Whitehorse, Yukon
Tuesday, May 13, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.
Speaker: I will now call the House to order.
We will proceed with prayers at this time.
Prayers
DAILY ROUTINE
Speaker: We will proceed at this time with the Order Paper.
Are there any tributes?
Introduction of visitors?
INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS
Speaker: In the gallery, I have my wife Dorothy and my son Phillip, who just turned 16.
Applause
Speaker: Are there any returns or documents for tabling?
TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS
Mr. Livingston: I rise to table a statement on the progress the DAP Commission is making, as well as to table a legislative return on the development assessment process as it relates to municipal interests.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling an information package on the mobile-home strategy and the Yukon mobile-home study report.
Speaker: Are there any reports of committees?
Petitions.
PETITIONS
Petition No. 3 - received
Clerk: Mr. Speaker and honourable members of the Assembly, I have had the honour to review a petition being Petition No. 3 of the First Session of the Twenty-Ninth Legislative Assembly as presented by the Hon. Leader of the Official Opposition on May 12th, 1997.
This petition meets the requirements as to form of the Standing Orders of the Yukon Legislative Assembly.
Speaker: Petition No. 3 is accordingly deemed to be read and received.
Petition response?
Petition No. 3 - response
Hon. Mr. Harding: It's indeed a pleasure to have the opportunity today to respond to the petition filed yesterday in this House by the Official Opposition regarding the issue of power rates.
I want to begin by thanking all of those who signed the petition and expressed their concerns about electricity rates and the application by the Energy Corporation currently before the Yukon Utilities Board proposing an interim refundable rate increase.
This petition demonstrates a genuine concern about energy issues, just as the petition we tabled in this House last December did. Indeed the petition of 1993 that led to the creation of the Utilities Consumers Group also demonstrated that same concern.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands that concern and shares it. We agree that Yukon people need more certainty and more stability in energy supply and energy costs. That's why we made the commitment in the last election campaign to work toward long-term strategies to meet our energy requirements in a stable and affordable manner.
Mr. Speaker, that's why we established the Yukon Energy Commission, to address the development of a long-term, comprehensive energy policy for this territory and to explore in detail the options that are available for Yukoners with Yukoners. And that is why in December we made a clear commitment to rate relief by ensuring the same rate of relief would go to all consumers, and by introducing energy conservation incentives.
Before commenting in detail on our government's action to reduce the impact of the YEC's current rate increase application on electricity consumers, I want to comment on the misinformation contained in the preamble of the petition under discussion this afternoon.
Mr. Speaker, the 5.5 percent temporary rate rider was a direct result of the decision made by the previous Yukon Party government not to intervene with the Crown utility and allow Yukon Energy Corporation to initiate a court action in 1993 for the recovery of costs. The petition by the Yukon Supreme Court was made before our government assumed office.
The petition also mentions lower rate relief, but the previous administration refused to extend the program. In December, our government fulfilled their election commitment to continue rate relief to benefit residential consumers and revised the program to ensure that all electrical consumers received the same rate of bill relief and implemented a ceiling of 1,500 kilowatt hours to encourage energy conservation.
It is also incorrectly stated in the preamble orchestrated by the Official Opposition that a 20-percent increase has occurred and resulted in a total increase of 30 percent in electrical rates in the last four months.
As members are aware, the Yukon Energy Corporation has filed an application to the Yukon Utilities Board proposing an interim refundable rate increase. This means that, when the Anvil Range mine reopens, the rate increase will be removed. The Yukon Utilities Board has not yet decided on an increase or even if it should be allowed. Hearings are currently underway - this afternoon as we speak, as a matter of fact - and interveners, the public, who have many concerns, are having an opportunity to present their views to the Yukon Utilities Board.
The petition asks that no rate increases be allowed for the duration of the current government's mandate and alleges that this was an election commitment. This request is based on incorrect information. In our election platform, it is clearly stated that we will work toward stabilizing electricity rates to keep them affordable. It does not promise a freeze or a decrease in power rates. This would not be prudent or possible given that the YEC is a publicly owned utility, self-financed only by electrical ratepayers and not by government through tax dollars.
Electricity rates are not set by the Yukon government, but by the Yukon Utilities Board, an independent, quasi-judicial body made up of members from the public.
The Yukon Energy Corporation is a stand-alone entity, a public utility that is financed by ratepayers and required by law to remain solvent and ensure a certain debt-to-equity ratio. As a result of purchasing infrastructure for producing power from NCPC - Northern Canadian Power Commission - the Yukon Energy Corporation has certain fixed costs that must be paid regardless if the Faro mine is operating. The impact of these fixed costs on consumers is less when Anvil Range is operating, as the company consumes about 40 percent of YEC's capacity or output. In other words, they help pay the mortgage.
Prior to the problem with the fluctuation of electricity rates is that so little was done by the previous administration to address this long-standing situation. It is a situation this government is working to resolve, and already much has been accomplished in the last seven months.
The sudden closure of the Anvil mine has made the situation more difficult, but our government will continue to seek long-term solutions. The Energy Commission and long-term policy development and the revitalization and the changed direction from the previous Yukon Party government of killing bill relief was another initiative this government undertook to stabilize rates in the territory.
Despite the information contained in the petition, we believe that all possible actions by government should be taken to keep electricity rates affordable and that government has a role to reduce the impact of increases on ratepayers. We moved quickly to do that and fulfill our election commitment on the rate relief program, and stated repeatedly in this Legislature and to the public through the media and in direct correspondence that we were prepared to act once the Yukon Utilities Board makes a decision on the Yukon Energy Corporation's proposed interim refundable rate increase.
We will take whatever action we can within the confines of the Energy Corporation and the financial situation that's entailed there to ensure that the utility's long-term health is protected and that Yukoners rates are kept as low as possible. We want to ensure the long-term viability of the publicly owned utility that's owned by each and every Yukoner, but we want to ensure that, where we can, energy profits are used to help with long-term direction changes, but also are there to offset rate increases, as much as can possibly be undertaken.
We will base our response on principles of affordability and conservation, and we will be able to take some mitigative measures. We are still considering these options, and there are a number of them proposed that, I think, Yukon electrical rate consumers will be quite satisfied with once the Yukon Utilities Board makes their decision, and we have an opportunity to consider it, as a government, and to make some suggestions to the Energy Corporation on how to deal with it in the best interests, both in the short term and the long term of Yukon electrical ratepayers and consumers.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and once again I want to thank the people who took the time to sign the petition.
Speaker: Are there any new petitions to be presented?
Are there any bills to be introduced?
Are there any notices of motion?
Are there any statements by ministers?
MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
Mobile-home strategy
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Consistent with our government's belief that there should always be an adequate supply of affordable housing and land available to Yukon people, I am pleased to announce the adoption of a mobile-home strategy as part of a broader commitment to affordable housing.
The mobile-home strategy addresses the range of problems faced by people who find themselves living in sub-standard mobile-home housing units they cannot afford to repair, or stuck in a mobile-home park with no alternatives for relocating.
The strategy has been designed by the Yukon Housing Corporation, in partnership with the Departments of Justice and Community and Transportation Services, as well as the City of Whitehorse.
The past and present members of this House have frequently debated the serious health and safety conditions in some of the mobile-home parks and in older, sub-standard mobile homes. The problem has been studied extensively; now it's time for action.
In 1995, a task force of government officials and affected interests studied the issues facing mobile-home residents. In 1996, the Yukon mobile-home study report surveyed mobile-home residents and park owners, and researched technical and legal issues.
At the heart of the matter are the health and safety issues affecting mobile homes and parks. There is serious overcrowding in some mobile-home parks. The safety of park residents would be threatened in the event of fire.
Over 200 of approximately 1,200 mobile homes in the Yukon are beyond reasonable repair, plagued with health and safety hazards, and clearly are not economical to upgrade or relocate. More are deteriorating to that state.
Our government has analyzed the situation and is prepared to deal with the four problem areas - land, financing, regulations and public information. Through the mobile-home strategy, we are prepared to take decisive action on each.
First, we must deal with the lack of land options for the location of mobile homes. Older mobile homes in good shape that could be upgraded to meet building codes are often stuck in mobile-home parks because no appropriately zoned land is available.
To develop land options, we will work with Community and Transportation Services, municipal and First Nations governments and the private sector to support co-op or condominium land developments and possible conversions of existing mobile-home parks to co-op or condominium title.
Government is also reconsidering pricing policies for its land developments and will work to provide lower-priced lots in new subdivisions.
Second, financing options are extremely limited to owners of mobile homes not located on titled lots. We recognize this difficulty and will respond through loan programs.
1. First, owners of mobile-home housing that is beyond repair need help to identify and finance replacement housing. We are prepared to launch an equity replacement program to permit the scrapping of sub-standard units that cannot be upgraded. Through the home ownership program, Yukon Housing will be able to provide what would amount to a second mortgage for people with acceptable credit ratings who may be unable to assume immediately the full cost of a mortgage.
2. People unable to leave sub-standard mobile units that have outlived their economic life may need to finance emergency repairs to deal with threatening health and safety deficiencies. An emergency repair component will be added to the home repair program to allow mobile-home residents to make the minimum repair to their home to make it safe and habitable.
3. Home repair program limits on loans for homes in rental parks will be raised to allow residents to upgrade older homes.
4. Mobile-home owners wanting to relocate may need financing assistance to meet the actual costs associated with relocation when land becomes available. We are prepared to offer one-time loans to offset the costs of moving a mobile home to a titled lot.
Mr. Speaker, the third area to be addressed is appropriate regulation. The present regulations and bylaws affecting mobile homes and mobile-home parks have limited positive effect.
Our partner in this strategy, the City of Whitehorse, is reviewing its zoning policies to identify ways to provide more flexibility for relocating older mobile homes provided they can be upgraded to meet applicable codes and neighbourhood standards.
The Department of Justice is also committed to reviewing the Landlord and Tenant Act within the next year to identify better ways to protect the rights and outline responsibilities of tenants and landlords in mobile-home parks.
The department is also developing information brochures to advise mobile-home residents of their legal rights under the current act.
This brings me to the final point, Mr. Speaker, which is the need for good public information on housing alternatives.
Occupants of mobile homes in mobile-home parks often face a situation they did not anticipate. The costs of financing a mobile home may seem more affordable compared to the cost of a mortgage for housing on titled land, but mobile housing can prove to be an expensive option when the additional costs of pad rental or the high heating and maintenance costs for older sub-standard units are taken into account.
Our analysis suggests that many people who enter the housing market through the purchase of a mobile home in a rental park could, in fact, finance a mobile home or conventional home on a titled lot.
People require good information to make good decisions. The Yukon Housing Corporation is dedicated to providing sound information and advice to people who want to explore their housing options. It is also committed to working with the housing industry to provide honest, user-friendly information on housing alternatives.
Mr. Speaker, while some aspects of this comprehensive strategy will be of particular benefit to the people living in mobile-home parks, others will have a wider application throughout the territory. I urge mobile-home residents to discuss their needs and concerns with Yukon Housing.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I believe that our government's aggressive and comprehensive approach to this problems facing mobile-home owners will do a great deal to improve their quality of life. I also expect that the emphasis this strategy places on the programs of the corporation will encourage public interest in affordable housing and housing alternatives.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Speaker, I'm extremely pleased to learn that the government is acting upon the recommendations made by the Yukon Party to resolve the problems affecting owners of older mobile home in the Whitehorse area. It was the Yukon Party government that arranged for a study to be done on the problems with older mobile homes and I see that the majority of the initiatives outlined in this ministerial statement are the same solutions proposed by the Yukon Party.
Mr. Speaker, the Yukon Party government announced that it would implement a low-interest loan, mobile-home repair program, and would explore the development of a condominium concept for mobile-home parks, where mobile-home owners would own their own land and common facilities and infrastructure.
The low-interest loan program was to be geared to family income and was to have a flexible amortization period which would help mobile-home owners upgrade their homes. The mobile home repair program was to be used to improve mobile home safety through the upgrading of electrical systems which no longer met codes and to implement other building code measures.
Our government also announced that in addition to the upgrade of mobile homes we would improve the quality of life in mobile-home parks through the provision of better facilities and infrastructures, such as playgrounds for children. The condominium concept could be used for developing new parks or for converting existing parks.
Our party also planned to make these new initiatives territory-wide so that mobile-home owners all around the territory would be given the opportunity to upgrade their homes.
Mr. Speaker, I note that the ministerial statement recognizes the need for land to complete the mobile-home strategy, and I would reiterate my previous question in this Legislature and that is: how will the government develop lots at a lower cost to make them affordable for mobile-home owners?
Would the minister in his rebuttal, Mr. Speaker, provide the House with his assurances that this mobile-home strategy would be offered territory-wide and not just within Whitehorse, or is this government going to continue with its current policy of developing two Yukons: Whitehorse and TROY?
Mrs. Edelman: Our caucus is very appreciative of the action that this government has taken, in conjunction with the City of Whitehorse, to finally address some of the issues around mobile homes in the Yukon. With those sentiments in mind, can the minister please answer a few friendly questions?
Firstly, in point number one of the strategy, the Yukon Housing Corporation is going to provide what amounts to a second mortgage for people with acceptable credit ratings.
Mr. Speaker, I have a real concern that the government is going to be putting people into a debt position where they cannot possibly afford to live beyond their mortgage payments. What percentage of applicants' gross income is going to be used to determine payments of this so-called second mortgage?
My second friendly question, Mr. Speaker, is in regard to the development of the strategy. The statement speaks to the involvement of the City of Whitehorse, but what about the involvement of other Yukon municipalities? Also, Mr. Speaker, there is a comment at the end of the ministerial statement urging mobile-home residents to discuss their needs and concerns with Yukon Housing, but I do not see any reference to tenants' involvement in the development of the mobile-home strategy. Was there direct involvement in this process from the people that are most affected by the strategy?
Finally, I see little or no input from the private sector in this initiative. Was the private sector, in the form of mobile-park home owners or the housing industry, ever brought into the development stage of this strategy?
Mr. Speaker, I hope that the minister can enlighten us with his response.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: The problems in mobile homes have been building for many years, as we all have known. It's a very serious situation that we have here and it's been festering to the point of it exploding. If we don't act now, we're going to be faced with this situation year after year after year.
Mr. Speaker, we have said that we've taken into account the study, which has looked at the number of problems facing mobile-home owners in trying to get out of mobile homes into decent housing. The problems are the supply of land and, also, the financing options that are available to them. We've addressed all of these within the strategy, and we hope that, with the work of the rest of our departments - with the Departments of Justice and Community and Transportation Services - that the strategy will come together and be very effective.
We need to do some amendments to the Landlord and Tenant Act and also work on land issues, along with the City of Whitehorse.
This mobile-home strategy is not just for Whitehorse residents; it applies throughout the Yukon. A majority, I would say, of the mobile homes are in Whitehorse and it would apply mostly to Whitehorse, but it is available throughout Yukon.
This has been brought to the attention of the government since 1994, when three mobile homes were evicted from a park. We will be addressing all the issues that have come forward from them - the health and safety issues in particular - that don't just affect the Housing Corporation, but also many of the departments within government. It's not something we can hide away from and not deal with. We're taking action right now, dealing with the health and safety issues. Hopefully, this program, throughout the years, will become more and more popular and used more and more. We do have cooperation from the City of Whitehorse, which is a key component to this and we feel that the housing situation in the Yukon and in the mobile-home area will be greatly improved over the next few years. We don't feel that it will affect the marketplace in any negative way. We do feel that it's a good opportunity for home builders and suppliers and so on and there are a lot of benefits that would come from this strategy.
There have been some questions asked with regard to second mortgages and what percentages you need for those. I will get back to the member with appropriate answers, and thank you very much for recognizing our government's commitment to do something in the housing industry.
Information highway: communications upgrade
Hon. Mr. Sloan: Our government has a policy of using new technology to improve services to all Yukon people. Consistent with this, the government is continuing the task of updating its communication links to Yukon communities.
New high-speed lines have been installed in 10 communities to date: Haines Junction, Dawson, Watson Lake, Carcross, Faro, Mayo, Carmacks, Teslin, Ross River and Old Crow.
As well as serving government needs, the new lines are being shared by other users - schools, libraries, private sector organizations and individuals - to provide direct access to the Internet at an affordable price. The Department of Education has undertaken a project to provide Internet access to schools and libraries throughout the territory.
This communication upgrading has been achieved with a modest investment of Yukon government funds by sharing costs and technical expertise with federal government agencies and the private sector - Northwestel and YukonNet Operating Society.
Internet access offers rural communities new opportunities to overcome the barriers of distance that have limited community and personal development in the past. Internet service has been established in all of the communities that have the new high speed lines.
The partnerships formed to carry out this upgrading initiatives will not end with the completion of the project. Rather, the partners will continue to work together well into the future to keep the Yukon in step with the rapidly changing world-wide communications network.
Mr. Jenkins: I'd like to join the minister today in commending the Government of Yukon upon the task of continuing the expansion of our communication links to Yukon communities.
Members of this House may recall that it was the former Yukon Party government who first entered into new partnership agreements with the YukonNet Operating Society and Northwestel to provide Yukoners with access to the information highway through Internet.
In August 1994, a memorandum of understanding between the Government of Yukon and the YukonNet Operating Society was completed that set the stage for the management of infrastructure that links Yukon to the Internet, and to the global information highway.
In just two years from the time that Haines Junction first came online, Yukon has come a long way along the global information highway. It is great to see all Yukon communities online, as having access to the Internet presents endless possibilities and opportunities for students, educators, businesses and legislators such as us.
We are talking about the opportunity to enter a library without walls, and the ability to share and exchange information among Yukon communities where distances are far and people few between.
While I commend the government for continuing to expand these services to Yukon communities, our caucus has some concerns, one being that there is not much more room for improvements in the service delivery - Northwestel does not have the appropriate equipment in place that would enable faster and expanded access to the global information highway.
As a leader in providing access to this highway, I would encourage the Government of Yukon to demand that Northwestel invest in the worthy infrastructure that will benefit Yukon communities. Should Northwestel fail to do so, I would encourage the Government of Yukon to get involved with other Internet service providers and explore other alternate routes such as Internet access via satellite.
Our telephone company, Northwestel, is the major impediment to meeting Yukoners' existing and expanding communications needs, and I would ask the minister, in his rebuttal, what steps he will be taking with Northwestel to have this firm address their monopoly in a cost-effective and beneficial manner for all Yukoners.
Hon. Mr. Sloan: It's not going to take Deep Blue to contend with that. This reminds me of the days in the '50s when the Soviet government would announce, "We invented the internal combustion engine and, gosh, we invented jazz and a few other things," so I guess he's taking a page from Nikita Khrushchev.
Just on this, there are a couple of things the member did bring forward and raised with regard to capacity on the Net and high-speed lines and things of that nature. I have met with Northwestel earlier this year - with the president and a marketing individual from Northwestel - and some of the concerns I raised had to do basically with information technology and the ability to provide that. I indicated to Northwestel that I would be interested in meeting them further to discuss our information technology needs.
At the same time, I also expressed some concerns, which I think had to do with the keeping of Northwestel's management capability here in the territory, and I was also seeking some guarantees that Northwestel would continue to maintain service and staff in this territory.
Those are not the least of our concerns with regard to Northwestel, but I can tell the member opposite that we will be continuing our discussions with Northwestel. We are always pursuing other interesting options in technology and I hope to have more developments in this regard in the near future.
Thank you.
Speaker: This then brings us to Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation, management agreement with YECL
Mr. Ostashek: My question is for the minister responsible for the Yukon Energy Corporation.
Mr. Speaker, the member is making up new terms now: "interim refundable." I suggest that he get a dictionary.
Mr. Speaker, for the minister responsible for the Energy Corporation, on May 1st in this House, the minister gave a ministerial statement concerning the new operating agreement between Yukon Energy Corporation and Alberta Power. Negotiators were unable to complete a formal comprehensive agreement by April 30th, and the Yukon Energy Corporation authorized the negotiators to table a take-it-or-leave-it offer. The operating agreement was supposed to be approved by the board of directors of Alberta Power on May 9th and deliver it to Yukon Energy Corporation on May 10th.
Mr. Speaker, it's now May 13th, so I'd like to ask the minister to update the House on what has transpired.
Hon. Mr. Harding: My understanding is that the APL board has approved the agreement in principle. It's now set on Friday to go before the Yukon Energy Corporation board. It's taken longer than anticipated for them to arrange a meeting.
Mr. Ostashek: I thank the minister for that.
Mr. Speaker, the operating agreement also included provisions relating to what they called "the rationalization of assets," which effectively meant to sell out $4 million worth of YEC assets to southern interests, something the NDP government said they would never do.
I would like to ask the minister: is this still part of the deal?
Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, I have to respond to the bootlegged comments in the preamble of the question. There is an element in the arrangement, as has been discussed many, many times in this House, and approved by the board that was appointed by the former Government Leader - now Leader of the Official Opposition - with the exception of the CYFN representatives.
There is a provision with regard to rationalization. We, as the New Democratic Party, have always been opposed to the wholesale sellout to southern interests of Yukoners' Energy Corporation. We've maintained that position consistently.
The rationalization of assets is far from that. It's a movement within the same asset base. It's a redistribution of assets from distribution to generation and transmission, and the monies that will be collected from that rationalization will be reinvested into targeted energy infrastructure, and I think there are additional cost-savings as well in the agreement in principle for Yukon ratepayers of some $2 million over the life of the agreement, which will be reinvested back into rates.
So, Mr. Speaker, I would just say that the agreement in principle is still as it was contained in the initial proposed agreement in principle, and there is also a buy-back provision at the end of the agreement at book value if the Energy Corporation and Yukoners would like to do that. However, I don't believe they would, because once they see what good investments can be made in asset infrastructure for power generation helping to stabilize rates, I don't think that will be something that the Yukon public wants to do.
Mr. Ostashek: Well, Mr. Speaker, we saw the consistency of this government and the positions they took prior to the election and the flip-flop they've done on every major issue that they campaigned on now that they are in government.
Mr. Speaker, the operating agreement, if it is not approved by one of the parties - I understand there is still a substantial amount of negotiations to go on until the June 30th deadline with regards to franchising, which Alberta Power says if they don't get, they'll walk away from the agreement.
That only leaves about seven and a half months until January 1st, 1998, so I'd like to ask the minister to outline for the House what contingency plans are in place if something should happen and this negotiated agreement should fall through.
Hon. Mr. Harding: The member is wrong. This government has been completely consistent. His accusation that we have not been is incorrect. There have been no flip-flops. We have a litany of promises made, promises kept. If you look to our election commitments, Mr. Speaker, almost to the letter, we have been working on that agenda that we put forward to the Yukon public.
The members opposite could spin it any way they want, I suppose. That's their job. That doesn't make it any more true.
With regard to contingency, one of the things that the board required of the Energy Corporation - and also the government - is that the option of direct management be fully investigated and that a lot of work be done in preparation to ensure that there was a good position at the negotiating table to ensure that the option was fully investigated. That's what allowed us to get the good deal that was put before us, Mr. Speaker.
So, the contingency plan is there. If the franchising agreement is not successful in conclusion by June the 30th and APL decides to walk away - because we will be protecting Yukoners' interest at the table - then that will be their choice and we will be ready to assume direct management.
Question re: Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board, appointment of chair
Mr. Jenkins: My question today is for the minister responsible for the Yukon Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board.
The minister and his Liberal friends in this House are turning the Compensation Board into a political play toy, especially in relation to the appointment of a new chair. I suspect the minister is now regretting his earlier political intervention in removing the previous chair now that he has a former NDP candidate who defected to the Liberals being proposed to fill this important position.
There are still a few defeated NDP candidates or former NDP MLAs who haven't received a job with this government - a very few, I might add. Can the minister advise the House which one is being considered for this extremely important appointment?
Hon. Mr. Harding: You talk about leading with your chin from this member. I know he wasn't in the House before, but the member should look to his right and have a discussion with his colleagues who appointed, with no consultation with labour, a chair of the board who was on the party's executive and actually ran conventions for them at the time that he was the chair of the Workers' Compensation Board - totally ignoring labour stakeholders.
What this government has done is made the correct move, as we said we would do to the electorate of this territory, and work toward finding a neutral chair for this particular board. I asked the Opposition parties and the stakeholders for names. The Liberal Party put forth names; the Yukon Party put forth the same name: a former member of their executive, party president, activist.
Mr. Speaker, that's not the way that we want to go. We were prepared to accept the nomination of the Liberal Party, knowing full well that the person they were proposing was a partisan. That's fine. What we want is a good system for injured workers and for business that works well and supports the stakeholders. We're trying to build some consensus surrounding the chair's appointment. Mr. Speaker, I'm very encouraged to say that there has been some support identified by both labour and business with regard to the selection of the chair. I'll be continuing to work in that fashion to try and build consensus and make the appointment as quickly as possible.
In the interim, there's an alternate chair that's quite capable of running the operations of the board with the two labour and two employer reps on the board. As a matter of fact, the board ran for some 16 years with only one chair, Mr. Speaker.
So I look forward to being able to make some announcements in the near future.
Mr. Jenkins: I'd like to thank the minister for his very non-political response but, Mr. Speaker, what did Tim, Art and Doug do to not warrant a job with this government? Can the minister advise the House when he hopes to have a new chair in place for this board?
Hon. Mr. Harding: I find it amazing, when I think about all the people who passed through the Yukon Party Cabinet offices over the last four years, the Allen Hallmans of the world, the Dale Drowns, the Socreds. I watched, with fondness, the Alberta election results as Mr. Allen Hallman returned to Alberta, to Klein country, and shook hands with Mr. Klein on the night of his recent electoral victory. Unfortunately, this wasn't Klein country up here in the Yukon, and he had to go back home to Alberta.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the member opposite that partisanship is something that this government has not considered when addressing important positions, such as chair of the Workers' Compensation Board. I think, by our very actions of considering a suggestion put forward by the Liberal Party, indicates that that is indeed true. What we've been doing is working with the key stakeholders to try and develop some consensus surrounding the chair. It's a difficult task. There are many different interests involved with these types of issues, but certainly, Mr. Speaker, I indicated that I would try and build consensus, and I'm trying, and I hope to make an announcement in the very near future.
Mr. Jenkins: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, but the committee that was struck by this Legislature to review appointments is at an impasse, because of the position advanced by the members opposite. It is not working in the way that it was supposed to work. I don't want to be critical of the minister but, on occasion, he's living in a time warp. When he stated that a workers' advocate would be appointed immediately, it meant seven and a half months. Is this the same time frame for the appointment of a new chair, Mr. Speaker?
Hon. Mr. Harding: I don't do things like the Yukon Party did, which is just to make decisions without talking to anybody and appoint people to boards and committees with a very strong partisan persuasion, particularly when they are people who are in charge of a board that belongs to both business and labour stakeholders.
I think it is an important principle, when you're looking at very high profile boards, committees and chair positions, that the parties - and I plead with the Yukon Party to drop their move toward such blatant partisanship and their continuing with that policy. The boards and committees process that was underway through meetings is at an impasse simply because of the amount of partisanship that the Yukon Party wants to bring to those discussions. I think what we should be doing is trying to encourage all Yukoners to have a say in the process, rather than their attempts to try and bring more partisanship on behalf of the Yukon Party into the process.
With regard to the workers' advocate, again, we struck an advisory committee of labour to advise on the position for the Public Service Commission. We've been working through that process. There was an offer made as the result of a certification granted by the PSC and the advisory committee to an individual for the advocate. That was turned down. Other options are being investigated by the Department of Justice in the interim, while we evaluate the options that may involve sending a contract to someone to provide some extended advocacy work on our behalf. With regard to the time frame, it's a lot quicker -
Mr. Phillips: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Point of order
Speaker: Point of order has been called.
Mr. Phillips: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, there are only 30 minutes of Question Period. The minister should try and shorten his answers.
Speaker: Would the member please answer the question.
Hon. Mr. Harding: With regard to the workers' advocate and the time frame, it will be a lot quicker than the four years it took the Yukon Party to deal with the question.
Question re: Local hire
Ms. Duncan: Yesterday, I politely asked the Minister of Community and Transportation Services if he had an answer yet as to why an Edmonton-based firm was specifically invited to submit a proposal for the provision of engineering services for the Copper Ridge subdivision.
The minister told me I was wrong and the Minister of Government Services heckled across the way that I hadn't done my homework.
I'd like to ask the Minister of Government Services if this is the request for proposals: April 16th, 1997, the request for proposals, sent out to four companies, includes the terms of reference, and says your proposal should be submitted to the offices of contract services by 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May the 7th, and it included two submission envelopes, the green one for the technical proposal and the white one for the price proposal. The ad for the request for proposals was placed in the Star on Friday, April 18th. When any firm who read the ad called contract services and asked for a request for proposal they got this document, which has submission envelopes - the green one and the white one - and it says, "Your proposal shall be submitted to the offices of contract services by 4:00 o'clock on Wednesday, the 7th of May."
Will the Minister of Government Services agree that this is the same request for proposal?
Hon. Mr. Sloan: My understanding is that it is. I don't have the details, but my colleague, the Community and Transportation Services minister, has, and in his absence I will have to assume that it is.
I do know that it was a request for proposals and not an invitational tender, as was previously inferred. I do know that it was restricted, in terms of advertising, to the Yukon and I believe that there were three dates - I don't have the document that my colleague did with the dates of publication. I can find that out for the minister and get back to her on it.
Ms. Duncan: In the request for proposal, four firms were invited to submit proposals. They include three firms that have offices in Whitehorse and one firm that does not. The one firm that does not, I took the opportunity to look them up in the phone book - the phone number rings in Edmonton, Alberta. Their web-site page lists their head offices as Alberta; the alternate is in Calgary.
The letter that I received from them today has a return office address of Edmonton, Alberta. The company is UMA Engineering, and in the request for proposals it lists copies of request for proposals that were sent to the following consultants: Lorimer and Associates, Stanley and Associates, UMA Engineering and Yukon Engineering Services. Will the minister agree that this proposal was sent to an Edmonton-based company?
Hon. Mr. Sloan: Once again, I can only assume that it was sent to that company. Once again, I can assume that everyone has an opportunity to request proposals. I believe the legal principle is that information is like air - it cannot be restricted. Therefore, this would be readily available on Internet access and I assume that someone from UMA contacted them to request it.
Ms. Duncan: It was sent to this company and, indeed, information is like air and companies from outside the Yukon picked up copies of the Whitehorse Star and submitted bids. My question to the Minister of Community and Transportation Services last Wednesday - my question for the Minister of Government Services - why, on the list of four companies sent proposals, was an Edmonton-based company listed? Why were they sent a proposal?
Hon. Mr. Sloan: I assume that, if a company requests a proposal or requests the document, it can be sent. I might assume that that company was one of the ones that perhaps Community and Transportation Services had identified. I'm not sure of that. I don't have the information that my colleague does, but I can certainly check it out.
Once again, I just want to reiterate that this is not an invitational tender, as was inferred earlier. This is a request for proposals and, in that regard, the guidelines for such requests for proposals are done in consultation with consulting engineers of the Yukon, and in that it lays out such things as Yukon content, the services in the Yukon that would be employed, and the number of people on the team. So I'm assuming that that was done in conjunction with consulting engineers and that there's probably a reasonable explanation for it.
The member has me at a disadvantage with regard to this so I will check it out for her.
Question re: Local hire
Ms. Duncan: The invitation that was sent out on this contract - the minister accused me yesterday of not doing my homework - I think he will agree that, yes, I indeed have done my homework and that this was sent out. And, no, I was not wrong -
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, if the minister had chosen to answer that this company had done work before and that's the reason they were sent the request for proposal, I would have been quite content with that, but I have not been supplied with an adequate answer.
I'd like to ask the Minister of Government Services this: will future engineering contracts for the Government of Yukon require that there be a resident professional engineer based in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Sloan: Again, I reiterate my previous answer to the member. These are done in consultation with the consulting engineers of the Yukon. I think it's only fair to point out that many companies here have links with larger firms outside, and whether or not they choose to exercise those links is a matter up to them. But I can only assume that if it's done in consultation with the consulting engineers of the Yukon, they must have some input into how this is accomplished. They do lay out how many people form the Yukon team. They do lay out the amount of Yukon content in this. So, my assumption would be that in this regard it was done in consultation with the engineers here.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, I am not getting an answer to my question. Will the minister confirm that future contracts tendered by the Government of Yukon for engineering services will require that there be a resident professional engineer?
I have a specific reason for asking this. This contract is spread over four years. If we have a question in the middle of this contract in the middle of November, let's not be phoning to Alberta. Let's be phoning the local engineer.
Will he require that there be a resident, profession engineer in the contract?
Hon. Mr. Sloan: Well, Mr. Speaker, I've explored this actual issue with regard to some other professions as well, including architecture. There are advantages to having a resident person here. My assumption would be that on a major job that would be one of the criteria - that there would be someone on site to follow through on inspections and follow through on such matters as deficiencies as is generally required with regard to an architectural contract.
As to whether we can impose the criterion of having a resident engineer on a project, I would have to check that out in further detail to see if we can put on such restrictions. I'm not sure at this point. I can follow through with my department.
Ms. Duncan: Would the minister also follow through with his department and indicate whether or not they can require that the half-dozen jobs that this particular tender is going to generate will go to Yukoners? Can he also investigate that with his department?
Hon. Mr. Sloan: Mr. Speaker, I have already said that these projects and these specifications are generally done in conjunction with the consulting engineers of the Yukon, so my assumption would be that there are criteria there in terms of the amount of Yukon content, probably the subcontracts required, and the number of individuals in terms of the Yukon team.
I can tell the member that in contracts that I have seen in the last while there is a concerted effort by companies that come in to at least establish an office, to establish the number of people working on a project. Very often - and I'm just thinking in terms of the recent film contract for the Visitor Reception Centre - there were training opportunities in there for Yukoners. So, my assumption would be that in any future contracts, those are the kinds of criteria that would be built in.
Question re: National unity
Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Speaker, my question's for the Government Leader. I don't want him to feel slighted by not being asked questions, and I don't want him for one minute to think the Official Opposition thinks he's an insignificant part of that government over there.
Mr. Speaker, everyone is aware the federal election campaign is on and, as a consequence of the leaders' debate last night, national unity is emerging as the major issue. As the House will soon be rising for the summer, I think it's important that we get this government's position on record.
So, I would like to ask the Government Leader to make the position of his government known to Yukoners and to our fellow Canadians on this very important issue. Can the Government Leader advise the House if his government is in favour of special status for Quebec?
Hon. Mr. McDonald: I thank the member for his special attention, and I appreciate that he does not think of me as being an insignificant player on the government side of the House. I also would like to thank him for allowing me to stand up, as I have a bad back and it's a wonderful opportunity to actually relieve it.
The question is whether or not we support, essentially, a distinct society for Quebec. The New Democrats have always taken the position that Quebec is a distinct society. We've taken that position consistently in constitutional discussions in the past, and that submission was supported by members of this House on both sides of the Legislature.
So if the member is asking me whether or not we support the concept of a distinct society, the answer is yes. How that's defined is to be defined, and it would be the subject of constitutional discussions, presumably in the future, and court interpretations. The position we've always taken is that, indeed, Quebec is, in reality, a distinct society.
Mr. Ostashek: I thank the Government Leader for that. He is right. This party also believes that Quebec is a distinct society, but we do not believe that because they are a distinct society they should be granted any powers that aren't available to other provinces. That's what I'm trying to clarify with the member opposite: if he believes that the recognition of Quebec as a distinct society should grant them extraordinary powers that aren't available to other provinces.
Hon. Mr. McDonald: I seem to be having some difficulty understanding the member's definition of "distinct society", Mr. Speaker. Whenever the discussion was raised at the Charlottetown Accord negotiations or discussions by members of his own party, when it was a Progressive Conservative Party, the assumption was always made that the notion of distinct society would allow Quebec to protect its culture and language, and that was an assumption which I thought was supported by members opposite when they were members of the Progressive Conservatives.
Now, that's certainly a notion that we embraced as well in the New Democratic Party. I understand from what the Prime Minister said last night, I would assume that the Liberal Party shares that view. So, if the member is asking me whether or not we support that notion of distinct society, meaning that Quebec should have the appropriate powers to protects its language and culture, the answer is yes, indeed.
We also believe, as a jurisdiction in this country, and the position that we have taken, as manifested through the devolution discussions, is that we also want to become masters of our own house and take the necessary tools so that we, a government that is very close to the people, can influence public affairs to the greatest advantage of Yukoners. So, we have taken actions as a government, like other jurisdictions and other provinces in this country, to promote local control of various programs and services.
Now, that, of course, has to be balanced with the need for national programs and national minimum standards that any Canadian anywhere in this country can enjoy. I suspect that that debate will continue for as long as I live and probably for as long as my children live - as long as this country survives. The balance between local control and national standards will probably continue.
Mr. Ostashek: I thank the Government Leader for that. The Government Leader alluded to Yukoners looking for some different arrangements within the federation, as well, and that leads me to my final supplementary.
Is the federal Liberal government, in devolution talks, taking the position that we would only be allowed to manage the land while Yukon First Nations, through their land claims, will have outright ownership of some lands, as do provinces and other Canadians? We Yukoners believe that we are also loyal Canadians, and does not the Government Leader believe that after devolution Yukoners should have the right to own the land and resources in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. McDonald: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we have taken that position on a number of occasions, and I've been a member of previous governments that have taken a similar position.
The immediate step in the devolution talks, however, is to take over management of Yukon lands. That includes the right to dispose of Yukon lands to third party or private interests. We expect that right to be transferred in the devolution discussions.
Taking on full ownership and, ultimately, provincial-like status or provincial status under the Constitution, is a step yet to be determined. We are not pursuing that step in these devolution discussions. That would be a step that I would suspect would be very much of great interest to Yukoners, and Yukoners should have significant opportunity to speak out and express their views on the subject.
In the interim, we are proceeding with devolution, and if all goes well in the next year or year and a half, we should have - with the exception, or perhaps even with, the Attorney General function - all the powers and responsibilities of any province currently existing within Confederation, albeit under a federal act.
To change the constitutional status of the Yukon would be the final step.
Speaker: The time for Question Period has now elapsed.
Notice of Government Private Members' Business
Hon. Mr. Harding: Pursuant to Standing Order 14.2(7), I would like to inform the House that the government private members do not wish to identify any items to be called Wednesday, May 14th, under the heading "government private members' business."
Speaker: We will proceed to Orders of the Day.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Hon. Mr. Harding: I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Government House Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Chair: I will now call Committee of the Whole to order.
Is it members' wish to take a brief recess?
Some Hon. Members: Agreed.
Chair: Fifteen minutes.
Recess
Chair: I will call Committee of the Whole to order. We will continue with general debate on the Public Service Commission.
Bill No. 4 - First Appropriation Act, 1997-98 - continued
Public Service Commission - continued
Mrs. Edelman: Yesterday we were talking about issues of employment equity. One of the issues that comes up or that has been recognized recently is the issue around ageism. Now, ageism is the discrimination against persons by virtue of their age, particularly senior citizens, or those getting to be in the more mature age group.
I'm just wondering if there have been any initiatives in the new evaluation of the Public Service Commission dealing with issues around ageism?
Hon. Mr. Harding: Yes, the commission is looking at that. There is a concern. There's no requirement under the Superannuation Act to have people stop working as a result of age. So that's a positive thing that the government has to deal with that particular question.
Ms. Duncan: I'd just like to ask the minister a couple of questions about bonuses. It was recently brought to my attention that the City of Whitehorse had or has a policy whereby so many sick leave days are allotted in a month and if the individual doesn't use those sick leave days they're given a portion of their salary as a bonus. Has the Yukon government and the Public Service Commission examined this option?
Hon. Mr. Harding: After five years of service, the employees are paid out a percentage of their sick leave days, so there is a provision of some sort of that nature.
Ms. Duncan: My colleague, who is the critic for the Yukon Housing Corporation, has noted some items in previous Hansard referencing a Yukon Housing Corporation manager's bonus. Could the minister elaborate on that?
Hon. Mr. Harding: I have no idea what the member is pointing to, but I will try and get some information for her - and myself.
On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures
On Finance and Administration
Chair: On finance and administration, is there general debate? Clear.
On Activity
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $444,000 agreed to
Finance and Administration in the amount of $444,000 agreed to
On Corporate Human Resource Services
Chair: Is there general debate? Clear.
On Activities
On Staffing Administration
Staffing Administration in the amount of $833,000 agreed to
On Staffing Operations
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, there has been a 26-percent decrease. Could we just have a line of explanation from the minister, please?
Hon. Mr. Harding: With regard to the personnel, they've decreased by six percent due to the conclusion of a temporary assignment for the federal government, and that's a significant amount of the personnel decrease. Other dollars that have decreased in this corporate human resource services is 14 percent, and that's from reductions to communications, advertising and removals. That's 21 percent.
Staffing Operations in the amount of $54,000 agreed to
On Employment Equity
Employment Equity in the amount of $358,000 agreed to
On Classification/Competition Appeals
Classification/Competition Appeals in the amount of $38,000 agreed to
Speaker: Are there questions on the statistics?
Ms. Duncan: Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a question with respect to the statistics for employment equity. On the number of target groups' clients counselled, the disabled figure has risen by 150 percent. Is this the addition of another counsellor?
Hon. Mr. Harding: No, it's not, but it's an area that we're going to work toward.
Corporate Human Resource Services in the amount of $1,283,000 agreed to
On Pay and Benefits Management
Chair: Is there general debate?
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, could we just have a word of explanation from the minister about the increases, please?
Hon. Mr. Harding: Absolutely. That increase is reflected in personnel dollars. There is one position from the health transfer, and so it's a devolution initiative of $48,000.
Chair: Seeing no further general debate, we will go to O&M expenditures.
On Activity
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $890,000 agreed to
Chair: Are there questions on the statistics?
Pay and Benefits Management in the amount of $890,000 agreed to
On Staff Relations
Chair: Is there general debate? Seeing as there is no general debate, we will go to O&M expenditures, activities.
On Activities
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $548,000 agreed to
On Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada
Ms. Duncan: This line and the next line have very significant increases. Could the minister explain those, please?
Hon. Mr. Harding: That's the cost of negotiations. It's a negotiating year, and there's always some increase there to conduct the negotiations for contract services costs associated with it.
Ms. Duncan: There's no estimated increase, though, on the basis of the outcome of those negotiations. It's strictly the cost of the negotiators.
Hon. Mr. Harding: Yes, certainly, that's the outcome. We might have some angry discussions but, no, that's just for the cost of negotiating.
Mr. Phillips: Is the amount that's budgeted in here the standard amount that would have been budgeted in other years for negotiations, or is it more than normal? What's average? What did we budget the last negotiations?
Hon. Mr. Harding: The Public Service Commissioner tells me it's very comparable. It the member wishes more detail, I could provide it to him at some future time.
No, he says fine, thanks.
Yukon Government Employees Union/Public Service Alliance of Canada in the amount of $192,000 agreed to
On Yukon Teachers Association
Yukon Teachers Association in the amount of $68,000 agreed to
On Managerial/Confidential Exclusion
Managerial/Confidential Exclusion in the amount of $5,000 agreed to
On Long Service Awards
Long Service Awards in the amount of $81,000 agreed to
On Indemnification
Indemnification in the amount of $1,000 agreed to
Chair: Questions on the statistics?
Staff Relations in the amount of $895,000 agreed to
On Workers' Compensation Fund
Chair: Is there general debate?
Hon. Mr. Harding: Just by way of explanation, there have been some questions about funding for increases. There have been a number of questions on potential power cost increases. This reflects the increase proposed by the Workers' Compensation Board and the government's share of that.
On Activity
On Workers' Compensation Payments
Workers' Compensation Payments in the amount of $1,764,000 agreed to
Workers' Compensation Fund in the amount of $1,764,000 agreed to
On Planning and Research
Chair: Is there any general debate? Seeing no general debate.
On Activity
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $307,000 agreed to
Planning and Research in the amount of $307,000 agreed to
On Employee Leave and Termination Benefits Adjustment
Chair: Is there general debate?
Ms. Duncan: Can I have an explanation from the minister, please?
Hon. Mr. Harding: Yes. The personnel dollars have decreased by 47 percent, as a result of a decision to maintain a maximum leave accrual liability of $30 million. The decrease in the program is $2,027,000. We've essentially put a cap on the leave liability accrual accounts, an issue that's been a concern to successive governments.
We believe that the amounts identified are significant and certainly are enough to cover off any liability.
Mr. Ostashek: The minister said they put a cap on leave accrual. That has been an issue of contention by past governments. My understanding is that the Auditor General would not be in favour of that. Was the Auditor General consulted before the decision was made to put the cap on the leave accrual fund?
Hon. Mr. Harding: I am not sure if Finance actually consulted. I can check for the member opposite on that. Certainly, in the decision, there were deliberations about the position of the Auditor General - the potential position he might take - so I would assume there was some discussion or at least some rationalization of their position. I can bring the member back a specific answer.
The PSC minister did not, but I think that the officials of the Department of Finance have had some discussions about it.
Mr. Ostashek: I appreciate that, but I didn't realize that when we were in the Finance debate the leave accrual fund was going to be capped. I don't think that indication was given to us. This is the first I've heard of it. I'm not saying that I'm against it by any means. I was looking to cap it at about $15 million, but we do know that the Auditor General is going to frown upon it and will probably note it in every budget that he audits after that.
I just wanted to know if there had been any correspondence with the Auditor General and had there been any resolution or any agreement as to how it would be handled. I would appreciate the information from the minister.
On Activity
On Employee Leave and Termination Benefits Adjustment
Employee Leave and Termination Benefits Adjustment in the amount of $2,265,000 agreed to
Employee Leave and Termination Benefits Adjustment in the amount of $2,265,000 agreed to
On Staff Development
Chair: Is there general debate? Clear.
On Activities
On Administration
Administration in the amount of $1,513,000 agreed to
On Employment Equity/Land Claims Training
Employment Equity/Land Claims Training in the amount of $250,000 agreed to
Chair: Are there questions on the statistics? Clear?
Staff Development in the amount of $1,763,000 agreed to
Chair: Are there questions on the recoveries? Clear.
Operation and Maintenance Expenditures for the Public Service Commission in the amount of $9,611,000 agreed to
On Capital Expenditures
Chair: We will go to capital expenditures. Is there general debate?
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, could I just ask the minister for a note of explanation about this, please?
Hon. Mr. Harding: Well, the member is referring obviously to the reduction and it's a reduction because there were some upgrades that were done that have been completed and so that's why it's been cut back. We've cut back some 25 percent on all purchases of furniture, equipment and systems, much to the chagrin of some people in government, but I think necessarily. We would have liked to make more cutbacks, but some of the systems are phased in over two or three years and if you would have cancelled them all, it would have been a penny-wise, pound-foolish move because the investment previously made wouldn't have borne any fruit.
The specific items identified are computer workstations, two printers and a computer and a presentation unit. The office furniture is a desk, file cabinet, chairs. There is replacement of a fax machine, replacement of a photocopier and $10,000 for other miscellaneous assets, training videos and other small assets. So, that's the breakdown from $100,000.
The major reduction was with regard to the computer workstations. Last year there was $180,000 spent on computer workstations. This year there is approximately $25,000 that will be spent on those workstations.
On Finance and Administration
Chair: Finance and Administration, page 10-2. Is there general debate? Clear.
On Office Furniture, Equipment, Systems and Space
Office Furniture, Equipment, Systems and Space in the amount of $68,000 agreed to
Capital Expenditures for Public Service Commission in the amount of $68,000 agreed to
Public Service Commission agreed to
Chair: We will now go to Department of Renewable Resources.
Department of Renewable Resources
Chair: Is it the members' wish to take a brief recess?
Some Hon. Members: Disagree.
Chair: Is there general debate?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: The proposed expenditures for the Department of Renewable Resources call for a marginal increase of less than one percent from our 1996-1997 forecast, and call for just over $15 million to be spent in the coming fiscal year.
Of this amount, $13.4 million will go toward operating and maintenance expenses and the remaining $1.6 million will go to capital programs.
At the same time, we will be adding an equivalent of 5.7 full-time positions to meet our expanded program delivery obligations in areas related to land claims implementation, habitat protection, wildlife management and environmental protection.
Mr. Chair, I would like to take a few minutes to look at the department's new or expanded initiatives, its public consultation and public participation initiatives and its evolving roles and responsibilities and partnerships. I'd like to touch briefly on where we have been and where we are going.
Many people today think of the department as the game branch and they have no reason to think that the game branch does anything more than issue hunting licences and go after the bad guys.
Today, though, the department is more than just the game branch, the sum of its parts touches virtually all Yukon people, places and things. If you have children in school they have probably learned about local wildlife through our school visits by conservation officers and biologists, the wildlife viewing program and Project Wild. We see a bright and promising future as we look to new and innovative ways of expanding wildlife viewing programs.
School children will also learn from visits by our agricultural branch staff, who provide information on gardening, composting and farm animals.
If you, your family and friends head out for the weekends, chances are you stayed at a campground maintained by the department or used a recreation trail developed by the department.
The future for special areas to visit and enjoy is also promising, as we move to a Yukon-wide protected areas strategy.
If you've looked at ways of recycling many of the items you use in your home, you know that you can go to your local recycling centre, helped in part and supported by the department. Today, we have helped more than 20 community groups establish recycling centres and receive funding from the Environment Act recycling fund.
I believe recycling has a positive future in the territory as we look to ways of expanding the current program. We have also coordinated a special waste removal program to help business and individuals safely dispose of home and workplace hazardous products. At the same time, the environmental protection branch is working with Raven Recycling and the City of Whitehorse to deliver a new education and awareness program to help people learn how they can reduce their volume of household hazardous waste entering the Yukon garbage dumps.
Developers and mining companies are aware of the department because of the recommendations we make regarding their proposals and the work of the habitat staff and biologists who recommend measures to protect wildlife and vegetation species as well as important habitat areas.
We believe that, working cooperatively with industry, we can help promote the use and adoption of environmentally safe practices while maintaining the territory's vital diversity and encouraging sustainable development.
We believe that the majority of Yukon people value the territory's wildlife, whether they depend on it for subsistence purposes, for hunting, or simply wish to experience the wonder of nature.
We see a very positive future in which all Yukon people have a direct say in the steps we need to take to ensure that wildlife resources are here for future generations.
A new approach to wildlife and habitat management - the manner and methods used by the department to deliver its wildlife management programs are also evolving. The days in which we relied on one person and one section of the branch to provide all the answers is no longer practical in the complex and ever-changing environment in which many factors will influence decision making and outcomes. The days in which we relied on a species-specific biologist to provide all the answers are giving way to a new team approach in which a network of regional biologists complement and support the work of the specialists, who are moving to a much broader team approach to wildlife and habitat management - an approach that combines scientific knowledge with local and traditional knowledge, and recognizes the wide range of values that people associate with the Yukon renewable resources.
We are working to develop effective working partnerships with renewable resource councils and the Fish and Wildlife Management Board.
In the months and years ahead, the department will be placing more emphasis on community-based ecosystem management and continuing work with the Kaska Dena people of Ross River to determine how we can best manage fish and wildlife resources on traditional lands is a case in point. The positive result of that initiative is now expected to lead to a similar process with Liard First Nation.
Internally, we have established an interdepartmental working group to deal with wildlife habitat protection measures. This group will deliver new strategies that deal with habitat protection in relation to land claims agreements, the development assessment process and federal jurisdictions.
The department has allocated new financial and staffing resources within its geographic information systems unit to meet the increased information demands for community-based habitat protection planning, land use planning, environmental assessment, resource planning, the development of protected areas and information required for land claims negotiations and implementation.
We are almost doubling our financial commitment to the wildlife viewing program, and we will be identifying new wildlife viewing and nature appreciation opportunities in Whitehorse and Yukon-wide.
Our ability to offer technical support to renewable resource councils and to facilitate community-based fish and wildlife management programs will be enhanced by the recruitment of a regional biologist for the southern lakes and Northern Tutchone areas. They will join the team of regional biologists presently working out of Watson Lake, Haines Junction and Dawson City.
We are enhancing our ability to assist the Fish and Wildlife Management Board and renewable resource councils by establishing a full-time position to assist these organizations.
New approaches to wildlife travel - the conservation officers of the field services branch will be increasing their presence on Yukon rivers and in remote areas in response to public concerns for the impact that the increased popularity of wilderness and river travel may be having on our environment. Our parks and field services branch will jointly undertake regular patrols down the more popular Yukon rivers this summer to monitor traffic, educate travellers and enforce the Wildlife Act.
The department is also continuing its involvement with Tourism Yukon in the development of a wilderness tourism licensing act. This proposed legislation requested by the wilderness operators will provide quality assurance to the wilderness tourism marketplace while helping to sustain the wilderness quality of Yukon lands and waters. The department has also published a new brochure to inform and educate visitors and wilderness travellers about our laws and expectations when out on the land. A German-language version is in production, and French will follow.
Developing the park system plan - this year, the department is doubling its financial commitment to the territorial parks system plan in support of our work on the protected-areas strategy. Our goal is ensuring protection for representative examples of all 23 Yukon ecoregions.
A keystone in the government's commitment to parks was our commitment to a 2,300 square kilometre study area at Tombstone Territorial Park. In addition, we are seeking an interim withdrawal of a total of 720 square kilometres from mineral staking in order to facilitate the establishment of proposed parks boundaries.
We are substantially increasing our budget for a comprehensive resource assessment process to provide land use decision makers with assessments of recreational, archaeological and natural valleys of potential park areas identified in the park system plan.
Our current year's budget provides increased resources for improvement and enhancement of territory-wide outdoor recreational facilities, in accordance with the outdoor system recreation plan, along with a strategic plan to develop a Yukon-wide system of natural trails.
Environmental protection rules - the Environment Act regulations continue to demand our attention, and we are adding an environmental engineer position to our resources to support effective enforcement of regulations dealing with spills, storage tanks and contaminated sites.
Draft emissions regulations will be released for public comments soon, and we will also be going to the public this year to determine if the beverage container regulations should be changed. Work continues on the proposed solid waste regulations schedule for the 1998-99 fiscal year. We anticipate an increased workload in environmental assessment programs because of federal changes to the Quartz Mining Act and Placer Mining Act, which will regulate land use practices on mining claims.
When the mining land use regulations come into effect, we expect to screen an additional 400 to 600 licence permits and approvals a year.
Agricultural changes - positive strides continue to be made in developing the Yukon's agricultural base and promoting the market of locally produced products. Work continues on discussions intended to lead to the establishment of a small scale abattoir service to make locally raised meats more available to Yukon consumers.
At the same time, a major review of the 1992 agricultural policy will be conducted this year. After five years of operation under the policy, it's time to assess how well the policy has worked, and whether or not agricultural land dispositions made under the policy have led to a corresponding increase in agricultural productivity. We want to hear from the public as part of that review.
Developing new partnerships: new partnerships are critical to the development and delivery of new initiatives. To that end, we have assigned staff and financial resources to assist the Development Assessment and Forest Commissions. Our staff also regularly works in partnership with the First Nations, RRCs, Fish and Wildlife Board, and non-government organizations to deliver programs and initiatives which are important to them; the department and the people in wildlife who benefit from them.
Very little of what the department does can be undertaken alone. From wildlife management planning to the review of the Greater Kluane land use plan, and from the development of wilderness tourism legislation to the delivery of trapper training, we rely on our partners.
Public consultation initiatives - we will also be embarking on a multitude of initiatives in which we will seek the views and advice of a cross-section of the Yukon public. These initiatives will range from developing solid waste regulations to government and management of garbage dumps to consultation with stakeholders and First Nations on wildlife and fishery issues related to mining and land use permits. We will be consulting with the agricultural industry and the public as we proceed on phase 2 of the evaluation of the current agricultural policy during this fiscal year. We will be developing Yukon-wide guidelines in consultation with First Nations, the Fish and Wildlife Management Board, renewable resource councils and users to develop a consistent approach to wildlife harvest management decisions and equitable access to wildlife resources for harvesters and non-consumptive users.
We'll be consulting with First Nations boards and councils as well as off-road recreational users and dealers to develop and manage guidelines, which consider the impact of off-road recreational vehicles on wildlife and habitat.
We will be seeking the public's view on the proposed heritage river status for the Yukon portion of the Tatshenshini River and have put the management plan, which has been developed for the Bonnet Plume River, out for public review.
In cooperation with the Fish and Wildlife Management Board, and in consultation with stakeholders and interest groups, we will be developing an endangered species management strategy. One of the most significant and major undertakings for this department in the coming months will be the work to develop a Yukon protected areas strategy.
Protected area strategies are not new. One is being developed in the Northwest Territories, and the Provinces of Alberta and British Columbia have protected area strategies, which are now being implemented. We see the public participation in the Yukon protected area strategy process as a major initiative requiring the active involvement of a number of partners.
Key among these are the Government of Canada and First Nation governments with whom we are working on a government-to-government basis.
The Renewable Resources department is currently working with many other organizations to facilitate and develop the strategy. Staff are working with intergovernmental and interdepartmental committees as well as with a wide range of non-government organizations to ensure a high level of public participation in the process.
The goal of the strategy is to provide a coordinated and effective approach in establishing protected areas, and to gain support from both conservation organizations and industry groups for the guidelines established.
We believe that protected areas are essential to the survival of Yukon's diverse ecological regions and can provide improved certainty for mining, tourism and the forest industry.
These are exciting times for the department. Staff are working hard with a real sense of purpose and I look forward to briefing all members about the excellent work carried out by the department and its employees as we go through this year's estimates.
Mr. Ostashek: I thank the minister for his statement. It does give rise to many questions that we'll need to pursue and explore so we have a better understanding of where the department's going.
The member, in his speech to the Legislature, laid out a bureaucratic process of so many boards and committees and consultation groups and interdepartmental groups that I'm afraid the poor salmon won't know whether it's swimming upstream or downstream or whether it requires a permit to do it. The minister is going to have to be very vigilant in how we move through this process so that we don't put a process in place that's going to have a detrimental effect on the Yukon as we move forward into the new millennium.
While this party supports a protected area strategy, I would just caution the minister that he doesn't put too much faith in the one that was put together in British Columbia, because it drove almost all industry out of British Columbia by doing it. The lumber industry is in dire straits, as is the mining industry, and it has done nothing for the economy of British Columbia except to pull it downhill. There is a way to do this and there is a way to do it where it won't have that type of an impact on economic expansion in the Yukon, which I don't need to tell the minister the Yukon dearly needs at this time if we're going to maintain the lifestyle that Yukoners are accustomed to.
The minister spoke of a number of new positions that have been created within the department, and that causes me some concern. Rather than my standing here and giving a big speech, I think it would be better if I explore these issues one at a time so that we can get a better understanding.
I want to start with the new positions that have been created in the department. Have they been filled from within or are they new positions? Have we increased the number of staff in the Department of Renewable Resources? Could the minister inform the House as to how many new positions have been created and whether this was new staff that was hired to the department?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: First of all, in regard to the process of using all the different boards and councils, many of these are reflected through the land claims agreements. We will honour them in the way we do things. I do feel that it is a very good way of having information flow from communities to government.
In regard to the positions that I said we were creating, 5.7 are new positions, and at this point none have been filled.
Mr. Ostashek: What's the total complement of staff at Renewable Resources now?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I believe that it's close to 147 people, but I can bring more accurate figures for the member.
Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Chair, even if we round it off at 150, with five, almost six, new positions, this is a substantial increase in staff in one budget. Are these positions all permanent positions, or are some of them going to disappear as we progress? Could the minister give me a breakdown on that?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, the 5.7 positions are all permanent positions, except in habitat management. That is a half-time position.
Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Chair, I'm concerned that we have that type of growth in the department in one budget year. These are new positions that are being filled. That means there is additional payroll. There is ongoing cost to the department every year. It's not a one-time cost. The operation and maintenance of this department is going to continue to grow and grow.
While I appreciate that the department is doing more things now, when I look back over my time in the Yukon, and I look back at the number of people in the department in 1980, when we had a larger population in the Yukon than it is today, I think that we're going to have to take a serious look at how government does business. There's a tremendous cost involved if we have expansion and growth in the department at that rate.
The minister spoke of regional biologists, and I agree with the philosophy and the concept of having regional biologists that are responsible for all of the wildlife in an area and live in the area and can talk to residents in the area on an ongoing basis, but I need a clarification from the minister. Are we going to continue this process with regional biologists in all regions of the Yukon, and is this going to be offset by a reduction in biologists in Whitehorse where they are not required?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Certainly with the demands out there in the public for new initiatives, this department definitely needs to grow, and that's why some of these new positions are reflected in here. For example, in protected areas we will be using a lot of our internal staff to work on this, although we would need a person working on the geographic information system.
I would also like to let the member know that in regard to the biologists, these are two new positions that now cover all of the Yukon, and there won't be any reduction in the biologists in the Whitehorse area.
Mr. Ostashek: Well, I'm concerned about that, Mr. Chair, because we just heard the minister stand up and give us a big speech that we're going to move away from specialists in the field of biology and we're going to have more consultation and more community input into how we look after wildlife in the Yukon, and I fully agree with that. But I really don't understand why we need a whole building full of biologists in the City of Whitehorse and then hire more biologists out in the communities. I think that's overkill, and I don't know what it's going to do for wildlife management in the Yukon.
We should be listening more - and I agree with the member - to the First Nations and the input that they have to put in there. The people that make their livelihood in the bush can give the biological branch a lot of information and something that hasn't been paid much attention to over the years, but I really have difficulty when we're going to be hiring more biologists and still have a bunch of biologists sitting in Whitehorse here to manage our wildlife.
I just think that's overkill, and I just put that on the record for the minister to consider as he moves forward, because if I felt there was a need for it, I would be very supportive of the minister doing this, but I believe that we have more than enough biologists on staff now.
What we need is a reallocation of those biologists to different areas of the Yukon, and not all operating out of the City of Whitehorse. That has been one of my pet peeves with the Department of Renewable Resources for many, many years.
Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)
Mr. Ostashek: Well, I hear the Member for Whitehorse West laughing, but it would be like having 100 teachers in Beaver Creek commuting to Whitehorse to do their job, and that's what we have with the biologists. So, I just put it on the public record that this party is not very supportive of that.
I'd like to move on to the protected area strategy. I believe the minister said there are 23 ecoregions in the Yukon. I believe six now have some protection. Is it the intention of this government to protect the representation of all 23 ecoregions in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, we do want to have representation of all 23 ecoregions. It's not by ourselves. It's with the help of the Northwest Territories and B.C.
In regard to the overkill which the member had brought up, as you know, we're moving along through the land claims agreements. There is a tremendous amount of demand for biologists out there right now. We're trying to correct this in the Mayo area. We do have a biologist that does work on the North Slope, who has done a lot of work in Mayo and doesn't really have the time to do that. We want to try and ensure that the technical work can be done in these areas.
Mr. Ostashek: I just want the minister to know that I'm very supportive of him putting biologists out in the regions. I don't have any difficulty with that at all, but I can assure the minister that when he comes back with his next budget after these positions are filled, I'm going to be asking him to justify the biologist he has in Whitehorse, as well, because I believe that this is a duplication of what we're doing now. I have no difficulty with the biologists being out in the regions. That's the way it's done in every other jurisdiction in Canada, almost, that they have regional biologists that are responsible for all wildlife.
We not only have biologists. Now we're putting more biologists out there. We have the regional resource councils, which are responsible for wildlife in the area, as well, and they need the coordination of biologists working with them. I'm very supportive of the minister putting them out into the areas. I'm not supportive of having an equal number sitting in the Renewable Resources building in Whitehorse. That's where I have the difference of opinion with the minister on that move.
On the protected area strategy, what is the total percentage of the Yukon? What's the policy of this new NDP government? What percentage of the Yukon do they see protected after the protected area strategy is completed?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Our government is not going to be putting on a percentage like some of the provinces have. We feel that we would like to work on the broader base of ecosystem management - ecoregion management - and, we do feel that the 23 ecoregions should be covered off and not have it tied to a number, because I do feel that in the regions the percentages could change from one region to another.
Mr. Ostashek: I'm not asking about the size of each one, I'm asking about the total percentage that's going to be in protected areas. What's the policy of this government?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I did say that we are not putting a percentage to it. Other provinces have held to 12 percent and we feel that we shouldn't be bound to that, and we're not going to work on that basis.
Mr. Ostashek: I'm sure that's going to make investors in the Yukon very, very happy to hear that. We could end up with 12 percent, we could end up with 20 percent, or we could end up with 50 percent of the Yukon in protected areas. I think it's incumbent upon this minister and this government to let Yukoners know what their target is - what they want to see at the end of the protected area strategy to be in a protected area.
What percentage of the Yukon is going to be granted park protection?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: In regard to protected areas, we're looking at different kinds of protection. Some may allow development and, certainly with that, I do believe that if we were held - like the Province of B.C. - to 12 percent, we would be hurting ourselves by doing that.
They are now at nine percent and they've only got the southern part of B.C. covered and I don't want to be held with that position. Maybe we will go to 13 percent or 15 percent. I don't believe that we're going to have anything close to 50 percent.
Mr. Ostashek: Is the minister saying then that they are looking at the concept of multi-use parks?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: We will have territorial parks that don't have development on them. We will have other areas such as habitat protection and so on that could possibly have some sort of development on them - things like heritage rivers and so on that may allow logging and forestry and so on.
Mr. Ostashek: I'm trying to get it clear from the minister here on policy on protected area strategy. Is the minister saying to me today that the protected area strategy will include heritage rivers, game sanctuaries, areas that have limited protection, McArthur Game Sanctuary, Kluane Game Sanctuary - are all of these areas going to be included in the total package of the protected area strategy, or are we talking about a 12-percent target in the Yukon over and above the areas that have, in some areas, quite a bit of protection now.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, we will be including most of those. In the percentage, also, will be those that have gone through the land claims process as special management areas.
Mr. Ostashek: I thank the member for that. While I'm still on the subject of protected areas, Kluane National Park takes up 8,000 square miles of the Yukon and we also have a national park in the northern Yukon that takes up a substantial land mass. Are these being included in the total protected area strategy or is the protected area strategy going to be a percentage of the Yukon over and above those national parks?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: We feel that these national parks are a form of protected areas that are similar to what we want and they will be part of the overall percentages.
Mr. Ostashek: Well, I'm pleased to hear that, because that certainly wasn't the position of the NDP when they were in Opposition on this side of the House.
The Member for Faro says it's not true. On April 24th, 1996, Trevor Harding made the following comment, "Anyway, it's always possible to improve on the D or F grade. One just has to start designating parks and saying that we will not treat all kinds of multi-use parks that do not qualify under the definition of Endangered Spaces 2000."
Mr. Chair, yes, absolutely. Well, it doesn't surprise me from that member on the flip-flops that he can take responsibility for since before the election and now, but at least this is one in the right direction, where we may be able to have some development in the Yukon.
Mr. Chair, I want to move on. Is the workplan complete for the protected areas strategy? I'm not sure if the minister has tabled one yet or not, or is he going to be tabling one?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: We will be continuing to put a plan in place to develop this strategy. We do have a major workshop scheduled for the end of May which resource councils, industry and all the affected people will be attending.
Mr. Ostashek: But the department is not working on a workplan that is going to give us dates, time lines and some targets. Can we get a copy of that workplan?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: What we have done within the department is put together a draft workplan that would be discussed at the workshop, and hopefully some direction will be coming out of that so that in a year's time we do have the strategy put in place.
Mr. Ostashek: Is the minister saying we're going to have the protected areas strategy in place in a year or we're going to have the workplan in place in a year?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: The strategy certainly will be completed by this time next year, although we would not have identified all of the protected areas that we feel are necessary. Some of this would go on for a bit longer.
Mr. Ostashek: I thank the minister for that, and I appreciate that, but could I get a copy of the workplan, when you have the workplan, for what you're going to have completed in the next year? That's what I'm looking for. Can the minister give me that commitment?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: As I said earlier, we do have a draft workplan that's going to be coming forward to this meeting that we're having at the end of this month and, at that point, we can give the member that draft workplan to look at.
Mr. Ostashek: That's what I was looking for. The member said he was going to be discussing it at the end of the month, and I would appreciate receiving a copy after that so we can monitor his department and see how they are progressing with their workplan.
I have a couple more questions right now, then I'll let some of my colleagues jump in. I'll have more later.
Does the minister have someone designated in the Department of Renewable Resources to coordinate the work between his department and the commissions - the DAP Commission and the Forest Commission? Is there a person within the Department of Renewable Resources who has been delegated that responsibility?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: We have one person that has been assigned over to the Forest Commission and another who spends approximately 60 percent of their time in the DAP Commission. We also have our ADM that spends a bit of time with them, along with the director of policy.
Mr. Ostashek: I appreciate that. I know you have people that have been seconded to the commissions and you have people working in the commissions. I want to know if there is anybody in the department that's responsible for the coordination of the work within the department in conjunction with the Forest Commission and the DAP Commission. Is there a certain person, and who is that person?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Like I said, we do have people working with the commissions but we don't have a person directly involved in coordinating these commissions.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, I'd like to begin my questions in general debate by thanking the departmental officials for the briefing they provided. The technical briefing and the follow-up that the department has sent me have answered a great many of my questions and I appreciate their attention to detail, so I'd just like to thank the department officials, through the minister, for that.
I do have a few questions. A number of them are simply requests for information that the minister can indicate he'll send me at a later date.
First of all, just a general comment. In the budget highlights, under finance and administration, there seems to be a bit of a delay with this department. For example, in financial services it says the department will be implementing direct entry into accounts payable in order to speed up processing of invoices. This strikes me as pretty basic accounting and catching up with some of the human resources unit and so on. The department seems to be a little bit far behind and I'm curious. Perhaps the minister could respond to that. I think there has been a long-held view that Renewable Resources, not through any malicious intent, seems to be a bit of a neglected department.
Would the minister just respond as to the catch-up that's required in this area?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Over the past couple of years, the department has been trying to catch up with this technology, and because of the department being spread out, it makes it a bit difficult. We're trying to integrate and link up with the government-wide computers.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, I'd like to move into the personnel area, if I could, a little bit, and the Member for Porter Creek North has touched on this a little bit, as did the minister in his opening remarks.
There is an indication that there are two additional positions in the regional fish and wildlife biologists positions. I'm not clear exactly where those positions are going to be stationed. Where will the biologists actually be?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: The one biologist for the southern lakes will be based out of Whitehorse, although they will be spending most of their time in Carcross and Teslin. The other one could possibly go to Mayo. We're not quite sure yet on that. It could be between one of the three communities.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, I'd just like to talk about some of the positions in Renewable Resources for a moment.
They are much sought after positions - the conservation officers and biologist positions. People seem to become ensconced in these positions. They are in Teslin; they are in Teslin; they are in Teslin for so many years and on and on and on. Could the minister just enlighten me as to the policy in terms of the rotation of conservation officers and biologists throughout the Yukon, please?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: In regard to the rotation, we don't have a policy in place for that, although I do think that is something that we need to think about.
Ms. Duncan: I would appreciate it if the minister would give it some thought in terms of staffing. I think it's a useful policy and it bodes well for the administration of the department.
There's a note in the briefing notes that there's a Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development position that's being seconded to deal with the contaminated sites and spills regulations. I appreciate the Yukon government borrowing the expertise; however, I'm concerned that once a position is actually established that we're going to be in a position of having an individual competing for a job and an untenable personnel situation. What safeguards have we put in place with respect to this issue?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, we will hopefully be filling that position. We have asked for this expertise to come over and deal with the regulations that we have passed for now. It may not be that person who fills that position.
Ms. Duncan: That's exactly my point, that we've seconded a position from DIAND and we may then place this person in the untenable person of competing for the job that they've been filling and other people competing with the person who's been doing the job for six months to try and get the job. I'm just concerned about that - that we're presenting a level playing field for the future. Could the minister address that concern, please?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Certainly, there's going to be, once this position does come back up, a level playing field.
Right now, I guess one of the reasons for this is that we haven't really been able to identify a person in Yukon to fill this position.
Ms. Duncan: Also in the technical briefing, we were advised that there was a reduction in casuals and a reduction in the auxiliaries that are being hired by department this year. There's also a reduction in contract services. Could the minister elaborate on that? I'm particularly interested in the reduction of casual and auxiliary employees.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Certainly I can come back to the member on the casuals and auxiliaries. In regard to contracts, it's just a matter of priority, and we wanted to concentrate most of our efforts in protected areas.
Ms. Duncan: There was some controversy this fall - and some criticism of the department - that too much money was being spent on big game, like caribou and moose, and not enough time on the smaller animals, the birds and rabbits. There are two additional biologists being hired by the department. I just wonder if the minister could use this opportunity to address that criticism.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, that has come to us. What we would like to do is try and change some of the focus that has been with the department and look at a broader approach to ecosystem management. Having biologists deal with the renewable resource councils and having them take into account First Nations and traditional knowledge would, hopefully, aid in this.
Ms. Duncan: I'd like to explore those closer links with renewable resource councils, management boards and the traditional information a little bit further with the minister. The Porcupine Caribou Management Board was looking at different rules with respect to addressing issues like habitat preservation, hunting and how the aboriginal cultures tied in to the herd.
Have the departmental officials heard from the Porcupine Caribou Management Board, and are they working with them in this respect?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: As the member knows, the renewable resources councils, developed through the land claims processes, are a primary instrument, I guess, for us to use. And the way it's supposed to work, I guess, is that information flows through them to the Fish and Wildlife Management Board, and also with the Porcupine Caribou Management Board. A lot of their direction is flowed through the Fish and Wildlife Management Board and recommendations come back to our department.
Ms. Duncan: The minister prefaced his remarks by saying, "as the member knows". The member is learning about these processes.
I wonder if the minister could provide me with the time frame. For example, the reports about the Porcupine Caribou Management Board indicated that they were looking at closing the Dempster Highway for a week each year. What's the time frame for that sort of information? How much lag is there between their recommendations to government, changes to regulations as they're required or legislative changes? What is the time frame?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Normally, I guess what happens is that the recommendations would go into the Fish and Wildlife Management Board and then, at that point, would go into public consultation. If it is approved, it's reflected in the hunting regulations.
Ms. Duncan: What I'm understanding the minister to say is that there could be quite a time lag between the recommendations and the actual changes to regulations.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes. There is a fairly long, I guess, wait, in that regard. It could take up to six or eight months to do.
Ms. Duncan: I'm going through all these news reports, and there's just a tremendous amount of these issues. There's talk about changing the hunting season for wolves, there's talk about the sports fishing regulations that went before the Alsek Renewable Resources Council and any number of these.
What steps is the department taking or could it take to speed this process up? Six to eight months is quite a lengthy time frame for recommendations to be turned into regulations. What could they do to speed this up?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I guess it depends on what the issue is. The department, I guess, will have to weigh how fast they would like to see the change. We can make recommendations to the Fish and Wildlife Management Board to deal with it right away. They are backlogged quite a long way back with a number of different issues, but it depends, I guess, on the importance and the severity of the issue. Government can put interim measures in place - interim protection or whatnot. Again, not everybody would know the regulations to that and that's why we like to see it reflected through brochures and licences and that.
Ms. Duncan: So, Mr. Chair, just one example and then I'd like to leave this issue. The tourism groups, wilderness tourism businesses and the Yukon Fish and Game Association wanted the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board to adopt and implement tough rules for tourist hunting. What I hear the minister saying is that it's unlikely that that request would happen in time for this year's tourist season; it's likely going to be next year's.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, Mr. Chair, the member is right, although we would be doing this through education and through brochures and all that, but I must say that not all of the tourism business is in agreement with that.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, I'd like to address a few questions about campgrounds to the minister and about the cost of the campgrounds. We have identified in the budget briefing $215,000 in revenue and I don't see the costs separated out anywhere, and perhaps I've missed this. What is the cost of maintaining Yukon campgrounds - and I'm excluding capital costs that we do each year in terms of ongoing repairs - the actual cost of people collecting fees, firewood, et cetera?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: We couldn't find the numbers here. I'll have to get back to the member on that.
Ms. Duncan: That's fine and, with some of these other requests, if the minister wants to get back to me, that's fine on those as well.
Could I ask that perhaps, when the minister does respond, in terms of the costs, could he also indicate if the department is exploring better methods for the collection of campground fees? There seems to be a lot of slippage and I'd like to know if there's any exploration of better collection methods.
I'd also like to ask the minister - and I'm going to assume this will require quite a technical response, but perhaps he may be aware of it - I've been asked by one of my constituents to ask why our campgrounds are so far from the lakes? The best example that comes to my mind is Kathleen Lake, and I know that's not a Government of Yukon campground. Quiet Lake - the campground site there is actually quite far from the body of water. Why is that?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: We do, I guess, have a fair number of campgrounds that are right close to the lake; for example, Fox Lake. One of the reasons might be that it's for sanitation purposes.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, fair enough. That answer will, I'm sure, satisfy the constituent that asked.
There was an issue with respect to security of our campgrounds after last summer's unfortunate incident, and there was some call for increased security in Yukon campgrounds. Has the department examined this issue, and what are they doing?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Certainly this is more of an issue in regard to campgrounds that are close to town. There are several things that have been tried and basically failed in the past, but we will have our conservation officers increase their presence in campgrounds.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, only 13 of our 50-some-odd campgrounds have what's known as Big Toy equipment. It's a type of playground equipment, and this type of playground equipment has to be used because it's the only one that carries liability insurance, so we can't even make a local-hire project out of it.
Could the minister advise if there is a game plan to ensure that, ultimately, 90 percent of Yukon campgrounds would have Big Toy equipment?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: It won't be in this year's budget, but this has come up to us in the past, and I guess it's something that we could look at. It's all going to come down to dollars and cents in the end, and if you notice that even in our budget this year in campgrounds, there is a dramatic cutback.
Ms. Duncan: Yes, I did notice that, and as a user of Yukon campgrounds, I was somewhat disappointed. Speaking of using them, can the minister provide an opening date for the campgrounds?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I do believe that most of them are opening now. I notice that the one in Carmacks, for example, is open, and they have a supply of wood and so on there.
Ms. Duncan: Mr. Chair, then anyone specifically planning for the long weekend should contact the department to find out if their specific campground is open as of yet. There is not a date set that says that they will all be open by - or there is; I see some nodding. Will they all be open by this weekend? Yes. Thank you.
I'd like to ask the minister a little bit about the territorial protected areas strategy and the parks.
I note that $96,000 was identified in support of the protected areas strategy. Could the minister provide me with details on how that money is being spent? Are we talking about personnel? Are we talking about production of documents? If we're talking about buying coffee and doughnuts for public meetings, that's a lot of doughnuts.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: As I have said earlier, much of this strategy is going to be having our staff in the department focus their energies on this. There is some money for consultation and the other one is the $80,000 for the GIS and one person being hired for that.
Ms. Duncan: I thank the minister for that response.
I noted that the department is assigning conservation officers to patrol Yukon rivers this summer, and I noted that the minister addressed this point as well.
There was some talk that the money that the Department of Community and Transportation Services budgets for highway clean-up be allocated for river clean-up, in terms of the riversides. This suggestion was made in the media and I'm not sure if anyone ever followed up with departmental officials.
Could the minister advise if Renewable Resources has thought of this or is following up on it?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Our department will not be doing that, but I do believe that C&TS will be doing some clean-up in May, and then again in September, on some of the major rivers - I think the Yukon and Big Salmon; I'm not quite sure about that.
In regard to a conservation officer, a term conservation officer is going to be showing their presence on the Big Salmon, Yukon River and Teslin River, basically to ensure that river travelers are acting within the laws that are out there and to get a sense of how travelers are traveling, whether they're going with guides and so on, and to take a bit of a survey as to what is out there.
One of the approaches that we may be taking, and we're going to be explaining this a bit, is to have something similar to the Tatshenshini River, where river travelers are registered so that we do know what's on the river and who's on the river at all times.
Ms. Duncan: This would sound like it's an enhancement of the program where traditionally, at the visitor information centres, we would always recommend to visitors that are planning to travel the river that they check in with the RCMP when they decide to leave and when they arrive. It sounds like an enhancement and more taken over by the Government of Yukon.
We are, of course, working in cooperation with the RCMP on this? Thank you. The minister has indicated yes.
The minister touched on the use of traditional knowledge in terms of Renewable Resources policy. I'd just like to ask - I did ask in Question Period but haven't received an answer - about the study of contaminants in country foods. Has that study been completed, and is it available?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I'll have to get back to the member about whether this study is completed. I'm not exactly sure who's doing it. I think it's the federal government that's doing it. I'm not sure.
Ms. Duncan: I'll send the minister over this news report, so he knows what I'm talking about, and if he could just advise on the status of that.
Could I have an update on the status of the game farming policy? It was an item of discussion under the previous administration. Does the current government have a position on game farming? Are they amending the policy, or what is their direction in this respect?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Basically, we're not making any changes this year. It's going to remain status quo.
Ms. Duncan: Just as a last point, could I ask the minister to go over what he had said about the agriculture policy developments? I missed that point in his preamble.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Presently, we have gone through phase 1 of the policy, and phase 2, which I'm trying to find here, should be completed this year. We have and will be involving the industry and the affected people in regard to agriculture involvement in the review. The department feels they will be finished this by the end of this year.
Ms. Duncan: I did have a couple of other questions, and I will be brief.
In the briefing notes, it indicates that over 400 to 600 new mining land use permits are issued, and all federal CEAA screenings are referred to Renewable Resources. I'm concerned. Can the minister assure me that we have dedicated the resources in Renewable Resources to deal with this sort of level of activity?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Part of the time the environmental engineer, which is a new position, will be dealing with these additional permits and so on and we will have additional training in regards to conservation officers and that, which will help out in this area.
Ms. Duncan: Can the minister provide me, by legislative return, an update on where we are with habitat protection for M'Clintock Bay?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes, we will do that.
Ms. Duncan: There are a number of contributions made by this department to various non-government organizations. There are some contributions that are required under the UFA.
Could I have the minister's assurance that these non-government organizations are being linked in with the NGO funding policy being developed by this government?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Yes. All of these NGOs that we are presently funding right now would be tied in with this new policy.
Mr. Phillips: I have a couple of questions for the minister. Just to go back to game farming for a minute, can the minister tell me if there have been any escapes or health problems with the game farm animals in the territory that he's aware of?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: From the time we've been in government, and probably over the last little while, we are not aware of any breakouts, diseases or escapes of animals.
Mr. Phillips: Thank you, Mr. Chair. When the member's party was in Opposition, they were extremely critical of game farming. The critic's greatest concern was the issue of escapes and health problems. I know that there were no major escapes or health problems for the four years we were in government, and it appears, by the minister's answer, that there are none today.
The minister mentioned about no planned changes for the next year. Is the minister aware of the importance of the game farming industry to the Yukon economy at the present time?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Certainly I do recognize that it is an industry that's out there wanting to grow. I do recognize that there is some importance to this. Our position is not to be abolishing game farming. There are concerns that have come up with First Nations in regard to animals that are planted here taking over. One of the concerns is with the elk and so on. I haven't got deep enough into this to give proper answers to them, but I certainly want to be able to find out more on game farming. I realize that the elk are basically let loose right now, and so are the buffalo, but there is increasing demand to continue game farming and it is important. There are a lot of people who want to do it, and we haven't said that we'd be changing anything in that regard this year.
Mr. Phillips: I hope the minister is aware that all of the Yukon game farmers are Yukon residents and that it's probably the healthiest segment of our agricultural industry in the territory at the present time. Of exportable materials, other than mining, it's probably one of the largest exports the Yukon has at the present time. There are hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions of dollars, of animals being shipped to other jurisdictions from our game farmers on an annual basis. Not only are the owners of the game farms local but my understanding is that they hire all local people. So it is really a Yukon industry.
I would like to try and get from the minister a little more than a 12-month commitment. I know there are a lot of game farmers out there who are very concerned about what was said in this house before by other members who are now ministers in that government, and those people have a very extensive investment, a very large investment, in their game farming and want to know that there's a little more security than 12 months.
Can the minister tell us that he feels game farming and existing game farmers that are here are here to stay and that he has no plans whatsoever, this year or in this term, of changing any of that?
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I guess it's difficult for me right now to make any kind of a commitment as to where government is going to sit in regard to game farming. I can say that what we have right now more than likely would remain here, but we will continue to be monitoring this, and we would like to get more information and feedback from the rest of Yukoners on this, and maybe, over the next year, this would become more of an issue that we can spend time on.
Mr. Phillips: Mr. Chair, I don't want to take up a lot of time of the House, but I do want to get more of a commitment from the minister to the game-farming industry than a comment of "more than likely" they'll be around after the next year.
I think the game farmers deserve more than that. There are a lot of people employed in the game farming industry in the territory, from veterinarians to handlers to other people to shippers to truckers, who are all Yukoners. I just want to get assurances from the minister that the game farming industry and the existing game farmers will be supported, totally, by this government in their term of office.
Hon. Mr. Fairclough: At this point in time, we have no plans to make changes in getting rid of them or whatnot. I do believe that they will be here. I can't say, I guess, too much more than the fact that we have no plans to make major changes to get rid of them at this point in time.
Mr. Phillips: Well, "more than likely" and "at this point in time" aren't very comforting words for someone who has hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in an industry. I think what they would like to hear from the minister is that the minister would give them an absolute guarantee that he contemplates they will be making no changes in their status in his term of office. I'm not asking the minister to be granting other licences or other thin