. A couple of times this week I tried - maybe Question Period is the wrong forum because we are sort of on the attack too much. I am very concerned about proposal number 2, where wildlife viewing is given pretty much a free hand. It creates a real opening. If I were an unscrupulous person, I would say why get a game farming licence and be subject to game farming regulations when I could do the same thing under the auspices of wildlife viewing. I could bring in exotics and sell their offspring and not be subject to regulations.
I would like to ask the Minister what his views are on that and if he plans to do anything in the interim to prevent exotics from being brought in and to somehow regulate wildlife viewing.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: As to the exotic animals or wildlife viewing, there are two things we can do. One is to invite the Member to sit down with the officials and get a complete briefing. The other thing I could suggest - and I am not trying to be smart about this - is that the Member could put ideas in to the board - they are still receiving them - and go that way. However, we certainly will give him a briefing on it any time he wants. It is a problem - I think I have admitted that before in here.
On the Wildlife Management Board, I would say that I meet once a month with them now, and we are trying to develop, with the CYI, terms of reference that both sides can go along with and it can be settled.
I would just like to say one more thing on what I jumped all over the other Minister about. Not so much on that, but the fact that all the people in all the meetings I went to, and almost any place the fish and game people went, were solidly agreed that wolf management had to be done. I am being criticized for what I did here, but from all the meetings I get reports back from, everybody said they wanted to go on permits, they did not want it closed right off. That is just the difference between the two of us, this one simple thing: I have accepted what the people said.
In the other case, when the Hon. Art Webster was here, what he did was to turn around and form another committee and did not actually listen to what some of the people said. Mind you, I have to be out there hearing that, too. Sometimes the people get very emotional and do not look at things the way they maybe should. On this hunting issue, they seem to have very stern beliefs on how they want things done. They had the option of two things and, in most places, they voted to go for the permit system.
Mr. Harding: I have looked through some of the notes on that. I believe that a lot of people - I know this for a fact, as they have told me - supported the wolf kill on the premise that there would not be moose hunting. That is the issue. To say that there was unanimous approval for a wolf kill in this territory, without some kind of a plan for the future, would be inaccurate. There are many people who feel as I do, that some action had to be proven and taken, but it should not be used as an ongoing management tool.
I would not consider myself to be a big environmentalist, but I am concerned about this issue. It is expensive and socially and economically damaging in the long run for the territory. I have read some literature about it from some organizations that is being handed around that does cause me some concern. Perhaps it will not affect tourism this year, but it could in the long run. If there is a way around it, we should be looking at it. I will step away from this issue on the management board. We have talked about it often enough. The Minister knows where I stand on it.
The briefing would be welcomed. We will be asking for that. I thought long and hard about submitting my opinions, but I felt that, as an elected person, my best role would be to express them in here. I let the people submit their thoughts. Perhaps I should have done it in meeting form. I felt it was up to them. My views come up in here, and other people’s come in the surveys and proposals. That is why I did not do it.
I have no further questions. I will be happy to move into line-by-line debate, unless someone else has some Renewable Resources questions.
Ms. Moorcroft: I would like to follow up on the issue that we were discussing in Question Period, which was the forest fire on Red Ridge. Can the Minister tell me if there is a plan in place for the department to carry out a burn in order to improve sheep habitat on the Red Ridge?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: They plan on doing some experimental test plots. They are not going to be very big. They do not feel that they are big enough to go into a full consultation on them.
Ms. Moorcroft: Would it be possible for me to have a copy of the plan the department has prepared?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: No problem.
Ms. Moorcroft: Do they have a time frame on the implementation of that plan, and do they plan to conduct any fires during the current season over the summer months?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: It would depend upon the weather and when forestry will give us a permit to do this burning.
Mr. Cable: Firstly, let me give my apologies to the Hansard staff for rising here; they had given me instructions to be brief today, so I just want that transmitted.
I have some questions about the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board. There has been what appears to be a fairly disturbing bit of acrimony between the government and the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board.
I can see, coming down the road, that the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board will be making many decisions over the years affecting various people, including outfitters.
What is the Minister’s attitude toward compensation for people who are affected by this board’s decisions?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Under the umbrella final agreement, there is compensation for the outfitters. We pay part and the federal government pays part. Right now there is also compensation revoted for trappers, if their habitat is affected by certain things such as forestry.
Mr. Cable: I do not have the agreement in front of me, but is there at the present time - to the Minister’s knowledge - provision for granting compensation in lieu of licences to the three outfitters who are affected by the decision relating to the moose around Aishihik Lake?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: There is nothing for those three outfitters, because we do not think that we can declare it as an emergency. There would be no compensation for them.
Mr. Cable: I have a couple of questions on the forestry turnover. I gathered from listening to news reports and from information that I received that there has been a very large number of grievances filed against the federal government, the employer, in relation to management practices. The suggestion that came from the Public Service Alliance representative here was that the devolution of forestry not take place until these grievances have been resolved.
What is the Minister’s posture on that?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Actually, if the turnover was given to us we could deal with some of them. We have a year in which we have to deal with the employees before it is finalized, so we would hope we could deal with those as territorial positions.
I could add that everywhere I go in the rural areas the first thing the people ask me is when we are going to get forestry transferred. Quite a few feel they would like it to be transferred to the territorial government.
Mr. Cable: I asked the Minister the other day whether a definitive decision had been made on whether to transfer the forestry personnel, once they become Yukon employees, to Watson Lake, and he answered that a definitive decision had not been made. What is the Minister’s inclination? What is the government’s inclination? Is it to move most of the forestry personnel to Watson Lake?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The government has never even gotten around to the position of really talking about it. We really have not made any decisions on it, period.
Mr. Harding: I got some legislative returns from the Minister and I am glad they are supporting and developing catch and release. I think it is a good proposal and we need to do more of it. I am glad about the high-quality management waters, because we really have to protect our fish resource in the Yukon. That is important.
In the return, there was a representation made to the Minister. It said that under the federal Environment Act, I believe, there could be enforcement of littering in camps - hunting camps and that type of thing - but my concern is that conservation officers do not have the ability to enforce that. For example, if hunters left a camp a mess and a Renewable Resources officer saw it, what could he do about it? That was my concern.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We do now that the litter regulations are in force.
Deputy Chair: Is there any further debate?
Mr. Harding: I have a legislative return on all-terrain vehicles. I think it might have been interpreted that I was taking a position totally against them. I was not, and I guess the Minister’s position is that he will evaluate each situation on an as-needed basis.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: That is the position we are taking now in some areas. There are several areas that we have closed off now, and we will close off any wildlife viewing area that they might disturb.
I should also point out that - I have a problem with this myself, but it is fact - by having ATVs running around, we put the game hunters out into different areas. Therefore, we are not keeping pressure on the areas along the road, and they have a much greater ability to bring the meat back out, than they would the other way. Therefore, we know they are saving the meat.
Mr. Harding: So, the Minister does have some concerns about the ability to access all kinds of areas - I have those same concerns. I see some people who are not very respectful - they drag flats of beer on their four wheelers, off into the bush, and leave the cans behind. I do have some problems with that aspect. It is a difficult issue to deal with. I agree that you have to evaluate it. You might have a war if you tried to ban them outright in the territory - they have some good fights over it in British Columbia.
I guess that would be the end of general debate for me.
Mr. Joe: I have one more question. What is the government doing to encourage a sport fishing, catch and release program for fish?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Right now, we are trying to educate people and do advertising. We are working with the different derbies so that they do not always take all the fish out, but release them. It is a matter of education to get them to do this. The barbless hooks is another situation that we can move into and try to get the fish released back into the water.
Mr. Harding: I have one more little question. I was talking to a friend of mine. He was a little concerned about fly-in fishing and the ability of people to access different waters. I was wondering how the Minister would feel about resource councils coming up with a recommendation to protect certain lakes from that type of access and restricting them to on-foot access?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We certainly would expect that, just as we listened to them about the high-quality lakes. We expect in the future that there will be lakes in that classification. We will react when we see which lakes they are and hear the arguments.
Deputy Chair: Is there any general debate on Administration?
On Administration
On General Management
General Management in the amount of $250,000 agreed to
On Finance and Administration
Finance and Administration in the amount of $1,228,000 agreed to
Administration in the amount of $1,478,000 agreed to
On Policy, Planning and Assessment
Mr. Harding: Can the Minister tell me where the reduction comes from in the policy, planning and assessment area?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Yes, there is a reduction of $30,000 due to the elimination of internal charges and the clerical assistance.
On Director
Director in the amount of $252,000 agreed to
On Policy Analysis
Policy Analysis in the amount of $237,000 agreed to
On Program Transfers Unit
Program Transfers Unit in the amount of nil agreed to
On Planning and Assessment
Planning and Assessment in the amount of $304,000 agreed to
On GIS/Remote Sensing
GIS/Remote Sensing in the amount of $156,000 agreed to
Policy, Planning and Assessment in the amount of $949,000 agreed to
On Resource Management
Mr. Cable: I have a few questions on the game regulations that are being reviewed, or promulgated, or whatever the status is. When does the Minister see that the game farming regulations will have been developed, approved and put in force?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The conclusion of the public input will be at the end of this week. We will then be reviewing it with the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board on June 24. It will go from there to Cabinet.
Mr. Cable: Would sometime this summer be a reasonable target date for the regulations coming into force?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are not too sure that they will even get through everything and come into force.
Mr. Cable: I gather that what is being done now - unless I have misappreciated the exercise - is the formulation of interim regulations, and at some juncture down the road, when everybody agrees on the medical evidence, there will be final regulations. Have I appreciated the situation correctly?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We would bring in regulations, but they would be subject to change. I suppose the population will agree that some changes should be made. I point out also that we are under regulations made by the former government at the present time.
Mr. Cable: I gather that the only two problems with the game farming industry, other than licensing provisions, are that on an escape there is a possibility of disease transmission or genetic pollution. Are there any other issues that are being discussed?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The main one is just a moral issue. Some people believe in it and some do not. These are the balances we have to keep to see that we can get a consensus between the two groups. Some believe that all animals should be in the wild and others believe that you can game farm. We have this situation and that is what we are trying to decipher, to see if we can come in between where both sides are satisfied.
Mr. Cable: Is the Minister saying that is the main issue?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We mentioned the other issue is the disease issue, and the technical issue of the situation. Those are also very important to resolve.
Mr. Cable: I just have a couple of questions on agriculture. What does the Minister see as the likelihood of there being a substantial agricultural industry here in the territory?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Number one, it would depend on what the Member means by substantial. The last report we put out showed a great amount of money coming back, and that is one criteria to go by. It would depend on the economy, and it depends on land and a number of things, but I can certainly say, and I think Members would agree with me, that in the last nine or 10 years, it has increased a fair amount. There is more and more, and one of the big problems is the land issue.
Mr. Cable: I just have one more question. I do not want to belabour the issue but, in the Minister’s view, what segments of the agriculture industry are most likely to lead to some substantial amount of agricultural production?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: At the present time, it is mainly hay and forage such as that, and then greenhouses and vegetables, and slowly, possibly, meat situations. This, of course, depends on whether we have an abattoir and whether we can do it economically, or whether they can ship the meat in cheaper from outside than we can grow it here.
Chair: Is there any further debate?
On Division Management
Division Management in the amount of $208,000 agreed to
On Agriculture
Agriculture in the amount of $475,000 agreed to
On Fish and Wildlife
Fish and Wildlife in the amount of $3,781,000 agreed to
On Field Services
Field Services in the amount of $2,177,000 agreed to
On Parks and Outdoor Recreation
Mr. Harding: I would like to point out that I really appreciate the legislative return that the Minister gave us, with a breakdown in the lines in the beginning so that I do not have to ask for that information now. However, I would like to know the reason for the reduction in parks and outdoor recreation of 10 percent?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: It is a decrease of $180,000, largely due to the effect the Alaska Highway celebration in 1992-93 had on the campground maintenance, together with a cutback in the length of the season in some selected campgrounds.
Parks and Outdoor Recreation in the amount of $1,591,000 agreed to
On Environmental Protection
Environmental Protection in the amount of $370,000 agreed to
Resource Management in the amount of $8,602,000 agreed to
On Land Claims
On Land Claims Administration
Land Claims Administration in the amount of $171,000 agreed to
On Yukon First Nations Comprehensive Claim
Yukon First Nations Comprehensive Claim in the amount of $450,000 agreed to
On Inuvialuit Final Agreement (IFA)
Inuvialuit Final Agreement (IFA) in the amount of $1,055,000 agreed to
Land Claims in the amount of $1,676,000 agreed to
Operation and Maintenance Expenditures agreed to
On Capital Expenditures
On Administration
On Departmental Equipment
Mr. Harding: Could the Minister tell me what departmental equipment is going to be purchased? So that we can clear the lines, can the Minister tell me what is going to be purchased under all of the other line items - Office Furniture and Equipment, Information Systems and Computer Equipment in that administration section?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: It is everything from skidoos, boats, motors and anything else that is required for work out in the field.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We can give the Member a detailed breakdown.
Mr. Chair, I can see you are in a hurry to get to Old Crow. We have been here for so long now, you are running in circles.
I would like to propose an amendment here.
Amendment proposed
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I move
THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 14, Renewable Resources, by reducing the line item Departmental Equipment on page 86 in the capital estimates by $15,000; and
THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.
Amendment agreed to
Departmental Equipment in the amount of $149,000 agreed to as amended
On Computer Equipment
Computer Equipment in the amount of $80,000 agreed to
On Information Systems
Hon. Mr. Brewster: In that line item, we have money for library assistance and some more for the GIS study. Would the Member like that on paper?
Information Systems in the amount of $18,000 agreed to
On Office Accommodation and Improvements
Office Accommodation and Improvements in the amount of $20,000 agreed to
On Office Furniture and Equipment
Amendment proposed
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I move
THAT the estimates pertaining to Bill No. 6, entitled First Appropriation Act, 1993-94, be amended in vote 14, Renewable Resources, by reducing the line item Office Furniture and Equipment on page 86 in the capital estimates by $10,000; and
THAT the clauses and schedules of the bill be amended accordingly.
Amendment agreed to
Office Furniture and Equipment in the amount of $49,000 agreed to as amended
Administration in the amount of $316,000 agreed to as amended
On Policy, Planning and Assessment
Chair: Is there any general debate?
On Resources and Land Information Systems (RLIS)
Resources and Land Information Systems in the amount of $50,000 agreed to
On State of the Environment and Economic Reports
State of the Environment and Economic Reports in the amount of $30,000 agreed to
Mr. Harding: What is the breakdown on that? Is any of it recoverable?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: At the present time, the money is not recoverable, but eventually we will get some money from the federal government to supplement it. The $30,000 is to prepare the state of the environment report, as required by the Yukon Environment Act.
Policy, Planning and Assessment in the amount of $80,000 agreed to
On Resource Management
Chair: Is there any general debate?
On Agriculture
On Infrastructure Facilities (Abattoir)
Mr. Cable: I just have a couple of questions on the abattoir. I gather that the desired property is at the forestry reserve at the corner of the Mayo Road and Takhini Hot Springs Road. Could the Minister indicate whether that property has, as yet, been secured by the Yukon territorial government for purposes of the abattoir?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Negotiations are continuing. I have my fingers crossed - it is just about ready to fall over the fence, I think and hope, but as of right now, we are not sure.
Mr. Cable: I followed the public part of the negotiations, and it seems to me that the federal government has had some unreasonable resistance to the transfer of that property. What is the reason why they are resisting the transfer so vigorously? I gather there are 300 acres or thereabouts there, and all that is required for the abattoir is a small section.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I will put it this way: I guess it is a lack of communication, and I think we have it straightened around. I hope we have.
Mr. Cable: I gather $500,000 has been allotted to the abattoir from this government. Am I correct in that figure?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: It is from the EDA.
Mr. Cable: That is totally recoverable, I assume, and hence the $1.00 item. Is that the rationale?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: The reason we have $1.00 in there is because we do not really know where we are going until we get the land. Once we get the land, we will contribute part of that, but not all of that, to the organization that is going to run the abattoir.
Mr. Cable: Right at the moment - to make sure that I am understanding what the Minister saying - there is a segment of that EDA money that we have spoken about earlier that is tentatively devoted to the abattoir. Is that correct?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: With respect to the $500,000, they had approval for it, but it was cancelled with the new budget, and they will have to go back for another approval, when and if we get the land.
Mr. Harding: I have a couple of questions on the abattoir. One, I saw a letter to the federal Minister on the land, and I understand that issue. It also said that YTG wanted to begin the construction this year. I would like to know what it is going to cost YTG. What are we going to have to pay overall that is not recoverable?
I would also like to know why a Conservative government - this boggles my mind - would want to build this abattoir. I do not understand how it would be considered infrastructure from their point of view. It does not follow along with the free market philosophy - if someone could build it within the private sector, then it would be economical. In this case, the government says they want to build it, and they have commitments to the agricultural industry to do so. How does that fit into the free market Conservative philosophy?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are not building it. They formed an association that is going to build, run and look after it. All we are doing is trying to help them with some money, and they have to raise a certain portion of that money. We are not building it at all. All I have done is help them get the land. From there on, they have to work it, not me.
Mr. Harding: So, it is not going to cost YTG a red cent?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: We are prepared to support it as an infrastructure feature, but it is mainly up to the farmers and Agricultural Association to carry it on from there.
Infrastructure Facilities (Abattoir) in the amount of $1.00 agreed to
On Fish and Wildlife
On Fish and Wildlife Management Planning
Mr. Harding: I do not know if this is in line, but which is the line concerning the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board and the cutback in their budget. Exactly what is the extent of that budget? I understand that last year’s budget was in the area of $390,000. What is this year’s?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: That is in O&M. It was $43,000; it was cut back. The Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board spent $190,000. We had to take that out of other areas.
Fish and Wildlife Management Planning in the amount of $60,000 agreed to
On Wildlife Viewing and Infrastructure
Wildlife Viewing and Infrastructure in the amount of $150,000 agreed to
On Video - Yukon Wildlife Identification
Video - Yukon Wildlife Identification in the amount of $8,000 agreed to
On Parks and Outdoor Recreation
On Facilities
On Dempster Highway Interpretive Centre
Dempster Highway Interpretive Centre in the amount of $30,000 agreed to
On Territorial Parks
On Coal River Springs
Coal River Springs in the amount of $12,000 agreed to
On Kusawa Lake Management Plan
Kusawa Lake Management Plan in the amount of $25,000 agreed to
On Carcross Dunes Management Plan
Carcross Dunes Management Plan in the amount of $59,000 agreed to
On Lazulite Deposits
Lazulite Deposits in the amount of $2,000 agreed to
On Park System Plan
Park System Plan in the amount of $60,000 agreed to
On Resource Assessment
Mr. Cable: Perhaps I have missed this, but could the Minister tell me where the wolf kill monies are hidden in these books? They are not immediately apparent to me, and perhaps I have just missed it.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: It was in Fish and Wildlife Administration in O&M.
Resource Assessment in the amount of $70,000 agreed to
On Campgrounds and Recreation Access
On Planning
Mr. Harding: I would like to ask the Minister - I just glanced at a clipping in the news briefing that I got at 12:30 - about privatizing campgrounds. The Minister mentioned it last week in the Legislature. Can the Minister give me a few thoughts on that, because there are a number of campgrounds on back roads - well, not back roads for the Yukon - but roads like the Campbell Highway, the Lapie Canyon. Who on earth would want to go into business there? Can the Minister tell me what he is referring to there?
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Actually, it was only a suggestion that we were looking at, and it would be for the large campgrounds. Of course, the Member is correct; we would continue to maintain the small campgrounds ourselves.
We thought that we might be able to get someone to operate and manage some of the bigger ones for us. If someone were running them, they would be able to collect fees; right now the government pays people to run back to these places in order to look after them, especially if they are not in a community.
We were only considering this suggestion; we have not done anything and I do not want people to think that we have started doing this; we have probably only had three conversations about this.
There have been no draft papers of the good and bad; we have simply considered it. I am in agreement with the Member about the small campgrounds; the government would continue to maintain them.
Mr. Harding: By way of representation, let me say to the Minister that I would urge him to proceed very cautiously on the privatization of campgrounds.
I think that there would have to be strict standards maintained and we have a real interest in making sure those campgrounds do not turn into recreational vehicle sites.
Hon. Mr. Brewster: I agree with the Member over there, and that is one of the things that we have to figure out. We have to make sure that the campgrounds are maintained at a certain standard and that they are looked after.
Planning in the amount of $65,000 agreed to
On Western Region
Western Region in the amount of $109,000 agreed to
On Northern Region
Northern Region in the amount of $121,000 agreed to
On Southern Region
Southern Region in the amount of $148,000 agreed to
On Dalton Post
Dalton Post in the amount of $8,000 agreed to
On Outdoor Recreation System Implementation
Outdoor Recreation System Implementation in the amount of $60,000 agreed to
On Heritage Rivers
On Yukon River (30 mile section)
Yukon River (30 mile section) in the amount of $20,000 agreed to
On Bonnet Plume River
Bonnet Plume River in the amount of $40,000 agreed to
On Tatshenshini River
Tatshenshini River in the amount of $23,000 agreed to
Resource Management in the amount of $1,070,000 agreed to
On Land Claims
On IFA-Herschel Island Territory Park
IFA-Herschel Island Territory Park in the amount of $109,000 agreed to
Land Claims in the amount of $109,000 agreed to
Capital Expenditures agreed to as amended
Department of Renewable Resources agreed to as amended
Hon. Mr. Brewster: Before we move on, the other day, the Leader of the Official Opposition asked where the fish fingerlings would be found. They can be found under environmental management enhancement program.
Mrs. Firth: On a point of order, for the Minister responsible for Economic Development, I just wanted to point out to that Minister the new job that is going to be created in his department. It has not been any big secret or any big confidential matter, but it seems that the position was presented, and the managers and analysts were being advised. It was to be a position that was to be a new level between deputy ministers or the assistant deputy ministers and the area managers for the north and south regions.
I gather, by the Minister standing up this afternoon and saying that, on a point of order, absolutely no new positions were going to be created in his department, that this position will not be created. I am pleased to hear that we have been able to nip a managerial position in the bud from being created, if that is the case.
Chair: There is no point of order, but the Minister can respond if he wishes to do so.
Department of Tourism
On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures
Chair: Is there any general debate?
Hon. Mr. Phillips: I am pleased to introduce the budget for the Department of Tourism. The operation and maintenance budget totals $6.7 million, which represents a two percent, $107,000, increase over the 1992-93 forecast. This significant increase includes the funding to the Yukon Anniversaries Commission, enhanced funding for the film site promotion program, and funding for the Arts Centre Corporation, previously funded through the Department of Education.
The tabled capital budget totals $1.8 million. Our main estimates show this as being a 38-percent decrease from the 1992-93 forecast. However, if we delete the special projects, the Yukon and Carcross VRC development, a more accurate comparison of the ongoing projects shows an 18-percent decrease over the 1992-93 forecast.
Note that there are three proposed amendments that will reduce the capital budget by $31,000, and details will be provided as we debate the lines later.
The tabled budget includes a number of priority initiatives, such as were identified in the budget address. I will briefly highlight these new activities and other significant changes from the 1992-93 forecast by speaking first to the O&M for each branch, and then to the capital budget for each branch.
In administration, a line item has been added to provide the funding for the Yukon Anniversaries Commission, rather than requesting supplementary funds, which has been the procedure for the last couple of years. The contribution to the commission for 1993-94 is $285,000.
The upcoming gold rush anniversary should place the Yukon on an international stage, hence the importance of our supporting an organization to coordinate activities relating to these anniversaries.
In the heritage branch, the change is mainly due to the Yukon gold rush explorer’s passport program. Various activities, including printing and promotion for the 1993 season, will have already occurred. The 1993-94 budget has been adjusted accordingly.
The development branch has seen no significant change from 1992-93 operations.
In the marketing branch, the following three items represent the major reallocations within the marketing budget. A film site promotion program has been increased by $70,000 to $105,000, allowing the branch to be more pro-active when pursuing possible productions. Feature films, television movies and commercial productions have the potential of having a significant impact on the Yukon. There is $10,000 allotted to a pilot ambassador program, which will capitalize on the business and pleasure travel activities of Yukoners, who will become ambassadors for the Yukon as they travel outside. This program will be implemented with the assistance and cooperation of the Tourism Industry Association of the Yukon.
An assistant marketing officer will be recruited soon to enhance marketing support to the Yukon tourism operators in the travel trade and media relations programs.
Let me take a moment to acknowledge the American Bus Association which has, again, selected Discovery Days in the City of Dawson in the top 100 events to visit this year. Congratulations to the City of Dawson for their efforts toward this accomplishment.
In the arts branch, the two major items include the following: the funding to the Arts Centre Corporation has been transferred from the Department of Education to the Department of Tourism, and there has been $50,000 targeted to a marketing initiative to improve access to the arts community and its markets.
I will now move to the capital budget. In the administration branch, this new activity reflects the transfer of responsibility from Government Services to each department. It includes funding for the department for office and storage accommodation, furniture, equipment and systems.
In the heritage branch, there have been four major changes. Funding for the historic resources trust fund has been reduced to $75,000 in 1993-94, due to fiscal restraint. Our efforts to build the fund in future years will continue. Under museums assistance, we will continue to fund museums for small, capital projects. However, major museums developments, such as the Dawson Museum storage facility, has been deferred at the request of the museum, who wishes to address the need for a fire control system as a priority. Heritage branch is working with the museum to access federal funding for this fire control project.
Note the 1992-93 forecast for artifact inventory and cataloguing includes $50,000 recovered from the federal government. The 1993-94 mains are the same as the 1992-93 mains.
Within historic sites planning, the initial planning research for a Canyon City tramway will be started.
The development branch, in recognition of the need for improving economic and visitor statistical dat