Whitehorse, Yukon

Wednesday, April 30, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.

Speaker absent

Clerk: It is my duty, pursuant to the provisions of section 24 of the Legislative Assembly Act, to inform the Legislative Assembly of the absence of the Speaker.

Deputy Speaker takes the Chair

Deputy Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

We will proceed at this time with prayers. I would ask members to bow their heads in a moment of silent reflection.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

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

Tributes.

TRIBUTES

National Book Festival Week

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Today I rise to pay tribute to National Book Festival Week, which is currently underway. This annual celebration of Canadian literature is sponsored and funded in the Yukon by the Writers Union of Canada, l'association des Franco-Yukonnais, the Playwrights Union and the Department of Education.

May 1st and 2nd, the 18th annual young authors' conference will be held at F.H. Collins. This year, we have as visiting authors Jason Sherman, playwright; M.T. Kelly, novelist and poet; Gregory Scofield, a First Nation poet; and Larissa Lai, a novelist.

I would encourage all members to take advantage of the public readings and wish the young authors well in their conference.

Tribute to Manitoba flood volunteers

Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give tribute to the people of Manitoba. Flooding has devastated the province, but the people of Manitoba are fighting back. Provincial workers not directly responsible for flood control are using their work days to sandbag river banks. Volunteers from around the province are manning reception centres, feeding, housing and clothing flood victims.

EMO has been activated. The military is working 24 hours a day. Red Cross workers have been called in from all across Canada, and neighbouring provinces have been sending in equipment and supplies. There's no greater test of our humanity than disaster.

With this in mind, I am asking this government to respond to the Red Cross Canada-wide appeal to raise money to support relief efforts in Manitoba.

To date, there has been $285,000 raised by the Red Cross to help victims of the flood. Eleven thousand people have been registered at reception centres for flood victims in Manitoba. We need to act. Next time, we might need help, and today we already heard about flooding in Dawson City.

I pay tribute to the people of Manitoba and I appeal to this House and the people of Yukon to send help to Manitoba.

Hon. Mr. Keenan: Certainly, I too rise to pay tribute to the people of Manitoba and to the Red Cross. I certainly think that, as the member opposite has eloquently stated, that it is up to each and every one of us here in the Yukon to come forth so that we might be able to participate in helping our brothers and sisters in Manitoba at this very critical time in their life.

I also would like to recognize that the organization of the Red Cross is simply an organization consisting of much of what you see represented in this room - of everyday, ordinary-type people. It's an organization that is very needed in the world and you never seem to notice that it is there until something affects you. So, I'd like to pay tribute to the Red Cross. I'd also like to encourage, as the member opposite has said, everybody to pull together and to come to heed of this most urgent need for our Canadian citizens and to remember that it also can happen to us. Thank you.

Mr. Ostashek: On behalf of our caucus, we, too, would like to extend our support to the people in Manitoba in their time of great distress. I believe it is very fitting that we do this. We know how generous Canadians were when the Old Crow school burned down in January of this year, and now is the chance for Yukoners to be able to contribute their share. With the generosity that they have shown in other instances, I'm sure they will be very supportive of this. We just wish the people of Manitoba the best of luck in times of real adversity, and we hope that things will come out for the best, and that we will be able to all pull together. This is what Canada is all about. I think it's time we all pull together in times of great need like this.

Deputy Speaker: Introduction of visitors.

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

Are there any statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Reading recovery

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I rise today to inform the House of a concrete demonstration of our government's policy to support and encourage children at risk, as spelled out in the budget address of March 24th.

The ability to read is a fundamental skill that can affect many aspects of a person's growth and development, yet for many children it presents many difficult challenges that can be identified in the very early days of school or even before.

To help these young people meet these challenges, I am pleased to announce the implementation plans for the reading recovery program, which is an early intervention remedial program for students. This program will help Yukon youngsters get off to a good start in their school learning, and better prepare them to meet the challenges of the future.

As the 1997-98 budget demonstrates, Mr. Speaker, funding in the amount of $316,000 has been set aside for this important program. Reading recovery is a highly specialized program designed for six-year-old children who are at risk in learning to read. The classroom teacher is trained to work one-on-one with the children to determine the student's strengths and use specific recovery strategies to accelerate the child's reading growth.

Regular classroom instruction for the student is supplemented with personalized daily lessons of 30 minutes in length for a period of 12 to 20 weeks. When the child has successfully reached a level of reading comparable to her or his peers, the student leaves the program, providing an opportunity for another child to become an independent reader.

Exploratory work with reading recovery was done in 1995-96. During the current year, this work is being accelerated and expanded. There has been a series of pre-training sessions held for 20 teachers this school year, and a Yukon teacher is currently on sabbatical receiving teacher-leader training at the Canadian Institute for Reading Recovery, in Scarborough, Ontario.

The teacher-leader will begin intensive training of eight teachers - six urban and two rural - from the pre-training group this school year. A second teacher-leader will be trained during the next school year and, upon her return, will focus her efforts on training in rural schools.

This government believes our children deserve the best possible start to their school learning. Through reading recovery and other early intervention strategies, we are putting that belief into practice and helping to ensure that our young people have every opportunity to succeed.

Mr. Phillips: We, on this side, support this initiative for young students, but we do have some concerns. The minister talked about students receiving help until they reach the level of their peers. Perhaps the minister could explain what level that is, or the minister's interpretation of it.

It is interesting that the government today is prepared to announce a program offering $316,000 to help these students to bring them up to a certain level, but when it comes to excellence or awards of excellence in education, they feel that those students who want to reach higher heights should get nothing. I think that it is unfortunate that the party opposite feels this way, because we feel that if students work hard they should receive rewards in the long run.

This is a positive program, and it deals with probably a smaller number of students, but I think it would be an extremely positive program; it would help those students to reach their higher level of education.

Ms. Duncan: Reading is as fundamental and as important to us as good nutrition. Just as parents try to provide the right food for growing bodies, instilling a love of reading and words at a very, very early age could be considered the right nutrition - good food for growing brains.

Unfortunately, it is also a fact that the resources to provide a love of reading are more easily at hand for some families than others. The reading recovery program essentially puts in place a program at a very early age for children to ensure they attain the necessary reading skills. Reading recovery is a good program, and our caucus supports its implementation in all Yukon schools.

However, on behalf of the Yukon Liberal Party caucus, I do have a couple of questions and what I believe to be a constructive suggestion for the government. My suggestion: this government is supportive of partnerships in education; the partnership begins at home between the parent and child. This is especially evident in reading. You cannot pick up a parenting book or magazine that doesn't encourage you to read to your child. In fact, you cannot leave Whitehorse General Hospital without a book given, I believe, by the Department of Education, for you to read to your child.

Unfortunately, communication between the government and the parent about reading to your child ends as you leave Whitehorse General Hospital and it could continue prior to the child reaching school age; for example, in cooperation with the Department of Health, the public health nurse does a brief assessment when a child is taken in for their shots. Parents are asked such questions as, "Can this child walk backwards yet?" and "Is the child receiving good nutrition?" Why not add the question, "Do you read to your child?" just as a point of encouragement?

The point is that there are other not necessarily costly suggestions that the government could undertake in support of this program as well.

My questions: where is the role and discussion with Yukon Learn with respect to this program, with the overall idea of support from the very beginning for the reading partnership between parent and child? Literacy is not a skill that every parent has. Are we addressing the root of the problem in consultation with other agencies? And, with regard to reading recovery, the minister identified that funding had been set aside for this particular program. The source of the money has not been identified. Are the funds available from cost savings from other departments or is it simply a reallocation within the Department of Education's budget?

When the minister responds to these questions, I'd also note that the time frame and the actual measurements of success for the reading recovery program were not included in the ministerial statement. The reading recovery program is an excellent program and I look forward to further discussion of it.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I thank the critics for their comments.

Children are being helped to learn to read, because once a student is able to read, they are able to learn. That's why this is such an important program. The Yukon Party critic's remarks about our government's position are completely inaccurate. We do believe in helping all students to do their best. As well, I would remind all members that schools and school councils are, to my knowledge, very active in communicating with parents both on the issue of helping students to read and on other important issues that affect the learning in the schools that all students receive.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation, power rates

Mr. Ostashek: My question is for the minister responsible for the Energy Corp.

The minister is aware that he told the House about three weeks ago that there was to be an agreement with Alberta Power on the management of our utility by April 30th. I look at the clock, and the minister has got about 10 hours left until this day runs out, and I'd like to know if he's ready to inform the House if he has an agreement or if he's hopeful of getting one.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, it's still April 30th, and we haven't all turned into pumpkins, yet. It's quarter to two, and I understand that the board is meeting with the president at two o'clock, and that negotiations are still underway. So, I can't give a definitive response to the member opposite. The parties - the Energy Corporation and the board - are still pursuing an agreement, as I understand it.

Mr. Ostashek: Well, I thank the minister for that. The minister has to be aware that this is an issue of great importance to not only the Opposition but many, many Yukoners. This is going to mean a change in the direction and how our utility is to be operated. Many Yukoners are waiting for the minister's announcement.

The minister, three weeks ago, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was very confident that we would reach an agreement by April 30th. Can the minister tell this House what the obstacles are in reaching an agreement?

Hon. Mr. Harding: I've always expressed to the member some concern that there were a number of hurdles to cross, both for the April 30th AIP operating agreement as well as any aspect with regard to franchising for June the 30th. So, I've always been consistent in the position that there are a number of hurdles to be crossed. It's an extremely complicated issue, and it's one that demands a lot of attention on behalf of the board.

There are many, many details with regard to laying the agreement to rest as they pertain to right of first refusals for the Energy Corporation and Yukon Energy on certain projects, how exactly generation transmission versus distribution are defined - those types of issues.

So, I do believe that there is hope for an agreement, but - certainly it's our government's position that if there's not a good deal, there shouldn't be any deal.

Mr. Ostashek: The minister is aware, from the discussions that we have had with the minister, the questions in this House and the presentation that was put on by the president of the Energy Corporation, in this House that if there was no agreement by April the 30th, the other deadlines didn't matter. That's why I'm so very concerned.

The other thing is that if, in fact, we are unsuccessful in reaching an agreement, there is only eight months left to put something in place. So, I'm asking the minister now, how much further is he prepared to extend this deadline, if they don't reach an agreement by midnight tonight.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Agreements on extensions would be in the domain of the board, and I have not been asked to agree to an extension by anybody. They're still negotiating. I think it's important that a deal be reached within the appropriate time, unless there's some very imperative reason for an extension, and I haven't been apprised of one yet.

The member is quite right, if this deadline is not met, June 30th doesn't matter; I still maintain that position.

Also, I would just say that it is an important arrangement in the negotiations. I know that the president and the board did some due diligence on direct management, had some extensive conversations, and had some extensive work done with other utilities who do direct manage, and they wanted to ascertain whether or not it was a feasible option.

They did reach some very positive conclusions, but also identified some problems. So, it is still a viable option if there's no beneficial deal with Yukon ratepayers with Alberta Power - and the member knows that there's a transition period - if the deal were to fall apart, for Yukon Energy Corporation to take over direct management.

Question re: Selkirk Street Elementary School meeting, concerned parents

Mr. Phillips: My question is for the Minister of Education.

Last Monday, there was a school council meeting at Selkirk Street school and there were several items on the agenda. Approximately 30 to 40 parents attended the meeting to express their concerns over recent actions by this council. Many of the parents who attended felt the school council did not want to listen to their concerns and virtually cut off debate during the meeting. The parents left the meeting very upset and have been phoning our offices and speaking to us about the meeting. They are now turning to the minister and would like an opportunity to speak to the minister first-hand, and I understand the minister's office turned them down.

I'd like to ask the minister why the Minister of Education won't meet with concerned parents of our school children?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: The member's facts are wrong. I have not turned down any meetings with anyone. Our office has had some calls from people regarding the meeting that was held at Selkirk this week. Many of the parents who were there wanted to talk about a personnel matter and the school council felt that there should not be public debate or discussion on a personnel matter.

Mr. Phillips: The minister is wrong. When the individual talked to the minister's executive assistant today, they made it perfectly clear to the executive assistant that they would not discuss personnel matters. They did want to discuss other actions of the council. They were also advised by the minister's executive assistant to go through the process of talking first to the deputy minister and then to Mr. Seipp.

Well, Mr. Speaker, they had talked to the deputy minister before this even happened, before they called the minister's office today, and they were told by the deputy minister he did not want to discuss the issue any more and he would get Mr. Seipp to call. That was over a week ago.

Would the minister now meet with these individuals and at least allow these parents of students at Selkirk Street Elementary School to express their concerns to the minister about the council's actions?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: As I said in the response to the member's previous question, I am very willing to meet with parents about their concerns. Nonetheless, I have to reiterate that discussions from my office with anybody who phoned made it clear that, on personnel matters, it is not appropriate or legal for the political people to get involved in personnel decisions and that we would not do that.

Mr. Phillips: I wish the minister would listen to my question, because in my previous question I told the minister that they made it perfectly clear to the executive assistant that they would not discuss personnel matters. They wanted to discuss the actions of the school council regarding other matters.

Will the minister, then, meet with these individuals, as long as they don't discuss personnel matters?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: If the member opposite would listen to my answers to the same question that he has just repeated three times, I have told him that I am prepared to meet with people who call and want to have a meeting with me. Yes, I will meet with parents when they phone and ask for a meeting.

Question re: Crown corporations, appointments of presidents

Mr. Cable: I have some questions for the Government Leader on his appointments of the presidents of the two Crown corporations last fall. The Yukon Housing Corporation Act, as we have discussed previously, appears to give the board of that corporation the power to appoint the president. The Yukon Development Corporation Act states that the appointment of the president is made on the recommendation of the board of that corporation.

In December, I asked the Government Leader why he had appointed the presidents of those two Crown corporations without the input of the boards of those Crown corporations, and he said that he had the power to do what he did - that was the gist of his comments.

In the letter I got from the Housing Corporation, I was advised that the board of that corporation believes that there are inconsistencies with the appointment process as defined in different acts. The question I have for the Government Leader - and we've gone back and forth on this - is, just for the record: is that the view of the Government Leader, the view that was expressed by the board of the Yukon Housing Corporation?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: First of all, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the member for asking the question. Apart from the question yesterday, I have not had many questions in Question Period for over one week, and I've been desperate to speak.

Unfortunately, this question doesn't really get my juices flowing, so perhaps the member could be a little more provocative in his next question.

When the member raised this matter last December, I did allow that I didn't believe there were inconsistencies between the acts. I do believe that the Public Service Act gives Cabinet the authority to appoint presidents of the two corporations he mentions. I do, however, feel that there is also the fact that there are some inconsistencies between the Yukon Development Corporation Act, the Yukon Housing Corporation Act and the Public Service Act. I did indicate to the member before that those inconsistencies should be resolved at some point. I would be more than happy to consider that matter when time allows.

Mr. Cable: Well, I won't go so far as to get the Government Leader's juices going. Let me quote to him what he said in 1989, when the Housing Corporation Act was being amended, setting out that the board shall have the right to appoint the president, and he was responding to the Member for Riverdale South, as she then was: "The member has already read out that the board of the corporation shall appoint its employees. That is not to say that this employee shall be appointed by the government. It does not say that this employee shall be elected. It does not say that this employee will be anything other than appointed by the board of the Housing Corporation." Now, when the president was appointed, and when the president was removed, rather unceremoniously, last fall from the Yukon Housing Corporation, that must have been in the minister's mind, so would the minister - the Government Leader - tell us: what is his intent, that the board of the Housing Corporation run the Housing Corporation or that he has the right to appoint these deputy ministers?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Well, first of all, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I should correct the impression that the president of the Housing Corporation was somehow unceremoniously dealt with in October/November of last year. There wasn't a lot of ceremony around his appointment to the Department of Economic Development, but there was a round of handshaking, and there were some congratulatory remarks, because people felt very confident that this fellow could do this job and do the job well. I just want to make it clear that whatever impression is in the members' minds with respect to this person's transfer to another job, the job was done with some ceremony but not a lot of pomp and ceremony perhaps.

The best advice that I had at the time with respect to the appointments, in terms of technical advice, was that the government did have the authority to undertake the appointments, and the Housing Corporation -- because I know the member has checked - did ask and receive legal advice, which confirmed this fact. But, the member has pointed out an inconsistency with the Housing Corporation Act and the Public Service Act. I would suggest to him that that's not the only inconsistency between that act and other acts of this Legislature. There are a number of other features of the act that should be reviewed as well, so the member has identified one inconsistency. I would argue that there are probably others, and at some point, we should resolve those.

Mr. Cable: Well, stripped of all the legal arguments, the legal mumbo-jumbo, we know that this government, I believe, wants to make the Housing Corporation an arm's-length corporation. Is this government prepared to bring in legislation that will clarify the inconsistencies in the various governing acts?

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member will know the Public Accounts Committee has raised the matter of the relationship between the various Crown corporations and the government, and they've recognized, or acknowledged at least, that there has to be some determination as to how arm's length each corporation should be, depending upon its objectives.

The member and I had agreed, as members of the Public Accounts Committee in the last Legislature, that this should be a high priority for the Public Accounts Committee and I would suggest, perhaps before we even get into any legislative review on a corporation-by-corporation basis, that the new Public Accounts Committee put their minds to this particular project.

I know it's a high priority for him. He would have my support. The Public Accounts Committee could then make some recommendations on - in policy terms - how arm's length the corporation could be and then from that point, we could strike a legislative committee to resolve the obvious problems the member has identified.

Question re: Yukon Forest Commission

Ms. Duncan: It's the Liberal Party's day to provide the thrills. My question is the first question for the Yukon forest commissioner.

There's a widely held acceptance that there are a number of differing views about what should and should not be done with Yukon forests. The issues and solutions are not simple. Other than the general mission statement and terms of reference, we have not seen any real information about the Yukon Forest Commission. Is there a workplan or timetable, and is the commissioner prepared to table this information?

Mr. Fentie: I've stated earlier in this House that we have a target date, which coincides with the date for devolution, of April 1998, and we are going to work toward that. We will soon be tabling a workplan in this House and will continue to work through the process of partnership with the other orders of government, a process of consultation with the public and recommendation from the Yukon Forest Advisory Committee.

Ms. Duncan: I look forward to receipt of that workplan.

I'd like to ask about the commission's priorities. The commissioner, in a letter to me dated March 25, indicated, in response to concerns that I had raised with him, that he "...shared my concern regarding the proposal for allocation assignment in the short term, especially in its failure to adequately recognize sawmillers and other long-term operators."

Are these immediate concerns a priority with the commissioner, or are they simply being lumped in, in an overall forestry policy discussion?

Mr. Fentie: In the first place, Mr. Speaker, our obvious priority is the protection of Yukon forests. Also, it is our position that we work to establish a value-added industry in this territory and lessen our dependence on raw-log export. That process must involve the people of the territory: those who are here now and those who may be coming to this territory in relation to this industry.

Ms. Duncan: The commissioner has just stated that the first priority is the protection of Yukon forests. The endangered spaces report card states that, "Now protected areas need to be established in the southeast Yukon; for example, at Frances Lake and the Coal River watershed." Forest management plans being developed for the southeast must include a network of protected areas as a first step. Protected areas are under discussion in other avenues of the government. However, does the forestry commissioner agree with that statement?

Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the process must be inclusive and a forest management plan must include protected areas, and that's exactly how we approached this issue.

Question re: Yukon Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board, rate increase

Mr. Jenkins: My question today is for the minister responsible for the Yukon Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board. Mr. Deputy Speaker, on Monday in Question Period, the minister made light of the close to 60-percent increase of the assessment for Workers' Compensation premiums for business. The minister blamed these increases on the previous government, on the previous chair of the board, and, I'm sure, Mr. Deputy Speaker, he would have blamed his own mother if she was a Yukon Party member. Unfortunately for the minister, it is he who is responsible, and it is he who must act to shield Yukon businesses from the significant increase.

Will the minister reconsider his decision not to do anything until the fall of 1998? Will he act now?

Hon. Mr. Harding: I'm getting used to this Yukon Party math. The increases started at 20, then they go 40, then they go 60, and every day in Question Period they add a few more percent on it to try and make it sound like it's a new question. This is day 20, and they're drying up. It's getting quite embarrassing.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, they'll keep rehashing these questions, and I'll keep answering in a responsible manner. The issue of the assessment increases was first announced in January of 1996. There was extensive consultation done by the board, and the chair was appointed by the Yukon Party - that's a fact; I'm just explaining it to the member. There was extensive consultation done with the business community, and there was some tacit acknowledgement within the business community, as I understand it and, in talking to some businesses myself, I've heard the same thing, that they were the lowest rates in the country with regard to the Workers' Compensation Board, and that the overall balance and the position of the corporation had to be protected. Employers wanted that. They wanted to know that their fund was going to be protected.

Now, subsequent to that, they brought in increases. The request that the member has made of me - I don't believe it's appropriate for me to act on it in a manner that he presents. What I have said is that there are two employer representatives on the board who are responsible to their employer constituencies, and there is an independent board there that handles matters such as setting assessment rates, not the Government of the Yukon, and I would say to the member that I will pass on his concerns to the employer reps from the board and to the board at large so that they can deliberate on them in an appropriate fashion.

Mr. Jenkins: I'm sorry, but the minister cannot blame anyone else for the decisions he must make. Political tinkering is fast becoming the hallmark of this particular minister, and it was this minister who removed the previous chair of the Compensation Board and is now up to his eyebrows in the selection of a new chair. Can the minister advise the House who the new chair is going to be?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The member is reading a script and almost put me in a state of sleep.

Anyway, I would say to the member opposite that I have not selected, as of yet, a new chair. The reason for the removal of the previous chair was that the previous government did not conduct any consultation with employee organizations as it was mandated to do in the act. The act clearly requires consultation with labour and employers. I've checked that diligently and that is indeed quite the case. I conducted a thorough investigation of all of the communications back and forth that were undertaken with regard to that consultation.

Secondly, we are trying very, very diligently to try and build some consensus, as difficult as it is, between labour and employers about a choice for chair, and we're going to continue to try those best efforts.

Unfortunately, because of the difference of opinion, it has taken longer than I anticipated, but I think it is a pretty important principle that there be some neutrality in the chair, and the chair should be chosen regardless of what political party they represent, but rather whether there is some consent among the stakeholders - that is, the employers who pay the premiums and receive the insurance benefit, and the workers themselves who are injured on the job performing sacrifices in the workplace and who need the benefits that are so desperately required.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, what the minister said is simply not true. The minister, in Opposition, made much about helping injured workers in terms of supporting the hiring of a workers' advocate, but in view of the recent protest by injured workers, it is obvious that the minister has not kept his word. When is the workers' advocate position going to be filled?

Hon. Mr. Harding: It is a shame that the member has no respect for the law and the law of the Workers' Compensation Act. He should familiarize himself, as the critic. I encourage him to do it.

I would say to him that we have a very diligent agenda with regard to Workers' Compensation. We said in the campaign, that we would approach a neutral chair; we've done that. We said in the campaign that we'd hire a workers' advocate. I think the hiring is taking place; the hiring committee is meeting April 28th, April 29th, and I think those dates have been met.

So, we've been working along on that respect. We've also asked the board to get up and running on the occupational health and safety review.

We've also announced that we'll have a legislative review for the fall of 1998 of the Workers' Compensation Act. We have a process agenda, and what we've refused to do is to do what the Yukon Party minister did, which was to get his hands in every individual worker's case and write letters to the board asking him to pay invoices for $40 for the use of some truck. I mean you can go back through Hansard and find out all of the problems the previous Yukon Party minister got himself into, because he didn't approach the problem on a policy plane, but rather on an individual case approach. That is not appropriate and it is not legal with regard to interfering with the adjudication of claims.

Question re: Mackenzie River Basin

Ms. Duncan: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have some questions for the Minister of Renewable Resources about the Mackenzie River Basin management agreement. The agreement was initialled by the federal government, four provincial governments and the two territories in March 1993. The purpose of the agreement was to establish common principles for the cooperative management of the Mackenzie River Basin and to make provisions for water management agreements.

The Yukon government has not passed legislation or an order-in-council to put the agreement in place. Is this government working on living up to its commitments?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have asked the department to continue work on this and do a review and come back to me. Work is ongoing with it.

Ms. Duncan: I understand that there's some opposition to the agreement from groups within the Yukon. One of the groups is the Council of Yukon First Nations. Could the minister outline what those concerns are with this agreement or what forum will be used to address the concerns?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, I can bring those back to the member by legislative return if she would like. I, myself, don't know all the concerns that the CYFN had with this.

Ms. Duncan: When the minister comes back to me with the legislative return in that respect, could he also indicate what time frame he has in place for putting the agreement into effect and when legislation might be on the government's timetable?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Certainly, I can give her an update on that.

Question re: Northern Lights Centre

Mr. Phillips: My question is to the Minister of Tourism. Last weekend, I attended the annual tourism conference in Watson Lake. The Town of Watson Lake used this conference to showcase their brand-new Northern Lights Centre. I, as well as the minister, had an opportunity to view the new presentation. I think the minister would agree with me that the facility and the presentation were absolutely outstanding and will help make Watson Lake a real destination.

One of the concerns I heard, though, from Watson Lake residents is that they felt that the government Department of Tourism should promote this facility more than they are at present. This year, in the visitor guide, there's a strong focus on the new Beringia exhibit, as well as a special page on the Yukon Tourism Internet page. I would like to ask the minister if he'll give a commitment to Watson Lake that this new facility will get equal billing and promotion in their tourism marketing.

Hon. Mr. Keenan: Certainly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I can commit to meeting with the proponents of the Northern Lights Centre and work through with them their desire.

Mr. Phillips: Some of the concerns that were expressed to me by the people of Watson Lake were that there are several pages in the new visitor guide dedicated to Beringia as well as a special page on the Internet, and yet there is very small mention of the new Northern Lights Centre that's going to come onstream at about the same time.

So, I'd like to ask the minister if he would have his department work with the people of Watson Lake on developing a marketing plan for this particular centre.

Hon. Mr. Keenan: I will reiterate my answer to the member's question that I will have my folks go to Watson and we will be able to work with Watson Lake and come to a mutual and agreeable answer.

Mr. Phillips: The purpose of the centennial anniversaries program is to build significant attractions in all Yukon communities and to make our visitors stay a little longer and have a little more pleasant stay. The Yukon will become a destination on its own if we do this.

Will the minister talk to his department and urge his department to promote all of the CAP projects as they come onstream? There's one in Haines Junction now that's being built. Dawson City is ongoing. Pelly has one. Would the minister promote these particular CAP projects on an equal basis and give them equal treatment as he is to the Beringia Interpretive Centre?

Hon. Mr. Keenan: As we said in our platform A Better Way, we will be working to promote Yukon as a destination - not simply CAP projects but certainly inclusive of CAP projects and also inclusive of other projects. As we proceed to making the Yukon a stand-alone destination, we will be certainly reworking our marketing industries on a year-by-year basis.

I also, as the member opposite has said, was in Watson Lake last weekend. The town was very enthusiastic of their Northern Lights Centre, as I was very enthusiastic, and quite enjoyed the show and do believe that it is something that could be promoted and should be promoted.

Certainly, my staff will be undertaking this initiative and will be working with others to make sure that we do live up to our campaign promise. I thank the member opposite for his question.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

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

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

Motion agreed to

Deputy Speaker leaves the Chair

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Chair: I will now call the Committee of the Whole to order. Is it the wish of the members to take a brief recess?

Some Hon. Members: Agreed.

Chair: Fifteen minutes.

Recess

Bill No. 4 - First Appropriation Act, 1997-98 - continued

Department of Economic Development - continued

Chair: I will now call Committee to order. We are on general debate in Economic Development.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I just want to circulate some information to the critics. I'm getting some more information for the members opposite, such as the Cordilleran costs and stuff that was raised.

Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Chair, in general debate yesterday I was expressing my concern. I felt that this budget put forward by this government and the actions, or lack of actions, by this Minister of Economic Development are causing me some concern as to what's going to happen to the economy of the Yukon as we move on through this year. I know the minister is pinning a lot of his hopes on the recovery in the Yukon being based on the reopening of the Faro mine.

As I said yesterday in Committee debate, I don't think there is anyone in this House or, for that matter, most Yukoners, who would not like to see the mine back in production. I also believe the minister and the government, for lack of a better term, need a plan B to deal with what will be alarmingly high unemployment this next winter if the Faro mine does not go back into operation. That is a major concern of mine and many Yukoners that I've talked to.

As we watch - or as I watch, anyhow - on a fairly regular basis as to what zinc prices are doing and what lead prices are doing and precious metal prices, there isn't a lot of hope there that anything is going to start moving in the immediate future. In fact, I saw lead prices yesterday were, I believe, at 28 cents, and zinc was running in the 56 or 57 cent range, which is a fairly good price for zinc, Mr. Chair, but lead is low and headed in the wrong direction right now. My understanding is that Faro produces a lot of lead from the concentrates that they're producing there.

There is a major concern, and I have a major concern, as to what's going to happen to the economy, and I'd suggest to the minister that they should be working very diligently to try to come up with some options to try to stimulate the economy and create an environment for jobs in the Yukon, other than the long-term stuff that they're doing, for which I commend the minister. As I said yesterday, that's not anything that any other government, either Yukon Party or New Democratic government in the past, has not done. Those are ongoing roles of government and the Department of Economic Development, to be looking at the future and looking for ways to diversify the economy.

What we're going to need now is some action on the job front. We don't need to start doing polls right here in the Yukon. We only need to look at the poll that came out on Monday in relation to the federal election where jobs are the number-one priority of Canadians, and that includes the 15.5 or 15.7 percent of Yukoners that are unemployed.

There are a couple of other things I want to just clarify today, that came out of general debate yesterday. The minister seemed to be taking some comfort from the fact that retail sales were up in February. He called it an anomaly, and said that that happened during the Yukon Party government as well as theirs. I don't know whether the minister didn't have time to review the statistical report in detail or whether he just wasn't prepared to look at what the retail report really says, because there are some alarming things that are developing in this retail report that haven't happened in the past and, I believe, ought to be of concern to the minister.

It really shows where our economy is heading and I would just like to draw to the minister's attention that, in the February retail report, while he is right on a year-over-year basis, retail sales are up 9.3 percent for the month of February. But what has changed in this one dramatically from what has happened in the past, even over the past four years, is that, in January-February of 1996 and even in January-February of 1995, the month-over-month figure continued to rise, where in January-February 1997 the figure has gone down quite dramatically.

That causes me some concern. It shows - and it says on the inside page - that the figure for February is down some 12.4 percent from January. That's a dramatic drop in one month. In the previous years, the February figure was higher than the January figure. So that ought to be some concern to the minister, and I think it gives him some time to be able to deal with some of the grave concerns and anxieties that Yukoners have out there today and are looking to the government for leadership.

Also, I took the time this morning to look at the consumer price index, which again has some alarming trends in it, and one, which I spoke of yesterday, is that the inflation rate overall on a year-to-year basis is up dramatically and is up almost three percent; but, I believe what's more alarming than that, Mr. Chair, is that when we look at the energy component of the consumer price index, it's up 9.3 percent. Now, that's not even taking into consideration whatever increase will come out of the application that's going to the Utilities Board. It's going to add to that inflationary figure and, as a result, is going to have a dramatic impact on Yukoners - especially those Yukoners that are on fixed income and cannot do anything about it. Quite a few pensioners have raised concerns with me as to their ability to be able to meet their financial obligations if inflation starts to take off as it appears to have done in the Yukon, and let's hope that it's only a short-term burp, but I think the energy component in the consumer price index is sending a clear message to the minister that there are some problems in our economy in the Yukon that need to be dealt with and need some leadership to try to alleviate some of the burden on Yukon residents until such time as we do have an up-turn in the job market in the Yukon.

While I'm hopeful of the Faro mine going back into operation, I'm not nearly as confident as the minister is that the mine will be back in production in this calendar year and probably not in this fiscal year. I'm just not as confident as the minister is, and I would appreciate hearing the minister's thoughts.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, I think this is somewhat of an artificial debate. Surely, the member must know that when you take 600 or 700 jobs - maybe even 1,000, if you count all the indirect jobs - out of an economy, it is going to have an impact. It's going to have an impact on sales; it's going to have an impact on inflation. Look at the inflation trends in 1992-93. The member should look at those. He'll see that inflation was up around three percent.

I know he's doing his thing - no problem, but we have a plan B. I've gone through numerous initiatives in the here and now that we're undertaking in job creation. I also said that we can't spend our way out of it. I've talked to a number of pensioners myself who say, right off, "You can't spend your way out of this thing."

So, I don't know. I understand the concern of people about energy rates, but when this member was the Government Leader in 1993, when the Yukon Energy Corporation went for reimbursement of costs that ended up, ultimately, in the rate rider that came into effect in February, surely he must have know then that this could ultimately, when they went to court, lead to a rate increase, and he didn't direct the Energy Corporation not to proceed.

So, I can only say to pensioners that we have some ability to deal with the energy rates question. We already extended rate relief in December and we are going to take action once the Utilities Board deals with the present application. The member also knows that in 1993 there was a 58-percent application before the board.

I would caution him not to be overalarmed. I would say that he should start looking at some of the initiatives that we are doing i

n a more positive light. I cannot spend my way out of this, and you can't take 600 or 700 jobs out of a small economy and not have the stats go wonky.

I don't know what more I can say, and I am not going to read out or get into a huge debate about all of the other initiatives that we're undertaking in the here and now, because I did that yesterday.

I understand his concern. I had the same concern when I watched 58-percent applications go forward. I had the same concern when I watched the Faro mine go down in 1992-93 and watched the GDP drop 18 to 20 percent.

I watched all the impacts of the shutdown. It is almost déjà vu.

The one good thing about this time is that I think our government has a good plan for dealing with it. Secondly, I think that the company situation, with regard to the mining operation, is a lot better. Just since they shut down, the price of zinc has gone from 46 to roughly 56 or 57. They have no debt. They have extensive tax pools that make it an incentive to invest. They have huge multinational corporations behind them. There is a lot going for this company and a lot going for this ore body.

I am not banking all my hopes on the Faro mine, by any means, but the member has to have some realism when it comes to these numbers.

Mr. Ostashek: I think the minister has to take these numbers a lot more seriously than he is. He can sit there and spout the political rhetoric, but that's not going to help put Yukoners to work. There are some very glaring differences in what's happening with our retail trade figures now and what happened even back in 1992. If you go back and look at the report on the back page, you'll see that retail sales went up every year, even with the Faro mine shutdown. That doesn't seem to be happening now.

I know there are some differences. Interest rates are a lot lower now than they were in 1992. There are a lot of things that should make it easier to get out of this time, but the dramatic drop in February from January should send a clear message to the minister. For the minister to say that the government ought not to have proceeded with a court case, let me just say to the minister opposite, he was the minister when the decision came down. It was his decision to go ahead and collect the money. He didn't have to make that decision either. He can't blame the last administration.

He got elected because people didn't like what the Yukon Party was doing. They were going to do things differently. For him to go back and just blame the Yukon Party for everything isn't going to wash with the Yukon public.

The other problem the minister is talking about is blaming the 58-percent increase in power rates under the Yukon Party, when he knows we limited that to 15 percent. That's something this administration hasn't done. They brought in additional rate relief that, in fact, cost ratepayers money. I wouldn't be surprised if, at the end of this year, their contribution to rate relief is going to be less than it was last year.

The other point I want to make is that even though they got rate relief in, the glaring difference between their administration and our administration is that, under our administration, we didn't allow consumers' electrical bills to rise. They have allowed them to go up 10 percent, along with rate relief, with the two riders that have come into effect. We didn't allow that; we absorbed the extra cost under the rate relief. There is a glaring difference that the minister has to deal with.

I'm just pointing those things out to the minister. There are some very glaring differences in what the figures are telling him, and these figures ought to be of concern to him and his department as to how they deal with the situation that we're faced with in the Yukon today, or we're going to be in a very serious situation a year from now if no action is taken by this government.

Mr. Chair, we're not asking the government to go into debt to get jobs for Yukoners. We said time and time again in this budget debate that it's a matter of spending priority. We pointed out where we believe the priorities are wrong, that there could be more jobs created with different priorities. That's our role - to point those things out to government.

What the government does with it is certainly entirely up to them, and we'll be back a year from now to debate another budget and see how successful this administration has been in creating jobs.

Mr. McRobb: I'd like to add a couple of comments on the record, if I may. The Leader of the Official Opposition incorrectly stated that his government reduced rates from the 58-percent application down to eight percent in 1993. I would like to put on the record that it was the Yukon Utilities Board that reduced the 58-percent application to about the 30-percent figure. The rate relief reduced that further, about 15 percent.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. McRobb: After the Yukon Utilities Board decision, and that's exactly the position we're taking. We don't want to be seen to be interfering with the independence of the utilities regulator, despite the tormenting from the Official Opposition with one press release after another. Now we see a petition. I certainly don't see how it could possibly be justified. It's electioneering at its worst, and the Opposition knows they don't have the ratepayers' interests at heart. It's the headlines they're after, Mr. Chair. That's all.

I was through the process in the last four years. I saw what happened to the regulatory process under the previous administration, how they streamlined the process to discourage interventions, to discourage information from being brought to light, how they streamlined the profits for the power companies, how rates did not reduce when the Faro mine restarted, and now this opportunism, Mr. Chair, these press releases, as they come across my desk these days. I just laugh at them, because that's exactly what they are: laughable. There's no substance to them whatsoever.

As the minister of the Yukon Energy Corporation has stated, we have a plan to mitigate the increase. Our government is responding to the increase. We are aware of the concern expressed by seniors and low-income people especially, and we will be mitigating and announcing that, once the Yukon Utilities Board makes its decision.

Thank you.

Mr. Ostashek: Well, we've heard a lot of utter nonsense there from the Member for Kluane, and that's just his view of what transpired. There are many, many other people who think that actions taken by the Yukon government of the day to streamline the process saved the ratepayers a substantial amount of money, and I know he might be smarting a little bit because he feels his soap box was taken away from him, but many Yukoners think it was the right move. So, we'll see what happens with them.

The fact is, Mr. Chair - and this is for the minister, not for the Member for Kluane - that we announced prior to the Yukon Utilities Board decision that we would be moving in to stabilize the rates; we announced that. This government has said they are going to do something, but they haven't got the credibility with the public because they did something at the end of the year to raise the rate relief to 1,500 kilowatts and yet allowed the rates to go up 10 percent. So, they have a credibility problem with the public. We'll see whether our petition is frivolous when it comes to the Yukon public.

Mr. McRobb: I have just a couple more comments to add to that response. I would like to remind the Leader of the Official Opposition exactly what happened on the 5.5-percent increase that Yukon consumers saw on their bills in March that's directly related to the appeal rider. When the Yukon electrical utilities took the Yukon Utilities Board to court, it went to the Supreme Court of the Yukon. The case was heard in Vancouver, B.C. and, Mr. Chair, that limited the involvement of Yukoners to be heard in that appeal.

The utilities were there in full force, Mr. Chair, along with their battalion of lawyers. They beat out the Yukon Utilities Board. They got the increase they wanted, sanctioned by government, but the question really is on the timing of the increase by the Yukon Utilities Board. The appeal decision was known in April 1996. It did not increase rates until 1997. Why did it take eight or nine months for that increase to go through?

Was it related to the election of September 30th, Mr. Chair? You bet it was. So, when I hear the Leader of the Official Opposition over there saying that rates did not increase under his government - balderdash. When I see him stand up and fight for the independence of Yukon Utilities Board - balderdash.

There's another issue I want to remind him of, and that's the wasted water at Aishihik Lake - two feet of water wasted in 1994 and 1995. I'm very familiar with that issue and, I believe, so is he. That water was wasted because the Yukon government didn't believe the Faro mine would reopen in the summer of 1994. In fact, when it did reopen, I believe it was November 10th, 1994, the previous week his deputy ministers held a retreat for capital planning for the following year's budget. The deputy ministers, along with the government, decided the mine would not reopen. They did not plan for it in the next year's budget. The next week, the mine reopened.

What did we see after that, besides two feet less water in Aishihik Lake that counted for driving rates higher? We saw the Yukon Party taking credit for reopening the mine. We saw the Government Leader holding up charts on how the economy is picking up, how the Yukon Party stands for mining.

The evidence speaks for itself. I believe this government, under the direction of the minister responsible for the Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Development Corporation, is doing whatever is possible for the ratepayers of the territory regardless of what we were left by the previous administration. There is a big, big hangover. The appeal rider decision, the dependency on diesel and the fuel increase, the three-percent rider, the wasted water from Aishihik Lake, the drained condition of Aishihik Lake, no alternative means of power generation other than diesel - it was a complete disaster and completely contrary to what was promised in the Yukon Party's four-year plan back in 1992.

Thank you.

Mr. Cable: I have some questions on the documents that were provided to us. I had asked for the update of the energy action plan, and we have filed today the energy workplan. Are we saying that that is one and the same, or is the energy action plan, as updated, about to be given to the House?

Hon. Mr. Harding: They are one and the same.

Mr. Cable: Well, these are two very different documents. I guess I misunderstood what was said at the briefing.

The energy action plan outlines a number of what appears to be actions and whatnot, not necessarily policy directions, but the energy workplan, I assume, is the workplan approved for the Energy Commission. Are we on the right wavelength here, or is there something I'm not appreciating?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Now, what this does, Mr. Chair, is delineate precisely who is responsible for what with regard to energy policy development with regard to energy action in the government. The member will note that there are certain classifications along the right-hand column, and it tells the member who is responsible for what.

Mr. Cable: Okay, I can appreciate that that is in fact the workplan. It's not really an update of the energy action plan at all then. Am I correct?

Hon. Mr. Harding: It was not my first direction to tell the department to update that plan in that specific way. That was the Yukon Party's way of doing things. That was not our way of doing things. This is the energy workplan. It shows an overall view of how government departments liaise when it comes to energy issues. It also shows who has responsibility for certain tasks.

Mr. Cable: All right then. What is the status of this energy action plan, 1995-98, that was prepared and made public by the previous administration? Is that the plan to which the government is working, or has it been taken off the table?

Hon. Mr. Harding: We haven't concentrated on that plan. We've concentrated on the deliverables with regard to energy policy. I know that some of the staff in Economic Development have provided some assistance to the commission as well in terms of energy action plans or workplans.

Mr. Cable: Well, there are a number of actions, though, in this energy action plan; some have been directed to coal, for example, on which I know there was a difference of use between the present and previous administration.

Are we saying that this energy action plan, 1995-98, put out by the previous administration, is no longer the guiding document in the energy area for this present administration?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Absolutely. There is a difference on coal. The Yukon Party had a big coal philosophy. They didn't care whether it made economic or environmental sense.

Our position on coal is that we would only get involved in it if it made economic and environmental sense. So there is a difference; the member is dead on.

Mr. Cable: Well, let's strip away all the verbiage. I took that to be a "yes", that this document that I've been flashing around here, entitled "Energy Action Plan, 1995-98", is no longer the governing document in the energy area. Can we get a yes or no on that?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The energy action plan is not the overall guiding document; however, there are some aspects of that energy plan that I, as the critic, agreed with. The Energy Commission is also looking at the document and we'll be able to make some more definitive statements, but all of this, in terms of our energy policy, has got to be subjected, I think, to a more in-depth stakeholder review. We thought one of the failings of the department's action plan was a lack of consultation in energy direction.

Mr. Cable: Well, that may, in fact, be the case, and I don't pass any judgment on that, but if somebody walks into the minister's office and says, "Mr. Minister, this energy action plan of 1995-98, is it the guiding document, the policy document for your department?" And he will say, "Well, some of it is and some of it isn't, and I'm not going to tell you what part of it is."

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Cable: Oh, maybe the minister could clarify that then.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, if someone were to do that, I would say, "No, that was the Yukon Party's guiding philosophy. They were prisoners of the coal philosophy, whatever that was. We tried for hours in debate to try and figure it out. I guess - it was like some God they were worshipping. They didn't care how much it cost or anything else."

The former Government Leader saw some mountain sheep by a coal project in Alberta and thought that was good enough justification to have it here.

So, I would say to the member opposite that there are some aspects of the plan - it wasn't my first order of business to sit down my officials and say, "Okay, let's review the energy action plan that the Yukon Party put out." That wasn't my first order of business. That wasn't the priority that I gave the department. I said let's take some action on the economy.

So, what I would say to the member opposite is that the Energy Commission is looking at aspects of that workplan that made sense and I'm sure will be sending aspects of that plan out for stakeholder review.

Mr. Cable: What I'll tell people who come into my office is that we're not quite certain what parts of this apply, but some of it might and some of it might not, maybe coal and maybe not coal, maybe renewable energy and maybe not.

One of the things I asked for yesterday was a list of the policy initiatives, and I got this document noted, "Speaking notes on the budget". Is this what I'm getting in lieu of the list of policy initiatives?

Hon. Mr. Harding: It's a narrative of most of the things the department is doing, including priorities of the government and policy directives.

Mr. Cable: Okay. So, this document then, entitled, "1997-98 Workplan: Strategic Management, Department of Economic Development", is a document providing a response to my request for a list of policy initiatives and the times for completion?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Yes, that is correct, and I would also point out to the member opposite, in response to his last question, that it took the Yukon Party four years to come up with that little booklet on an energy action plan. I would say to him that we have to have a little bit of time - we've only been in six months - to analyze what they were doing and to set a clear course for how we want to proceed in terms of consultation with the public on energy issues. The member knows full well that they are extremely complicated.

Mr. Cable: You got that right.

The minister and I were enjoying the company of an Australian by the name of Jacko Jackson at the Yukon Chamber of Mines meeting back in November. I believe that the minister, either before or after Jacko Jackson's speech - it was some time after Mr. Jackson's speech.and in that speech - this is dated November 26, 1996 - the minister was praising the last NDP government, the NDP government that moved out of office in 1992. He had to say, "As memory serves me, the last NDP government had a pretty good relationship with the mining industry," and there are a number of bullet points. This is on page 7 of his speech, if he kept it. He says, "The Ketza mine, the Sa Dena Hes mine, the Mt. Skukum mine and the Faro mine all benefited from our help." All of these mines, of course, are down now, which raises some questions about just what sort of help should be given to these mines.

I know that, under the Yukon industrial support program, there was some money given to Loki. Has the Loki contract been analyzed to see if all the covenants have been complied with?

Hon. Mr. Harding: There was a fair amount of money given to Loki and it's still being paid out. There are still ongoing commitments for over $400,000 in grants, I think, for this budget year and the next two. The department does some ongoing analysis of how well they are living up to their side of the industrial support policy. It's quite subjective at times, and I would like to see if we can find a better way or a more diligent way of quantifying how well they're living up to the agreements.

The anecdotal evidence is something that you rely on and it is tough to ascertain. I was up there for the pouring of the first gold bar, and everybody seemed happy. That's a good occasion, and I don't know if it's a clear indication of everything that's happening with the company. I know, myself, I feel that the company is a good corporate citizen. I have engaged in a lot of conversations with them. I think that their relationship with the Dawson First Nation, although it's had some rough spots, I think they're pretty progressive in their approach. I think they've really tried hard to use Yukon business as much as possible.

Anecdotally, I think they're living up to it, but I wish I could tell the member that there's a more rigid system in place for analyzing whether that commitment was indeed lived up to.

Mr. Cable: Well, there are a number of commitments in the agreement, and I think it'd be useful to go over those in detail when we get to that line item in the budget, so I would alert the minister to the fact that there'll be some questions asked on it. There's particularly a covenant relating to jobs, as I recollect.

Now, back to the minister's speech on November 26th, 1996. He was beating the podium, saying, "Now we're back and we're prepared to work with you to build a strong future for the mining industry.

The number of new and proposed mining projects is unprecedented."

Could he tell us about these new and proposed mining projects? Does he have a list of them stuck in his back pocket?

Hon. Mr. Harding: What I'll do is I'll ask the Energy Commissioner. He can dig out the Yukon Party caucus update. That was that propaganda document from the pre-election campaign, where they had nine mines ready to open up in the next year.

Mr. Chair, I wouldn't make that claim. I never did. I think that there are some exciting developments.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Harding:

I don't know what planet the Leader of the Official Opposition lives on some times, but clearly reality is not part of his daily life.

Mr. Chair, with regard to the Skukum project, there's an extensive underground exploration program going on there right now. So, although the mine is not operating, there's still a lot of work that could conceivably be done there.

With regard to the Ketza mine, which is also down - which was just a purchase by BYG of Ketza. They have a plan - I'm not commenting on the feasibility of it, other than what they have told me - to ship ore from Ketza to their Mount Nansen project for milling. So, some of these properties are down, but they're not done. They're still being worked on and there's substantive money being spent on them.

The Minto exploration property is going for their Water Board hearing on May the 14th. There's real potential. They have a major backer of Asarco, who's looking at developing that property. I just met with United Keno Hill Mines. They are also going before the Water Board. They have a lot of problems with regard to their property to work out before that's going to be operable. One of the biggest problems is, of course, the price of silver right now.

There are a bunch of other properties like Western Copper that are going through the permitting stage. Western Copper has had a real tough time because what they're doing is talking about heap-leaching copper, which is a process that's not really that familiar in the north, so they've been having a rough time with the federal Liberal government in getting permitted. That's been a problem, so we've been working through some of those touchy areas with them and with DIAND - and I'm just kidding, by the way, with the member; they're not doing a bad job over there.

The thing is that that is a property that, if it can get through the permitting process without unnecessary hurdles, could create some substantive jobs and perhaps even some value-added copper production in the territory. They're looking at producing sheets of copper here, locally.

The other interesting property that's been the subject of a lot of discussions is the Dublin Gulch property. That's another heap-leach gold, similar to Viceroy. They're getting ready to go before the board. They're working through the permitting process. That's the First Dynasty project. They're looking at getting that ready to roll and then they may sell it because First Dynasty's actually concentrating more on South America and some other areas.

New Millennium that operates or has this property seems very buoyed by the fact that Viceroy has done a fairly successfully job with the heap-leach gold, so that's another property that has some good potential.

There are a number of them. I think the first mine you're going to see is the Minto Exploration's property. I think that Atna Resources has been billing their drilling work and exploration as the Yukon's next mine, and I've been challenging their CEO to beat Minto to the punch, but I think that they are more of an exploration company. However, they have some arrangements with Westmin, who has operating companies such as Gibraltar Mines, so I'm hopeful that they'll really think hard about getting those properties into production.

There's also some extensive work being done at Fire Lake. I don't think there ever were nine mines ready to open next year, as was billed by the Yukon Party, but there's some good potential out there.

Kudz Ze Kayah is also seen as a very big discovery at the prospectors and developers convention. The federal minister, Anne McLellan, identified it as one of the most exciting and important finds in the entire of western Canada, at Wolverine Lake.

So there's some enthusiasm, but I'm not prepared to do what the Yukon Party did and tell everybody it's just around the corner. We're just going to have to keep working through the problems.

Mr. Cable: Okay, on this Yukon short-term economic outlook, were any of those mining proposals factored into the short-term outlook in the sense of job creation or GDP?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The operating mines were. That's the Mount Nansen BYG operation and the Viceroy, but the report was done on a worst case scenario basis. There was some reference in the forward-looking part of the document to the successful conclusion of mines like Minto getting through the permitting process, spending development money and getting into production of having a positive benefit later. But, no, in the actual numbers it's a worst case scenario.

Mr. Ostashek: It was sort of interesting listening to the Minister of Economic Development sparring with the Leader of the Liberal Party. For a while I thought that the minister could qualify to be a Liberal because he was coming down on either side of the argument. Whichever one fit his argument the best, that's the side he'd come down on. He is very proficient at that. He was very against the coal project in Opposition; now, they support a coal project.

Mr. Chair, I've got some questions for the minister on short-term economic development that he's been trying to distance himself from. I'm going to say to the minister that he's responsible for the Department of Economic Development and he tabled this so-called short-term economic outlook in the Legislature. I just want to ask the minister if he reviewed this document before he took it to Cabinet?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Yes, I did a cursory review of the document; basically I read it and took it to caucus and Cabinet and informed them that this would be coming out and they had an opportunity to read it prior to it coming out and then I released it.

Mr. Ostashek: I'm going to say to the minister - just for the record, and I'm not going to go on forever on this, but I'm going to put it on the record - that had the Yukon Party tabled a document of this nature that is so lacking in information, so many key indicators missing, we would have been in debate in this House for several weeks when that member was in Opposition.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Ostashek:

No, it's not wrong, Mr. Chair, it's right. I want to just point out, to the member, some of the statements in this document - and I hope that they never table another one as bad as this. Not because of what direction it's giving, but because of misinformation and lack of information. I just want to go over a few of the glaring things here and ask the minister how he could have let it go through without questioning the department.

If you go to page 4 of the document, in the second paragraph, where it talks about oil and gas, there's a statement in here that says, "In anticipation of the transfer of authority from Canada to Yukon and the completion of the Yukon land claims, the industry may undertake more preliminary exploration activity in 1997, particularly in the southeast Yukon." Well, give me a break, Mr. Chair. I don't believe there's anybody in the Yukon that believes that the oil and gas transfer was going to take place in time for any economic benefit in 1997. Certainly land claims aren't going to be finalized in 1997. I ask the minister if he reviewed this, which he should have, and how could he let those things go through?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, Mr. Chair, I'm not surprised the member can't believe any activity would take place in oil and gas, because he couldn't get any agreement on devolution from the federal government. We, on the other hand, have a cooperative approach with Yukon First Nations, and I want to tell the member that we're very excited about the potential for oil and gas.

I also want to say that there is a difference. If it was a document from a public servant who is not a professional economist, I would have provided more direction. I probably would have asked for changes. My understanding of what the short-term economic outlook is is that a department hires an economist. The economist is a professional. The economist puts forward a document that is an independent review of the economy. With regard to the omissions that the member talked about, I can counter that by saying that the Yukon Party didn't even table a short-term economic outlook in 1995, I believe. So, that was the ultimate omission.

I don't understand the member's criticism on this. I am not an economist. The whole point of a short-term economic outlook is to have an independent, economically - rather than politically - driven review. Mr. Chair, I did not edit the document, and I respected the professional opinion of the economist. I will pass on to the deputy minister the member's objection to the work of the economist, and the deputy minister, which is responsible for personnel matters, can deal with those questions.

Mr. Ostashek: As I said, the member could be a Liberal, because that isn't the position he took on the short-term economic outlook when he was in Opposition, and let me say to the minister when he says we didn't put one out, the NDP didn't put one out in 1992 either. So, let's put that on the record.

The reality is that this is a document that the business sector looks at for what's going to happen in the Yukon for next year. Otherwise, what are we putting it out for at all?

In my opinion, this is a very shabby document - incomplete and a lot of misstatements in it. If we're going to take the time and the energy to put out a document, I think it ought to be of some benefit to people who are going to be interested in it. I would be ashamed to distribute this document if I were the minister. There are so many statements in here - go to Tourism. It says in the script that the department passes onto the economist that it's going to see a growth of at least 1.5 percent. When we get to the statistics in the back, it says 1.5 to four percent. I mean, come on. Let's get real here. If we're going to put out a document, let's put out something that is based on some fact and some projections, which I know are subjective, but at least a little more realistic, and when we get to the part of the document that says "permitted building construction", well, there's no reason that that ought to be left blank. It's not a very hard figure to get a hold of, and certainly, it's a subjective figure, but as the minister says, that's what the document is. But, if we're going to have a document that's going to be any use to anybody and is a cost to taxpayers, then it ought to be complete based on the best information that's available at the time.

Don't make statements such as that there's going to be some economic benefit to exploration in 1997 because they're moving ahead with devolution, when the minister knows that the federal government is not prepared to issue any land releases in oil and gas, and the minister told them that.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, we're working very hard on the oil and gas issue. I think we've advanced it further in a few months than the member opposite did in four years.

I've already spoken to a lot of people in the oil industry who are very excited about the Yukon and the potential for oil and gas. We have agreement with other Yukoners and Yukon First governments to proceed with the passage of the bill. Sure, it's delayed by the election, but it's not going to be delayed forever.

The biggest factor in the ultimate delay, in the last four years, was the fact that the member had no agreement with First Nations. Every time that they tried to ignore that, the First Nations would lobby the federal minister and the federal minister would back off - period.

So, with regard to the short-term economic forecast, I'll just say to the member that they didn't table anything in 1995, and because the private sector does rely somewhat, in some cases, on this economic forecast, the economist did not want to provide uninformed estimates. I think in the long term your credibility is at stake if you try to manipulate the political information to make it look like a Yukon Party caucus update. I'm sorry, but there were not nine mines ready to operate this year, and I do not think the economists should have put that in the economic outlook.

Mr. Ostashek: There's one thing that's on the line here, and that's the credibility of this Minister of Economic Development.

The economy of the Yukon is in the poorest shape of any Minister of Economic Development in the history of the Yukon, and this minister has got his work cut out for him. He ought to move ahead very quickly and take his job a little more seriously than he has been in the past.

The minister is responsible for this document, whether he wants to be or not. He is the minister of that department. If we're going to spend taxpayers' money to put a document out, it ought to be of some use to somebody.

We will review this document one year from now, along with a new one that comes out. I hope that the minister takes something away from this debate and passes on some direction so that we have a document that is going to be a little more factual and a little more accurate than what we have in front of us today and what Yukoners have. This is a joke.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I will let the economist, through the deputy minister, know what the member's concerns are. Perhaps he can incorporate some more information. If he has to qualify it more, I suppose that could take place. If the member wants the information in that document, we could take a look at it.

I don't want to fight with the member. I could talk about 1992-93 and the stats from 1992-93 when the Faro mine shut down and the former Member for Watson Lake's record as a minister. I will put my abilities and actions up against that minister's any time in the handling of a difficult situation such as this.

I am working very hard. I am looking ahead, though. I want to move ahead with Yukoners. We have a number of initiatives - I have read them into the record and talked about them ad nauseum here - that I think are going to help the Yukon in the long term. We have a fundamental difference of opinion and, Mr. Chair, I'll just leave it at that.

Mr. Ostashek: The minister is right, we do have a fundamental difference of opinion, but I just encourage the minister to reflect on the debate in this Legislature and to deal with the very serious issues that are facing Yukoners.

I do not have anything more in general debate. I am prepared to go line by line.

Ms. Duncan: I wonder if I could just ask the minister for a point of clarification in terms of policy discussions, in particular the workplan of the strategic management section that was tabled today or provided to the members.

On pages 2 and 3, there are a whole host of areas where the work of the Department of Economic Development cross-references with the Department of Renewable Resources. I can understand that that comes together in some instances under some areas, such as the commissioner for Yukon forests. However, are there other points where this work might come together at the officials' level?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Tons, actually, and the Minister of Renewable Resources and I have made it a priority for the Economic Development and Renewable Resources deputy ministers and departments to try and work interdepartmentally on a lot of these issues of priority.

We have development assessment process Cabinet subcommittee meetings where both attend, as well as the deputy minister for ECO. We do the same on energy, forestry and tourism. We believe that the endangered spaces agenda has some good economic potential and we want to make sure that that is realized, because there will be other sides to it. There will be people in the mining industry that would disagree with that. We want to at least show people that there is a long-term benefit, economically, that can be attached to endangered spaces.

I just think it's fundamentally important that Economic Development and Renewable Resources are tied together in terms of dealing with tough issues. Very often, there are two very different perspectives that come out of the two departments. In order to have that balanced view, you must ensure, when you're working on tough issues like energy or development assessment, that those debates take place not just at the political level, but also within the bureaucracy.

Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, could I ask the minister to clarify how it works in terms of the public? How does the public see these two departments, in particular - Economic Development and Renewable Resources - and I couldn't agree with him more that it's very important that they work together. How does it work when Jane Doe, who wants to start a mine, goes to deal with the government? How does she know those two departments are speaking to each other?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The department has really been trying, when meeting with stakeholder groups and the public, to work together. I'll give an example to the member on the Tombstone Park issue. There were representatives from the bureaucracy, from both departments, meeting with the chamber, mining facilitator and parks people from Renewable Resources. So, in that way, they would be liaising with the public. We've also done that in meeting with the conservation groups. We've tried to show the public that we are prepared to deal with both sides of the equation, economically and environmentally.

Usually, if someone would come into the department with a question, we would make sure that they were channeled through to the right people, whether it was a question that involved Renewable or whether it was a question of Economic Development. If it was one that crossed over both departments, we've really tried to work hard on interdepartmental exchanges and staff between the two departments. We've had people from Economic Development move over, on secondment, to Renewable Resources when there are issues that really excite them and they feel they can contribute something to them.

Ms. Duncan: Does the interdepartmental exchange extend, or is there some training or something that extends to the front-line staff, as opposed to the managerial policy level?

Hon. Mr. Harding: These would be the front-line people I'm referring to. We had a person who was quite knowledgeable in Economic Development on forestry issues, who transferred over to deal with protected spaces agenda and liaise with the public. So it's not just at the higher levels. It's also at the other levels of the public service.

Mr. Phillips: Following along the same line of questions that the Member for Porter Creek South talked about - the officials overlapping in departments and working within departments - I have a suggestion for the minister, which I think would be a useful one. When the minister was in Opposition, he was very critical at times of the tourism industry and very critical of the people involved in the industry, and made light quite a few times of the industry and the direction it was going. Even when it recommended certain things, the minister, when he was in Opposition, was critical of those things, and even here, just the other day, when we sent him over some resolutions from the Tourism Industry Association, the minister made light of them.

What I'd like to ask the minister to do is - I think it would be useful - since he is the Minister of Economic Development, and tourism is the second-largest industry in the territory, maybe the minister could give us a commitment that he would meet with the marketing council, meet with the TIA board, meet with the First Nations Tourism Association and take part in a briefing by the Department of Tourism marketing branch so he has an overview of the importance of tourism to the territory and the direction we're going and why we're going in those directions.

I know that the minister, in his travels to the prospectors' meeting and the other mining meetings he's going to, has discovered that it's important to be out there and be seen and be showing the flag and promoting the Yukon. But it might help if the minister went to these various groups and met with them and found out where the industry is really at, because it was obvious by his comments in Opposition that he didn't know that. He should just get more familiar with the Tourism department so that when he does go on his travels he can actually speak from a background of knowledge in the industry and from where the industry is coming from.

So, could the minister give me a commitment that he takes his job very seriously and that he will take time out of his busy schedule to meet with these organizations? I know he meets with the Chamber of Commerce, but he has tourism programs, I believe - the CAP programs and centennial events program are all in the minister's budget.

What I'd like from the minister is just a commitment that he'll take all of his responsibilities as the minister responsible for economic cevelopment very seriously, he'll become more informed about tourism and what tourism is and what it's all about, and that he will attend some meetings with the Tourism department and with the non-government agencies that give advice to government from time to time.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, I'll take the member's condescending suggestion to heart and I'll see what I can do.

I have met several times with representatives of the tourism industry, since I've been minister, on a whole slew of issues. We have somebody actually from Tourism, from the marketing branch, working in Economic Development. We've talked to Tourism about a number of issues, including the trade investment diversification strategy. The member is wrong about my views on tourism. I won't get into it; there's lots I could say.

The member used to like - when I criticized him - to say I was criticizing the tourism industry and that was a good tactic, I guess, when you're in government, but I stand by any comments I made.

I worked very hard on the Campbell region tourism initiatives as an Opposition MLA. My constituents know that, and so do the people of Ross River who are involved, as well. So, I think it's a stretch to say I was against tourism - a real stretch.

Mr. Phillips: I didn't say the minister was against tourism, I said the minister didn't understand tourism and what tourism is all about.

I have to tell the minister, with all honesty, that there's a lot of people in the industry that I've talked in the last several years with respect to the tourism industry who were quite bewildered by the comments made by that member when he was in Opposition. - right from the issue of pairing, when we wanted to do some tourism marketing initiatives. When he had to pair, he made some snide comments about pairing and dismissed it as useless.

The industry is nervous about this minister who now has some power and control over where we go in the future. So, all I'm asking the minister to do is to take some time, go to the meetings with these various groups, sit down with them, exchange his views and, if nothing else, listen to their views, and the minister will learn something. I think that would be useful.

I don't mean it in a condescending way.

The minister has spoken out loud and clear, on the record, about the tourism industry and how he feels about it, and the tourism industry itself is very nervous about this minister, so I just want him to take some time out of his busy schedule and meet with them. He can cancel one of his next Mexican holidays if he wants, and take that week to meet with them.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Mr. Chair, I know how serious and sincere the member is with his non-condescending suggestions now. The member, the other day, did say in Question Period that I was against tourism. That is a favourite tactic. You know, if you criticize the member, you say, "you're against tourism." Or if you criticize what they're doing on the economy, they say, "You're against the economy."

Mr. Chair, that's not been the case. I've had a number of discussions with representatives of the tourism industry, from wilderness tourism to the director of the TIA organization. Actually, we jointly attended the opening of the Canada/Yukon Business Service Centre not too long ago.

So, if the Tourism Industry Association would like to meet with me - if they're that nervous - I would expect that they would contact me and I would be happy to meet with them on a more formal basis, if they want. I'm going to the business after hours here in a little while and

I'll be happy to talk with people there and if they want to have a more formal discussion, then I'd be more than pleased.

I am very supportive of tourism; I always have been. I wasn't supportive of all the initiatives of the minister though. I don't agree with everything the minister did. I'm sorry about that, but, Mr. Chair, I would say to him that that's just a fact of life and he's going to have to get over it.

Mr. Phillips: Mr. Chair, I am absolutely shocked at the approach that this Minister of Economic Development is taking - how arrogant. What he said here a few moments ago is: if they want to meet with me, they can call me.

Mr. Chair, he's the minister responsible for Economic Development. The second largest industry in the Yukon is tourism. That minister should be taking the initiative. He shouldn't have to wait for an invitation. It's that minister's job to contact the marketing council, to contact the First Nations, to contact TIA and sit down and meet with them and not sit up there in his big gold office in the corner of the government building and say, "If they want to meet with me, they can come and meet with me; they can ask to meet with me; we'll put them on the schedule." They should be on the minister's schedule right from the beginning.

Talk about condescending. Mr. Chair, this minister should be making overtures to the industry, sitting down with the Department of Tourism officials in marketing and finding out what tourism is all about. He should get out of his first-class seat and make an effort.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I'm going to try and remain calm in response to the member opposite. I know he likes to get on his soapbox when he talks about a lot of issues. The member who spent thousands of dollars touring first class around Europe and did all kinds of things now seems to be quite high up on his high horse.

I would say to him that I have met with and talked with many people involved in tourism since I became the minister. The member opposite has asked me for a formal meeting. He's asked me to do that. I would hope that, given the discussions and openness that I have expressed to people in the tourism industry since I've been elected, they would feel free to meet with me at any time. I don't know what analogy or what the member has tried to draw from what I've said. I would say to him, though, that I have hardly sat in my office since I got elected. I've had hundreds of meetings with local businesses, including tourism businesses, on an ongoing basis. I've been out promoting the Yukon and I've been promoting wilderness tourism. I met with the Asia-Pacific Foundation and talked with them extensively about it.

The member is quite out to lunch. I know he's a big defender of his little enterprises and whatnot, but I don't agree with everything he did, so that's too bad.

Mr. Phillips: I would like to get an answer out of the minister. Will the minister ask for a meeting with the First Nations Tourism Association to find out what they're doing and with the Tourism Industry Association to find out what they're doing? Will he go to the next marketing council meeting to listen to what we're doing in marketing in tourism? As well, I would like a commitment from the minister to sit down with tourism officials in the Department of Tourism and get a briefing on our overall marketing plan. Will he do that?

Hon. Mr. Harding: If there are people in the tourism industry who want to meet, I would be more than happy. I will extend an offer to meet with them in the future.

The member is going to have to get used to the fact that he is no longer the Tourism minister. He's no longer in government. He was fired out of office a few months ago. Get used to it.

Mr. Phillips: I'm quite used to it. The problem we have here, with this minister, is that he doesn't know what his job is. He doesn't know who he's supposed to represent as the Minister of Economic Development. It isn't just the mining community. There are other aspects of economic development that are very important. I haven't seen one overture from this minister with respect to tourism.

Why didn't he go to the TIA convention this weekend? Is he not interested? Why didn't he go to the marketing council meeting a couple of weeks ago? Was he not interested? Why didn't he go to the TIA meeting a couple of weeks ago? Was he not interested? Mr. Chair, that is economic development. Those are agencies that deal a lot with economic development.

All I'm asking the minister to do is his job. I am not asking him to do anything more than just his job. He hasn't done a very good one up to this date.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, Mr. Chair, that's the member opposite's opinion. He's very bitter and very vindictive about the fact he's no longer the Tourism minister. You know, we end up talking about the litter in the yard over by the Tourism VRC because of the scope or the scale of his vision when it comes to tourism in this territory. The member opposite didn't look beyond the anniversaries when it came to tourism planning. I think that was an error on his part.

Mr. Chair, we've worked, through my department, with Economic Development, to involve them in the trade investment diversification strategy. We are working on pursuing initiatives with the Department of Tourism to enhance and develop tourism opportunities in the Yukon.

I don't know what more I can say to the member. I don't expect that he's going to laud any work that I do. It's borne out of bitterness and vindictiveness, and there's nothing I can do to change that. I'd be more than happy to meet with people in the tourism industry who would like to meet. At some point in the future, I hope that we have more formal meetings.

However, the member opposite, when he was Tourism minister, didn't go to all of the meetings that affected Economic Development. We have a Tourism minister who attended the meeting in Watson Lake this weekend on behalf of the government. It doesn't mean I'm not interested. We have a Tourism minister who attended on the government's behalf.

Mr. Phillips: Well, Mr. Chair, the minister's just helped me make my point. The minister said that we didn't think beyond the anniversaries, we did nothing beyond the anniversaries. Well, Mr. Chair, if he goes over to the Department of Tourism and he sits down with the marketing branch, he will discover that the initiatives that the new minister is working on now were well underway under our administration - all of them. Not one new thing, Mr. Chair.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Phillips: You see, Mr. Chair, he rose on his feet to say we didn't have a vision, but you know why he doesn't know the truth? Because he knows nothing about tourism.

Some Hon. Member: Point of order, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Phillips: He just said he's against it, Mr. Chair. The member's got to do his job. If he was doing his job, Mr. Chair -

Point of order

Chair: Mr. Harding, on a point of order.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I didn't say I was against it. I was simply mimicking the member opposite's silly comments.

Chair's ruling

Chair:

I see there is no point of order. Please continue.

Mr. Phillips: If the minister had taken a little bit of time out of his busy schedule, if he'd have stuck around in the Yukon instead of lying on the beaches of Mexico, he would have known that there was a vision, and the plan that was laid out in front of the tourism people this last weekend was in development long before the NDP government came to power. Lots of work was being done on it with the various people putting together the questionnaires and focus studies. I knew all about that coming down, but obviously the minister didn't, and that's why I think it's important that the minister go and get a briefing. It's important to understand what your job was all about.

I'm trying to help the minister here; I'm not trying to harm him. I'm just trying to get the minister out there doing the work he's supposed to be doing instead of sitting in his office. All I wanted from the minister was a commitment that he would call up these individuals and groups and members and people in the Department of Tourism, meet with them and get informed, and I'm pleased to see that the minister is giving me that commitment, so I'll leave it at that, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, Mr. Chair, I'll be kind to the member opposite. There is a lot more I could say. He's taking every cheap shot he can - Mexico, first class. He's holier than thou now on the other side of the House, but I know the member is very narrow in terms of his approach on issues, and so there's not very often a lot of substance behind what he says. I won't change that, so I will refrain from getting down into the gutter with the member opposite as he makes his condescending suggestions. There is lots I could say, but I'll refrain from doing that in the interests of a better debate in this Legislature.

On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures

On Administration

Chair: Is there any general debate? Clear.

On Activity

On Administration

Ms. Duncan: Could I have an explanation? In the $860,000, there's $3,000 for credit bureau fees. Could I have a detailed explanation of that? It's in your briefing note.

Hon. Mr. Harding: That's for credit bureau information for accessing for the BDF venture loan guarantee program - those types of lendings - that the government has done or did do.

Ms. Duncan: Also, in the $860,000, there is some $16,000 for acquisition of books, reports and periodicals for the library. I would assume this is a library kept by the Department of Economic Development. What steps are taken to ensure that there is not a duplication of resources with the tourism information centre in the new building, which I have had the opportunity to see and use, and the newly opened Business Service Centre?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The Business Service Centre uses our library and there's some referencing work done to ensure that there is minimal duplication between what Tourism does and what Economic Development does in terms of library work. However, there is some overlap because of the relationship between the general directions of Tourism and Economic Development. The information that is collected is intertwined sometimes. If you're looking at visitor stats, it has an impact on economic development and the service sector.

Ms. Duncan: Then perhaps I could ask if there's some reason why we couldn't centralize this information.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I'm informed that the duplication is extremely minimal and that normally tourism information, unless there's some definite point of overlap, is sent to Tourism, and economic development information is kept at Economic Development. So, I don't think it's really an issue. I could probably get more information for the member if she wants and if she's still not satisfied with the answer I've given her.

I don't know if the member has ever been up to Economic Development, to the library. She's nodding her head, yes. The library there is responsible mainly for economic development information, with very little overlap with tourism. Tourism information is referenced to Tourism. If people come in looking for that information for tourism, they're sent to Tourism, and vice versa with people coming in off the street for economic development information.

Ms. Duncan: That is my point. There are so many different locations for people wanting economic development information. There's the Business Service Centre. There's the Department of Tourism. There's the Department of Economic Development. That was my point. Is there not some thought that perhaps there could be some cost saving if this information were in one location?

I don't want to belabour the point. That is the point I am trying to make.

Hon. Mr. Harding: All information, all the periodicals and journals, are on the system, or the Internet, and can be accessed by anybody through that method.

I can tell the member that we'll see if there's any utility in her suggestion.

Administration in the amount of $860,000 agreed to

On Mines and Resource Development

Chair: Is there general debate?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Is the member opposite asking me to give him a breakdown of costs, or is he asking me to give him a breakdown of what the department of mines and resource development does, as a former Economic Development minister?

Mr. Ostashek: What the practice was in the Legislature before, Mr. Chair, is when we got to each one of these branches in the departments, the minister would stand up and give a breakdown of what's happening in the departments, where the money is going, why the increases. If the minister doesn't have that I can live without it, but I think it would be a lot more informative debate if the minister could do that.

We can read the sheets that are in front of us without coming into the Legislature to do that. It's been a practice in the past, and I was just asking the minister to go along with that practice.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Okay, I'm prepared to go along with that. The member had a technical briefing; I thought a lot of that information was provided.

Certainly, on mines and resource development, the member can see the program objectives in front of him. Certainly, they're the branch that liaises with the mining industry, with the resource sector.

The changes in the expenditures - I can go through line by line. The information isn't capsulized in one specific page, depending on what line item you're looking at. I can tell him in the administration section the change from forecast last year is because of full staffing in 1997-98.

The senior director position was staffed part way through the forecast year, and there's an administrative assistant fully budgeted toward administration in the forecast split between administration and energy resources, and there's a slight reduction that offsets it in outside travel and entertainment.

Mr. Ostashek: I thank the minister for that, as sketchy as it was. Fine, I'll let him off this time. We have another budget coming a year from now, and I may not be so generous then.

I just want to point out to the minister, and I want to raise my concern on the record again, that is: we look through each arm of this department right from administration, right through. We have an increase in staffing in every arm of this department. We have an overall increase in the operation and maintenance budget of this department, I believe, of some 12 percent. How much of that is for staffing, and how much is for other costs - the 12 percent?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, the total FTEs are 42 in the 1996-97 mains, versus 43.6 FTEs in the 1997-98 mains. The member opposite will know that we are embarking on an aggressive program to try and get oil and gas up and running in this territory. So, that is, in large part, responsible for any increase in personnel.

I know the member opposite is shaking his head. He doesn't agree with that, but it is indeed true that we are trying to ensure that the oil and gas industry develops in the territory, and that's going to take some expenditures.

The member also knows that there is a transfer of some resources from Ottawa on an annual basis in the Northern Accord to do that. Traditionally, the governments of the Yukon, generically, have not spent all of that money on oil and gas. We're putting more of that money towards oil and gas development in the Yukon this year.

Mr. Ostashek: I would like the minister to clarify for me, the operation and maintenance of the department has gone up by 12 percent. I'm not clear, and will the minister clarify it for me: are there recoveries that are going to offset some of that 12 percent increase? If there are, tell me how much the actual increase to the Yukon taxpayers is going to be. All I'm asking is for clarification of his budget.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, I'd be more than happy to present the member with a lot of detail on the question. I already read him out the difference in FTEs. The total dollar amount difference between the 1997-98 personnel mains and the 1996-97 forecast was $210,000 in overall monies. Okay?

The difference between the 1996-97 mains and forecasts is $139,000, due to vacancies. The $71,000 difference between the 1997-98 mains and 1996-97 mains is due to increased staffing. An administrative position budgeted as an indeterminate was filled as a two-year term from April 1, 1996.

In mines and resource development, utilities analysts in four additional positions in the oil and gas unit are budgeted to be filled in the mid-year. One of them is a GIS technician, for the summer of 1997, geologist engineer and a land administrator in the last quarter of 1997-98. We really do want to get the regime happening.

In strategic management there is a term secondee to the policy and planning unit to assist in priority areas, such as devolution, a sectoral strategies diversification and corporate strategic planning.

Now, in industry, trade and investment, there was a re-organization under the previous administration. The director and two community positions in Watson Lake and Dawson were eliminated in 1996-97. I believe the cost for them was partially shared under EDA funding, but we gained a new marketing position and .8 program delivery FTEs, as of April 1, 1997, resulting in a net reduction of 1.2. So, that's the whole story.

Ms. Duncan: Could I ask the minister for some explanation? In the technical briefing, in mines and resource development oil and gas, under other, there's a line item, travel outside, non-government job interviews, house hunting trips, for $12,000. Underneath that, on contract services for expertise relating to relocation costs, there's $45,000. I understand, from what the minister has said, that we are filling a new position and it may be that the expertise isn't available in the Yukon, that we may have to bring someone in from outside. Still, these two figures seem rather high to me and seem to be a duplication. Could I have an explanation, please?

Hon. Mr. Harding: I've asked the department to do everything they can to ensure that if there are people here, they're given opportunities for the jobs. Unfortunately, since we haven't had much of an industry, there is an increased expenditure in this government - higher than I would like it to be - for outside expertise, both on contract and in positions. The numbers there are high because of the lack of required expertise here.

Mr. Chair, I'd just say that, hopefully, as we develop an industry, we won't have to do this so much in the future.

Ms. Duncan: Could I ask the minister to have his department provide me - or perhaps his other department, Public Service Commission - with information as to exactly what the Government of Yukon pays for in terms of relocation? This $12,000 - we're not bringing a horse, I trust.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I can get that.

Mr. Ostashek: I just have one question, if the minister will allow me. I'm not exactly sure where it fits in now, since we've got out of the EDA, the BDF and that. It's been a practice at every budget session to table a list of the loans that are out there and what is in arrears. Can the minister give us the commitment that he will do that before the end of this session - a s soon as possible? I should have asked for it earlier, but it's one of those things that I overlooked, as well.

If I could have that commitment, I'd appreciate it.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I can get that information, consistent with the practice of the House.

Mr. Cable: The minister and I had some conversations today on some further communications with the conflicts commissioner on the Member for Kluane's role. I just want to confirm for the record that it's the minister's understanding and the member's understanding that we'll draft a joint letter to outline the activities of the member in and around Aishihik Lake. Is that correct?

Hon. Mr. Harding: I'm hopeful that it can be a joint letter, but there's going to have to be some communication between the Member for Kluane and the Member for Riverside on the issue to boil it down, and hopefully they'll be able to achieve that and get some further clarification through due process. I think that would be beneficial.

On Activities

On Administration

Administration in the amount of $153,000 agreed to

On Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources in the amount of $320,000 agreed to

On Energy Resources

Energy Resources in the amount of $1,030,000 agreed to

On Forest Industry Development

Mr. Cable: Who's leading off in the silviculture area, Renewable Resources or the minister's department - Economic Development?

Hon. Mr. Harding: If the member's referring to silviculture as a result of forest harvesting, that would be Renewable Resources.

Forest Industry Development in the amount of $71,000 agreed to

Mines and Resource Development in the amount of $1,574,000 agreed to

On Strategic Management

Chair: Is there general debate?

Mr. Ostashek: I just have one question. I have some questions on the community projects initiatives. Where would the minister like me to ask them? I don't see where in the budget to ask them.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Capital.

Mr. Ostashek: Okay, that's fine.

On Activity

On Strategic Management

Mr. Cable: Does the minister's department collect the various studies that it's done over the years on market research in the various sectors of the economy and make them available on a regular basis to the private sector? I know there've been studies on things like abattoirs, vegetable cold storage and on the brewing industry.

Hon. Mr. Harding: There are tons of studies available in the library. The member asked for a specific commitment to do anything with them, most of them are available to the public.

Mr. Cable: What's the general policy on availability to the public? Are they usually open to the public as soon as they are prepared?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Normally, unless there is some reason for them not being released, which is not all that often, on issues of confidentiality or things like that. They would be immediately available to the public, and they are also interchanged with the library in Whitehorse sometimes.

Strategic Management in the amount of $924,000 agreed to

On Industry, Trade and Investment

On Activities

On Program Delivery

Program Delivery in the amount of $554,000 agreed to

On Trade/Investment Diversification Strategy

Mr. Cable: I raised some questions yesterday on Mr. Brandt's contract, which I gather is in this area, if I've understood all the buzz words correctly. How long has the contract been extended for, and what's the extension amount? Can the minister tell us?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The amount has not been extended. The time for completion has been extended.

Trade/Investment Diversification Strategy in the amount of $287,000 agreed to

Industry, Trade and Investment in the amount of $841,000 agreed to

Chair: Are there questions on the recoveries in revenue?

Are there questions on the transfer payments?

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures for the Department of Economic Development in the amount of $4,199,000 agreed to

On Capital Expenditures

Chair: Is there general debate?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Mr. Chair, I don't have a capital budget speech prepared, but it's never a problem for me to make a speech, so I'd just say to the members opposite that I think this is a fine capital budget. There are a few problem areas. Just like in Tourism, I didn't agree with every expenditure that the previous administration was making, but let me just say that I think there are expenditures here in this capital budget that will help to create jobs in the Yukon. I think that a lot of the expenditures in capital construction will be helpful and will provide some long-term benefit for Yukoners with respect to tourism attraction.

I also would say that we have some significant monies available for community development initiatives, which I'm sure the members opposite will have more questions on as we get into the capital budget.

Mr. Ostashek: I just want to say to the minister that we'll let him get away with it for this session. We had hoped that he would be a little better prepared for debate on his department. I know he is new to the department and I appreciate he also has a new deputy minister this time, but I would like to see a little more preparation for the debate in the House.

I only have a few questions here. I'm not going to belabour this. I've already made my views known on the community project initiatives. I've made my views known on CDF. The minister knows quite well how I feel about these programs, and the proof will be in the pudding as to how they are developed

I would just go on the record once more with the CDF that, when the minister is developing guidelines, if this program is going to gain any credibility with a lot of the general public - now, I know it's appreciated by communities. I'm not going to argue that for one minute. Any time there's a pool of money they can get their hands on, they appreciate it, no doubt about it. But it will cause political problems - I don't care what political philosophy you are as a government - as to how it's administered.

If it's going to be administered similar to how the last one was, where the minister has the final say and can overrule the board that makes the recommendations to the minister, I don't accept that, and I would hope that a process is put in place so that the minister cannot be accused of political interference in making decisions as to who gets the money.

I have a couple of questions. I want to know, on the Kwanlin Dun First Nation and the community projects initiative - the carpentry and training development of $100,000 - who is going to be doing the training and what is the criteria for the training to be able to have approval for these funds?

Hon. Mr. Harding: I'll have to get some more detail. I have the project expenditures and what the program is. I do know, just from my recollection from a decision that was made, that we are liaising with justice and the Yukon College, and that we're ensuring that there's adequate training provided so that it does actually provide some longer term benefit for the people who are actually getting the training.

Mr. Ostashek: I should tell the minister that I don't have any difficulty in training people. I want to be satisfied that when we transfer taxpayers' money to another level of government or another organization, there are some safeguards in place and that there are some qualified people to do the training. That is my concern and that's a concern of many, many Yukoners.

So, I would appreciate it if the minister would come back to this House with some terms of reference for the community projects initiative and the CDF - if it's going for training programs - as to who is going to do the training and what checks and balances are put in place that qualified people are doing the training.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I can do that, but I reiterate to the member that there was some consideration given in regard to that in the analysis of this project, but I'll bring him more detail.

Mr. Ostashek: I thank the member for that and I would like to move on to the Kluane First Nation, construct a human resource centre for $100,000. Is this a new building, or is this a contribution to the administration building that the Kluane First Nation has been building for several years?

Hon. Mr. Harding: My understanding of this is that this is a new human resource centre. I just had a discussion with the Kluane First Nation this weekend about the issue. There is some money set aside. They have a number of hurdles they have to cross. I know the member's opposition to it full well.

Mr. Ostashek: Yes, I just want to reclarify - and the minister, I believe, has clarified it - that this is going to be a new building and not a contribution to the administration building that's been under construction for several years. Have I understood the minister correctly?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, I'm not sure that we have an agreement on the uses of the two buildings - the older one and the new one. I don't think we're jiving in a parallel fashion on both of those, at least on the issue of what's going to be done on them, but it's a new structure that we're talking about here, yes.

Mr. Ostashek: That's not the point, Mr. Chair. The point here is that in the list of community project initiatives that we have been given, it says, "construct a human resource centre." My interpretation of that is a new building. Now, if this is going to be a contribution to the administration building that the Kluane First Nation has been trying to complete for three or four years, then it ought to be identified in this list of projects as a contribution to that building. That's what I'm trying to clarify with the minister.

Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, I'll be happy to bring back more detail for the member. It's hard and I apologize. I'll make sure that in future budgets I have all of the issue-by-issue breakdowns. I don't have it here. I'm not so sure I want to get into long debates about the details of each particular project. There are a lot of projects, but I'll certainly bring back more information.

My understanding or my recollection is that we're talking about a new building here.

Mr. Ostashek: I thank the minister and I appreciate that. I don't want to get into a long debate on every one of these projects either. I just want to know that when a project is identified in her