Whitehorse, Yukon

Wednesday, November 5, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.

Speaker: I will now call the House to order. At this time, we will proceed with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

Speaker: We will proceed with the Order Paper.

Are there any tributes?

TRIBUTES

In remembrance of Frank Joe

Mr. McRobb: I rise today to pay tribute to Frank Joe, who passed away suddenly on July 16, 1997.

Frank was born and raised at Kloo Lake and lived a traditional lifestyle of hunting, fishing and trapping. He developed a passion for horses early in his life and worked as a big game guide for a number of outfitters.

Later in life, Frank operated his own business, Ruby Range Trail Rides. He had a love for his country, which was evident in his numerous stories. His knowledge and experiences about the history of his country were often shared with his clients. Frank had many friends throughout his life. He found time for everyone, young and old, offering his knowledge to those who would listen. Frank was especially noted for his sense of humour and good nature. Frank will be sadly missed by his family and many friends and all the people who knew him.

Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Speaker, the Yukon Party caucus would like to join with the New Democrats in extending our condolences to the Joe family. I had the privilege of knowing Frank fairly well. He worked for me on several occasions. He was a very competent guide and, as the previous speaker said, had a great sense of humour and a great knowledge of the history of the Yukon.

I am sure he will be sadly missed by friends and family, and we extend our condolences to the family.

In remembrance of Patrick Carberry

Hon. Mr. Sloan: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great Yukoner who was tragically taken from us before his time due to the effects of cancer. Patrick Carberry passed away in early September. Pat was born in England and apprenticed there as a chef. He served in the British Army in the Second World War.

After being released from the army, he re-offered to the British navy and was conscripted by them to work for two and a half years in their coal mines while still continuing to work nights as a chef in Nottingham. Prior to moving to the Yukon, Pat lived and worked as a chef in Edmonton and at the Royal York in Toronto, where he was involved in the chefs union. As such, he worked to get Canadian chefs certified.

After moving to the Yukon with his wife Claire and his five children in 1969, Pat worked as a chef in many hotels. In 1992 the Chefs Association of the Yukon honoured him for his work. His places of work included the TraveLodge, the Sheffield and the Monte Carlo. His last position as chef was at the Macaulay Lodge. He retired 18 months before his 65th birthday due to ill health.

Pat Carberry was a well known and well respected member of the Yukon community. For several years he performed services on behalf of the Yukon Council of Aging. He served as their president until the time of his death. He was also chairman of their seniors information board. Without a personal agenda, Pat pushed for rate relief for seniors' power and telephone service. He made a presentation on behalf of the Yukon seniors to the hearings of the Canada Pension Plan ratification and brought attention to issues of single senior women living in poverty.

As well, Pat and his wife Claire worked as private citizens to advance the cause of alternative medicine and treatments. Of particular concern to them was the right of every person to have incapacitating pain relieved and managed in a such a way as to afford them life and death with dignity.

Even though I knew that Pat was ill, I, like many of his friends and many of the people that knew him, Pat's own personal vitality belied his illness in many ways. Even while he was very ill, he was still very active in bringing issues to my attention and his presence will be sorely missed.

Our condolences go to Pat's friends and surviving family, especially to his wife Claire, who continues their good work. It's a service, Mr. Speaker, that will be a benefit to many Yukoners for years to come.

Mr. Phillips: On behalf of the Yukon Party caucus, I'd also like to pay tribute to Mr. Pat Carberry. Although I did not know Mr. Carberry personally, many Yukoners came to know Pat as an active member of the seniors community. Having served as the president of the Yukon Council on Aging from 1995 until recently, Pat acted upon concerns of the well-being of Yukon seniors and paid particular attention to financial and health matters relating to single senior women.

As my colleague mentioned earlier, Pat spoke out on issues regarding seniors' power and telephone service out of concern for seniors on fixed incomes who have high power rates, particularly for those who use electrical heat. Pat lobbied strongly for an increase in the pioneer utility grant.

At every opportunity, Pat raised the awareness of Yukon seniors and their contributions to the Yukon economy as being one of the reasons to keep seniors healthy and independent. He was a man true to his word, with a heart of gold and a love for the Yukon.

On behalf of the Yukon Party caucus and office of the official opposition, I wish to extend our heartfelt thanks for Pat's efforts over the years, and wish to extend our deepest sympathy to his wife Claire and our family and friends.

Mrs. Edelman: I rise today to pay tribute to Pat Carberry. Pat was an outspoken man. During my first election for city council, I decided to try going door to door during the campaign. My first night out, I went to Pat's door to ask him about what he thought about city issues - and he told me. He told me that night, and he continued to tell me during my six years on city council.

During that time, Pat also ran for city council himself. He had the gumption to put his views on the line and ran for public office. He wasn't successful in his bid for city council, but he did do well on the executive of the Yukon Council on Aging, and then finally as the president of the Yukon Council on Aging.

I served with Pat while I, too, served on the executive of the Yukon Council on Aging. Pat worked tirelessly on any committee or project that he committed to. He showed a surprising sensitivity at times and a gentleness that belied his gruff tones and grand bearing. We are richer for Pat's presence on this earth; his humour and his strength will be greatly missed.

Speaker: Are there any introduction of visitors?

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I have a document for tabling.

Hon. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Speaker, I have some letters from the Executive Council for tabling regarding the Shakwak.

Hon. Mr. Sloan: I have for tabling the 1996-97 annual report of the fleet vehicle agency.

I have for tabling the property management agency annual report 1996-97.

I have for tabling the community agency contribution agreement between the Government of Yukon and Northern Network of Services.

Speaker: Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, I given notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that by condoning the layoff of CNAs at Whitehorse General Hospital, by threatening the Yukon Teachers Association during arbitration, and by stalling on contract talks with the Yukon Government Employees Union, the NDP government have broken a commitment to develop a constructive relationship with public service employees, teachers and hospital workers; and

THAT this House urges the NDP government to take immediate steps to improve their relationship with public service employees.

Speaker: Are there any statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Student recognition program

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Mr. Speaker, I rise to advise members of our government's policy regarding recognition of student achievement in the Yukon school system.

Our government is committed to providing the highest possible quality of public education, Mr. Speaker. Yukon people have reason to be very proud of their educational system and the many dedicated people who comprise the partnerships that make it work so well.

As Minister of Education, I'm always happy to acknowledge the achievements of teachers, school councils, parents, school volunteers and, of course, students themselves, as we undertake the important job of increasing knowledge and understanding for today and the future.

Some months back, Mr. Speaker, I indicated that we would be reviewing the existing student recognition program, the Yukon excellence awards, as required, before the end of 1997. Specifically, we wanted to see how well this program has been working since its introduction in January 1995, and to explore ways to make it work better.

In order to conduct this review, an options paper was circulated to schools, school councils and education partner groups, including students. As well as this, a survey was sent to 500 randomly-selected households of students from grades 8 to 12 in Yukon schools.

The report of the review, which I tabled earlier today, shows several major findings, Mr. Speaker. While our education partners generally support the Yukon excellence awards program, they do not believe the Yukon excellence awards are effective in responding to public concerns about student mastery of basic skills.

This report tells us that there is public support for programs that recognize student effort and/or achievement. It also indicates support for the provision of funding to schools to implement student recognition programs. At the same time, the report suggests that those who participated in the review are not clear about how to implement such programs.

In light of this, I've asked school councils and the Yukon Teachers Association, who are leaders in the education community, to provide specific recommendations by the end of February on how we can improve our student recognition programs in Yukon schools, beginning with the 1988-89 school year.

Mr. Speaker, our government acknowledges that there are many ways to recognize student achievement and that a cash-for-grades program has certain built-in limitations. One of our main concerns in this regard is that many students who work very hard but who are simply unable to register high academic scores may not receive the recognition they deserve for their effort. We feel it is just as important to recognize the hard work of someone who has struggled to gain 70 percent rather than 65 percent, for example, as it is to recognize and reward those students who are consistently at the top end of the academic scale.

Our government also acknowledges that monetary rewards are not the only way to recognize student accomplishments. We will be encouraging our educational partners to recommend other forms of student recognition and support that may be appropriate in their schools or their communities.

I would like to conclude by expressing my thanks and appreciation to everyone who took the time to participate in this review. I would also like to assure members of this House that we will be pursuing the recommendations of this report. Thank you.

Mr. Phillips: I thank the minister for this statement. I will be very interested in reading the document that she tabled today. We on this side of the House feel relatively good about the statement that has been made by this minister. I would like to take members back to a few months ago or even years ago when the members opposite criticized the program severely when it was brought in, and now they have found out by way of consultation that there is public support for programs that recognize student effort and improvement.

In fact, what they look as if they are going to do with this particular program is even follow one of the commitments we made in the last election and that is to continue the Yukon excellence awards program and create a new program, the achievement awards to recognize students who work hard to improve their grades even though they do not qualify for the Yukon excellence award.

I am sure, as I am standing here, that they won't call it the Yukon achievement awards, because the suggestion of that title was not their idea.

It must be a bit embarrassing for some members on the side opposite to sit here today and listen to the statement that has been given here by this minister in accepting the fact that Yukon achievement should be recognized.

Let me take people back to Hansard. I love Hansard, because we can quote directly from Hansard. This was February 15, 1995. This was the position of the New Democrat Party at that time by one of its members, who said, "It is a big fat program that is going to do a big fat zero in terms of helping the people out there who need it the most. When one talks about needs-tested programs, this one certainly does not qualify. This is just another ideological, right-wing, drummed up, maybe-gonna-get-me-a-vote program, which has unfortunately blown up in the minister's face and shredded his credibility as an Education minister, oh-so-fast." That was the Member for Faro, Mr. Harding, who tore apart the awards of excellence program, saying it was a "drummed up, maybe-gonna-get-me-a-vote program."

I am pleased today, Mr. Speaker, that, maybe in the words of the Member for Faro, the new minister is going to continue with this "maybe-gonna-get-me-a-vote program" that the people actually want. I think that, in light of the consultation that took place and in light of the results, the people do want to see achievement recognized and that the Member for Faro owes an apology to the former Minister of Education for his statements. He was just grandstanding at the time. I think the minister should be embarrassed by the comments that he made at that time.

Mr. Speaker, this is just one of many comments that I will be reminding that minister of - ones he made that were absolutely outrageous at the time.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the Minister of Education for following through on this Yukon Party initiative and not cancelling it, as they said they were going to do when they took power, and realizing that it is important, and there is strong public support for programs that recognize student effort and improvement.

Ms. Duncan: The minister has provided a meaningful briefing in her statement as to the status of the Yukon excellence awards. I appreciate that briefing as I'm sure members of the public appreciate it. In fact the members of the public appreciate it particularly well - namely the school councils - because, Mr. Speaker, school councils received this document before we in the Legislature did - a disrespect for her fellow legislators that I'm sure the minister will make certain doesn't happen again.

Although I have not yet reviewed the report tabled today, the findings outlined what most people suspected all along - recognition of student effort and improvement is important. The difficulty with the previous program is the lack of consultation, and this too is emphasized in the minister's statement. There is not clear consensus on how to implement a program to recognize such effort and achievement.

The minister has indicated that she has asked the Yukon Teachers Association and school councils to provide specific recommendations by the end of February. I have several questions and some real difficulty with that option. Clarification by the minister might resolve some of that difficulty.

Firstly, is the minister asking for very specific recommendations from these groups, say from a list of options? Is she asking them to pick option a, b or c, or is the minister saying to the YTA and school councils, "Here's the report. Use your creativity and come up with some agreement or something innovative and wonderful that will end this other thorny political problem"? Either of these two options presents some real difficulty.

School councils in particular are being continually offloaded with ministerial responsibilities. School councils were summoned to determine the capital spending. School councils will determine how we recognize students. School councils serve on building advisory committees. School councils hire and fire principals. School council agendas are very, very full.

Now the minister will be poised at this point to give me A Better Way partnership speech. Save it for the next election. I've heard the message.

My point to the minister is that school councils are volunteers.

In case they missed it, school councils are volunteers. Be very careful in what you burden them with. This is yet another issue with very tight time lines. You have departmental staff and political staff. Perhaps there are some issues where the minister should be making the tough decisions and the recommendations - and be prepared to live with the consequences. Perhaps this is one of those issues.

The minister is likely also poised to give me that the problem was lack of consultation and consensus on the last program, and I certainly agree with that point. There was no consensus. There was no consultation. I would like to advise the minister that I feel she should be prepared that she may not get consensus on this issue, and I'd like to know how she intends to proceed if there is not consensus.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Well, let me start by saying that I am not the least bit embarrassed to stand up in this House and indicate that we listen to people, that the previous government, when they chose to bring in the Yukon excellence awards program, did not speak to the educational community, to school councils or teachers, or to the Yukon Teachers Association or to parents. Exactly what we have done is deliver on our campaign commitment to listen to people and to act on what they have to say.

The members of the opposition will have full opportunity to participate in the review of what is said in the report and to bring forward their recommendations. What we said, from the beginning of these Yukon excellence awards being launched, is that the government should have listened to the public, and that all of the efforts of all of the students in the public school system need to be acknowledged, not set up a program that only is targeted toward the students who are able to achieve grades of over 80 percent.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I don't think the official opposition critic was ...

Speaker: Order please.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: ... paying full attention when I was reviewing the summary of what's in this report. There is some public support for the student awards program as it presently exists. There's also a very strong segment of the population who would like to see the awards available for recognizing all students' efforts.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Nobody's convinced that the Yukon excellence awards are the most effective way of recognizing student achievement. People think they don't work and need to be fixed. Where people aren't in agreement is on how to develop a new recognition program, and that's exactly what we have asked educational partners to provide us with some advice on.

Now, I have to confess I'm somewhat puzzled at the patronizing tone that the Liberal critic had toward school councils.

I think she should know that school councils, while they are volunteers, run for office because they want to contribute to their children's education and they want to contribute to making decisions about education. I am not offloading ministerial responsibilities on school councils. I am asking school councils for input on issues that they very much want to have input on.

Mr. Speaker, we're here to speak for the public and I make no apologies for delivering the report - which was the report that school councils themselves had worked on as well as parents and members of the public - to the school councils and asking them for their thoughts on it in advance of it being tabled in the Legislature. That is not any affront, or intended as any affront, to the members of this House and I think we would all do well to recognize the important contribution that school councils and other education partners make to education in the territory, and I look forward to working with them in the future.

Building design standards

Hon. Mr. Sloan: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to make a statement in keeping with our policy of making government better. Specifically, I am talking about an initiative that will improve the design, construction and operating efficiency of government buildings.

During the last election, this government made a commitment to develop standards that would provide clear direction for the designing of new public buildings. Government Services, in partnership with the Yukon design industry, has completed the first edition of Design Standards for Government Facilities.

It is important to note, Mr. Speaker, that revising and updating this document will be an ongoing process, as conditions and building codes frequently change. The objective is to ensure that our design standards reflect the collective knowledge of all parties involved in the development and maintenance of public buildings in the Yukon.

The document outlines the general design objectives desired in the construction and renovation of government buildings. It describes objective, performance-oriented criteria for the designing of the various components of a building project, including sitework and architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical features.

The design standards combine up-to-date Canadian construction technology with a commonsense Yukon approach to ensure that government buildings are as energy efficient as possible. It is worth noting, Mr. Speaker, that energy-efficient buildings reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, which are the major cause of global climate change.

The design standards focus on satisfying the functional needs of the client departments and users of government facilities by: minimizing capital costs; achieving the lowest possible life cycle costs; optimizing the health, safety and comfort of occupants; minimizing environmental impacts; maximizing reliability and durability; and incorporating energy efficiency features.

I should point out that while we are obliged by the law to follow the existing rules with respect to local hiring and local purchasing, we will be studying the recommendations of the Yukon hire commission once it completes its work. I anticipate that the use of locally produced materials could well be a major factor in setting design standards for public buildings in the future.

In a similar vein, the policy recommendations of the Cabinet Commission on Energy, following its public consultations on a comprehensive energy policy early in the new year, could result in further changes to design standards.

This first edition of Design Standards for Government Facilities was prepared by Government Services in partnership and cooperation with local design consultants. The standards describe performance expectations required in the design of new buildings and renovation of government owned and occupied buildings.

Furthermore, landlords wanting to lease space to the government will find the building design standards a useful reference to help them assess the suitability of their building for government occupancy.

With these design standards for government facilities in place, taxpayers can be assured that their tax dollars spent on the construction and operation of government buildings are being used efficiently.

Mr. Jenkins: It gives me great pleasure to be able to once again commend this NDP government for continuing the work of the previous Yukon Party government to improve the design, construction and operating efficiency of our government facilities.

During the Yukon Party's government term in office, considerable thought was given to such improvements and, in turn, acted on by developing policies that encouraged the use of off-the-shelf uniform building designs for government buildings. This was restated in our election platform, in which we made the commitment to continue to strengthen the planning and management of government capital projects, as well as to continue to adopt practical, workable building designs for government facilities.

In the minister's rebuttal, I would like to know if the minister and the government intend to continue using off-the-shelf uniform designs for standard schools and standard fire halls that the Yukon Party first introduced, and at the same time, would these design initiatives and standards be made binding upon Yukon Housing Corporation?

Also, the minister addressed the environmental issues, and in the minister's rebuttal he should be aware that the Government of Yukon is one of the largest users of F-12 refrigerant in their building cooling systems. What steps are being taken by the government in this area?

When speaking of local hire and local purchasing, the government is once again talking from both sides of the mouth. I refer to the Old Crow design contract, worth $274,000, that was recently awarded to an outside contractor from the NWT.

In view of the fact that the NDP, in opposition, severely criticized the Yukon Party government for any contract that was awarded to outside firms who submitted the lowest price, I pose the question as to why it is now right for the government to do exactly the same thing, Mr. Speaker. It is important to recognize the value gained from design contracts performed by local firms. They are better aware of local conditions, local priorities, and are better able to provide onsite services. I believe recognition of this added value is reflected in the criteria used to design and evaluate proposals.

Once again, I am pleased to see this government is continuing the work of the previous government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Duncan: The Yukon Liberal Party caucus would also like to compliment the minister on bringing forward these standards. We are looking forward to reviewing them in some detail.

The caucus is particularly pleased that these standards will be applied throughout Yukon. The thought, perhaps misconception, that buildings outside of Whitehorse are of a different standard than those in Whitehorse, will no longer be applicable. These standards will be applied to government buildings throughout the territory.

We are also particularly pleased that the design standards have focused on a number of points, especially optimizing the health, safety and comfort of occupants, the minimizing of capital costs, and the incorporating of energy features.

The proof of any action, of course, is in the pudding. We are especially interested in the application of the standards, particularly to the new schools anticipated to be built in several communities in Yukon, and particularly interested in the application of these standards as we determine suitable office space for the Government of Yukon employees in Watson Lake.

Hon. Mr. Sloan: Just in responding to a couple of these, the Member for Klondike takes the old Soviet line: if you don't like history, you rewrite it. Perhaps he's unaware of the fact that some of the schools that he's mentioned were actually designs that came in under an NDP government. As for the idea of making a uniform, off-the-shelf kind of plan, I have to emphasize that when we're talking about design standards, uniform design standards are not the same as uniform plans. Perhaps - I hate to use props again - but perhaps the member might like to take a look at this, at his leisure.

But I should point out that just because we may use a basic design does not necessarily mean that that school will be the exact same school. For example, even though the footprint of Holy Family has influenced the design of the Old Crow school, there are considerable changes. For one thing, the Holy Family school is a primary school and has certain features there, whereas the school in Old Crow has its own specific structural concerns, including issues revolving around the kind of students we have in terms of age levels and grade levels and so on and so forth, so I'm afraid the member is somewhat confused on that.

As I said, these will guide not only ourselves, in terms of construction of schools, but we are also hoping that partners that we may have in the future in terms of providing office space will have, with these standards, some guidelines that they can work with.

Speaker: This brings us to the Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Protected areas, Yellowstone to Yukon initiative

Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Renewable Resources.

On August 8 of this year, the B.C. premier, Glen Clark, announced an agreement to protect a huge area of wilderness in northern British Columbia, an area of about the size of Nova Scotia that's known as the Muskwa-Kechika, and it was one of the largest land use decisions of its kind in North America.

Mr. Speaker, given this government's commitment to preserve and protect our wilderness habitat and also its close relationship with its NDP counterpart in British Columbia, I'd like to ask the minister if there has been any discussion or any thought given to the Yukon establishing a wilderness area similar to the one that was announced in British Columbia.

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: First of all, we are aware of the Yellowstone to Yukon initiative. We haven't been part of any discussions with B.C. at all, through our department, and our own protected areas network is certainly going to be built here in the Yukon with participation of Yukon people, and that's where we stand with this right now.

Mr. Ostashek: Mr. Speaker, the B.C. agreement appears to protect some 4 million hectares of wilderness, and it also adds a significant piece to the puzzle that environmental groups have been trying to put together to establish an 1,800-mile protected zone from Yellowstone to the Yukon.

Yellowstone - it's the Yukon conservation initiative that's in stone, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to table a map that was in Globe and Mail that sets out a large portion of the Yukon as a dream of these conservationists, and it should come as no surprise to the government that this is making investors very, very nervous and the mining community very, very concerned.

So I would just again like to direct my question to the Minister of Renewable Resources and ask if the Yellowstone to Yukon conservation initiative was on the agenda for discussion when Premier Clark visited with the Government Leader of the Yukon a short time back.

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I'd like to thank the member for his question. Certainly, this was not a part of discussions that took place when the premier was here. We did take initiative when we got in as government to look at protected areas and since then we have worked at putting together a protected area strategy that suits Yukon needs and involves all the people in the industry to take part in that development, and that is where we stand with that now.

Mr. Ostashek: I thank the minister for that, Mr. Speaker. We are aware of the protected areas strategy and we are very supportive of it on this side of the House. We worked very, very diligently on it in our four years in office. But the map that's out today, the wish list of the conservationists, certainly takes in a far greater area of the Yukon than what I believe any government has thought about as a protected area strategy.

So, my final supplementary to the minister is, will the minister give assurances to this House that no decisions will be made on this Y-to-Y wilderness park prior to full consultation with Yukoners?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: Our government is committed to the strategy that we had announced previously, and that is the basis we are working on. We have not looked at taking a big chunk of the Yukon to be protected. We looked more or less at an ecosystem type of approach and we have a lot of work to do in those cases in regard to land use planning. Much of the industry has to be part of developing this, including the outfitters and trappers and everybody else who is involved in development, including the mining industry. So this is actually a very big initiative that's being put forward, and I do appreciate the member's support on this and I look forward to more support as we develop the strategy in detail.

Question re: Municipal block funding

Mr. Jenkins: My question today is for the Minister of Community and Transportation Services and it concerns municipal block funding.

On October 20, my colleague from Riverdale South, in a news release, raised the issue of the Yukon government using its heavy hand to impose government hiring standards on municipalities by attaching terms and conditions to their municipal block funding.

I can tell the minister that, from my previous background as a mayor, the municipalities will react negatively to any government tampering with their municipal grants. Will the minister give his assurance that there will be no local hire provisions attached to municipal block funding?

Hon. Mr. Keenan: It gives me pleasure to rise and answer the question from the member opposite.

The report of the local hire commissioner is not in yet and is not due in. We certainly will be looking at that report.

I would also like to say that I know that the Association of Yukon Communities is very concerned about downloading responsibilities, and my government maintains that certainly no expectations will be placed on the municipalities without full consultation between the parties.

Mr. Jenkins: It is common knowledge that the only government in the Yukon that is not practicing what it preaches in promoting local hire is this NDP government, with all its outside hiring and outside contracting.

Will the minister give us assurances that Yukon municipalities will not be forced to adopt a union-only hiring policy as a condition of receiving their municipal block funding. Will the minister do that?

Hon. Mr. Keenan: Certainly, I feel that we will be working with the Association of Yukon Communities. We will be working with the recommendations that come from the local hire commissioner. It is common knowledge that this government is doing what we said we would do. We will continue to do what we said we would do and we are doing what we said we would do.

We term it A Better Way. It got us elected and we are working toward that end.

Mr. Jenkins: Once again, the minister has failed to answer the question. The question was quite specific; it dealt with a union-only hiring policy as a condition of receiving municipal block funding. The minister failed to respond.

Yukon municipalities are concerned about the high-spending policies being advocated by this NDP government in its quest for local hire, and federal transfer payment reductions could seriously erode municipal budgets.

I would ask the minister to make a clear and unequivocal ministerial statement in this House that the government respects the autonomy of municipal governments and will not attempt, through bullying, intimidation, or any other provision, to impose local hire provisions, or any other provisions, upon municipalities that are unacceptable.

Hon. Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, I thank you very much for the opportunity, once again, to answer the member opposite's question.

Certainly, to echo my colleague to my left, we are not bullying anybody. We will never bully people, but we will work within a process that will establish what people want and how we're going to do it.

I certainly believe in local governance. I believe that the municipalities are doing a very good job with what they have. I'd also like to state right here, right now, that we have not been tinkering with their funding. We've been maintaining a consistent level of funding with the communities and have an open and ongoing dialogue.

In the next few weeks, I'm going to be having a meeting with the president of the Association of Yukon Communities, and it is going to be in that meeting, and others that are subsequent to that meeting, where we will, with dignity and honour amongst the two, come and do what is right. That is what we're going to do. This is not under the table or over the table. This is eyeball to eyeball, and that is exactly what this government was elected on, and we're going to continue to do that: open and honest and sincere and thoughtful.

Thank you very much.

Question re: Land information management system, local contracts

Ms. Duncan: My question is for the Minister of Government Services.

We've had several discussions in this Legislature regarding the sole sourcing of work on the land information management system, or LIMS, to NovaLIS. The sole sourcing is one aspect of the work. I'd like to leave that to higher authorities, namely the Auditor General, to look at.

The very real issue I would like to ask the minister about today is the opportunity for local companies to compete for this work. Yesterday, the minister stated in this House that he has "given assurances to interested parties that the government is interested in their participation." The minister went on to say that he gave assurances that he would be trying to make opportunities available to local companies.

Would the minister explain exactly what the assurances were that he gave to interested parties and precisely how he intends to make opportunities available to them?

Hon. Mr. Sloan: First of all, I will explain a little bit about what we expect to flow from this particular contract. There are a variety of contracts coming up having to do with the so-called LIMS project, but one of the things that we are anticipating is that there will be around $400,000 worth of data conversion work that will be contracted.

Some of this will involve maps and may be of interest to local engineering firms. The rest will be data entry kinds of processes. So, we feel that our local industry is well-positioned to take good advantage of that.

As well, with regard to the discussions that I had with the folks involved in GIS, they explained to me some of their concerns and some of the areas that they felt needed to be addressed. What we have suggested and what I have undertaken is that we would sit down with them. I asked for representatives, not only from people involved in the GIS, but it was also suggested perhaps from the information technology industry, to sit down with our people from Government Services, specifically from the information services branch, and discuss ways in which those companies could participate in some of the functions that we expect to flow out of the LIMS project. As devolution proceeds, there will be opportunities for different kinds of projects to flow out.

Ms. Duncan: I am pleased that the Minister of Government Services has finally seen what his colleague, the Minister of Economic Development, referred to the other day as local experts and the value of them.

Unfortunately, the minister has not given a clear answer to the question of how he would be trying to make opportunities available to local companies. He has indicated that he would work with industry to see what might flow out of the LIMS project.

Could I ask the minister to be more specific? Is he talking about requests for proposals that might be tendered after the LIMS project is complete? Are there time lines for whatever it is he is going to make available for local industry? Could the minister be more specific in the time line and precisely what he intends to make available?

Hon. Mr. Sloan: Just with regard to being overly specific as I suggested earlier, much of the development that will flow out of the LIMS project will take place in the future; much will have to do with devolution. There are, for example, things surrounding mineral leases, forestry leases, things of that nature.

We expect that the LIMS will form the basis for a number of future applications and I have had discussions with these people involved in GIS. They agreed that there are some opportunities here for applications that they could bid on and that they would have areas that they could perhaps make proposals on in the future.

I'm not interested in excluding them at all. What I think needs to be done - and I have to at this time thank my colleague in the Yukon hire commission for facilitating this meeting - is that we can say, "Here's where this project is going. These are the kinds of outcomes that we expect to see from it. These are the future developments. What ways can you see the local GIS industry going? What kinds of things can you bring forward where we can work together?"

Speaker: Would the minister please conclude his answer.

Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, what the minister just stated in this House is that he's paying lip service to local hire. He met with industry. I've asked him three times what specific opportunities and time lines are being given to local industry. Is there going to be a request for tender after LIMS is up and running? What crumbs are being given to local industry?

Hon. Mr. Sloan: It's simply a nonsensical question. The member is asking me to anticipate a whole variety of projects that will flow out. We do not know at this point. We don't know the time line. We don't know the time line for devolution, we don't know the time line for many of these things to flow. What I have given is an assurance to work with the industry to try and make sure that their opportunities are maximized. That's what I have done. We can't predict the pace of this future development, but we are willing to work with them.

Question re: Victims of domestic violence act

Mrs. Edelman: My question is for the Minister of Justice. Mr. Speaker, I read to you from A Better Way, the NDP election platform from the 1996 territorial election: "Yukon people have a right to not only be consulted but involved in things that affect them, from the beginning of a process until the end."

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Justice still stands by that statement?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I have spoken to a number of groups around the territory about their concerns about the very selective and poorly designed consultation on the victims of domestic violence act that this minister is intending to pass through this Legislature this fall.

Will the minister honour the words of her party before the election and do more extensive consultations throughout the Yukon on this positive and important piece of legislation?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the member's allegations. I would like to assure the member that our consultation work on the victims of family violence act has not been restrictive and is ongoing and is being expanded. I have received the letters that were written to me, which were copied to the member, with some concerns expressed by people in the communities about the implementation about the victims of family violence act, about various components of that. I am writing back to those people. I have been meeting with people about it, and I hope that, together with the support that I know is in place from members of opposition parties, we can bring forward a victims of family violence act tailored to the needs in our communities to deal with this very serious and very real problem.

Mrs. Edelman: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm beginning to wonder whether this act is going to come forward this fall. There are a number of groups that have concerns about this legislation. They have some reservations about the content of the bill. In other words, their concerns go beyond the implementation issues.

If the minister is unwilling to do a proper consultation outside this House, she does have other options. I would suggest that when this bill is being debated before the Committee of the Whole, the minister call witnesses to testify and voice their concerns. This has been done on a number of occasions: in May of 1992 when Mr. Penikett called witnesses on the Faro Mine Act; in May of 1991, when the now Government Leader, Piers McDonald, called witnesses on the Environment Act; and in January 1994, when Mr. Phelps called witnesses to speak on the Yukon Family Services Association Rent Guarantee Act.

Will the minister, if she's truly interested in consultation, agree to call witnesses before this Legislature during the debate, if there is a debate, on this very important piece of legislation?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Mr. Speaker, not only am I willing to do a proper consultation, we are, at the moment, engaged in doing a proper consultation with the community about the proposed victims of family violence act. I am willing to meet any time, any place, with any individual person or group who has an interest in this bill. There have already been public meetings. There will be more public meetings. There have been recommendations made about some of the implementation aspects of the bill that we will be following up on. There will also be a full debate in this Legislature when the bill is tabled, after we have received all of the comments from people who have things to say to us about it, and I look forward to that debate very much.

Question re: Centennial anniversaries program

Mr. Phillips: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Tourism, and it's regarding the CAP program.

On October 23, there was a statement issued, a press release, that stated that they could not release the $1.5 million territorial contribution for the Whitehorse community centre until the government's contribution is confirmed.

I have heard that this proposal was turned down by the interdepartmental technical committee, partly because it doesn't meet the criteria - number one, low or no tourism component and, number two, they had missed several deadlines. I wonder if the minister could confirm that the technical committee turned down and had strong reservations about this meeting the criteria that other communities had to meet.

Hon. Mr. Harding: I will respond in my capacity as Minister of Economic Development, which has taken a lead on this issue from assuming the portfolio upon the election last year.

With regard to the project, we have made it fundamentally clear that our commitment to the project should stand, but it is dependent on certain criteria being met. We have taken similar positions with projects in Ross River and in Teslin, because they were well along their way. There was a lot of work done and we felt it was important to have every opportunity afforded to the proponents to try and meet those criteria.

In this case, we have gone that extra mile to try and help the people proposing this project to meet the conditions. Unfortunately, although our money has been there, our good friends in Ottawa, the Liberal government, have not been as supportive of this project as they publicly stated.

I would say that, until the Liberal government comes up with a commitment, it's very difficult for the unity foundation to meet some of the criteria that's been put before them.

Mr. Phillips: This project that was initially supposed to be a tourism project is now turning into a community centre project. My concern is that it doesn't conform with the guidelines as set out by CAP. All other communities in this territory had to abide by those guidelines.

The minister didn't answer my question. The question I had for the minister was this: did the technical committee turn this down based on the fact that it didn't meet the guidelines - that it had a low or no tourism component - and that they missed several deadlines? Was the recommendation from the technical committee to actually turn it down, and what has happened is the consequence of there being a political decision to actually fund the project?

Hon. Mr. Harding: Let me just say to the member that, first of all, this project has many similarities with other CAP projects, notably the project that was built by the members opposite in Haines Junction, which also has aspects of a community centre/convention centre as a component of the project.

With regard to the technical committee, as I said to the member in the answer to the first question, they have identified that there are concerns in terms of meeting the criteria.

I have told the member opposite that until the federal government comes forward with the money it is going to be almost impossible for them to meet that criteria.

Mr. Phillips: Mr. Speaker, the federal government coming forward with the money has nothing to do with the criteria. All other communities in this territory had to meet that criteria, and some communities were told to go back to the drawing board and reconform the design of their program so they'd meet the criteria. What this government is doing is making a political decision to fund a community centre project with money that was earmarked for tourism at the objections of the tourism industry in the territory.

I would ask the minister to go back to the drawing board on this one and to consider that the use of this money was for a tourism-related project to enhance tourism in the territory, and to admit that this community centre project, as designed and as submitted to the minister, has very little tourism component, and the money would be better spent in other areas related to tourism.

Hon. Mr. Harding: This project is very similar, as I just told the member, in many aspects, to what was put forward by the previous government in Haines Junction.

We have given more time to other communities - Ross River, Teslin - and, Mr. Speaker, we've done that because we want them to be afforded the full opportunity to meet the criteria of the program.

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the issues around the criteria, the tourism marketing component is one of the things that is still a difficult issue, and that is because they are not prepared to invest the money in developing this criteria until there's a commitment of funding from the federal government. So, it's a chicken and egg scenario.

So, Mr. Speaker, they are trying to meet the tourism component of this but, until they have a firm commitment from Ottawa for the funding, they do not want to frankly spend any more time and volunteer efforts to come forward with this project.

Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation, Aishihik Lake compensation claims

Mr. Cable: I have some questions for the minister responsible for the Energy Corporation.

Earlier this year, the Yukon Energy Corporation invited Yukoners who thought they were entitled to compensation because they were affected by the Energy Corporation's Aishihik Lake operations to come forward and file a claim. The theory was that Yukon Energy would like to deal with the claims in preparation for the Aishihik Lake water licence renewal.

Now, about a month ago, the Energy Corporation said there had been about 75 people file applications for compensation. Since receipt of the claims, has the Energy Corporation made an estimate - even a rough estimate - of the total amount of compensation that the ratepayers are looking at in the way of exposure? Is it $100,000, $1 million or $10 million? What is the rough estimate that we're looking at?

Hon. Mr. Harding: First of all, this process of addressing issues of compensation in the Energy Corporation was around when the member opposite was president of the Energy Corporation. It continued on into the discussions when the previous Yukon Party government was in office. This is not something new invented by this government, Mr. Speaker. This is something that has come forward at this time because those discussions are coming to a head with regard to the issue of the impact of Aishihik Lake and its impact on the traditional people who inhabited that area.

With regard to the estimates, the claims are still being sorted out. As I said to the member at the time the issue came forward by the Energy Corporation, the federal government is ultimately responsible for the damage or the compensatory awards that may come forward. Mr. Speaker, we stand by that.

Mr. Cable: I do not think the minister said that at all. I think he said that the federal government was responsible for the operations up to the date of the takeover.

Now, before the invitation was put out for these claims to come forward, had the Energy Corporation made a rough estimate on the exposure - this is before the claims came forward - and if so, what was it?

Hon. Mr. Harding: In terms of that information, I can provide that to the member. I understand he has an appointment with the new chair of the board, who is responsible for dealing with issues and working with the government on issues that pertain to energy policy; that pertain to issues around re-licensing. So, I invite him to take up that question with the chair of the board when he sits down with him shortly.

Mr. Cable: Well, one of the purposes of Question Period is to get some information out for the public. Perhaps the minister will take that into recognition when he invites me to have this luncheon with the chair of the board.

What was the target date that was set to resolve these claims? Could the minister tell us when he thinks these claims will be resolved, so that the taxpayers and the ratepayers will have some idea of the exposure?

Hon. Mr. Harding: It is not the taxpayers or the ratepayers of the Yukon; it is the federal government's liability and responsibility.

I am very surprised at the member. I am very disappointed that the Liberal Party in this territory has no recognition of the claims that have been long-standing for years of people who have been affected by that area. I think it is indicative of the type of approach of the Liberal Party in this territory. They stand on both sides of every issue.

I would like to know, if the member is opposed to this compensation action and the re-licensing, then he should stand up and say so.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS

MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS

Clerk: Motion No. 72, standing in the name of the hon. Mr. Livingston.

Motion No. 72

Point of order

Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, before you put Motion No. 72 before this House, I would like to declare that I may have a conflict of interest with regard to this motion. I therefore will not participate in the debate or cast votes with respect to this motion.

Speaker: It is moved by the Member for Lake Laberge

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) Yukoners deserve reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service;

(2) the present telephone service does not adequately serve the varied needs of rural and urban Yukoners;

(3) the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has a responsibility to Yukoners to ensure that regulated competition facilities lower long-distance rates, improved service and extension of services in underserved areas;

(4) all telephone services directed toward basic home and business use in the Yukon should be regulated by the CRTC to ensure reliable, affordable and accessible service;

(5) the Government of the Yukon should urge the CRTC to direct telecommunications companies operating in Canada to establish a fund to expand the Yukon's telecommunications infrastructure; and

(6) the Government of the Yukon should actively pursue all avenues to promote reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service in the territory.

Mr. Livingston: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to rise and present this motion to the House today - a motion about reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service for Yukoners - because I know that this is a matter that affects virtually every Yukoner.

There are three key issues: reliability, affordability and accessibility, and I'm pleased to see that members on this side of the House have a great deal of concern about this particular matter.

On the question of reliability, we see a number of different areas, from Ruraltel users - who have concerns about losing a particular service, about the cost of their particular service - to Internet users who feel that they can't rely on the quality of the service that's provided, to those that use the radio phones and the fax services, and we find that individuals and small business owners and the public across the Yukon want to be able to have reliable telephone service.

Mr. Speaker, service also needs to be affordable. It needs to be affordable, not only to businesses or individuals that may have higher incomes, but it needs to be affordable to those that have lower incomes.

I note the tribute today to Pat Carberry, who argued vociferously for special, affordable rates for seniors in the area of telephones.

Now, take a look at the typical Ruraltel bill that comes along, where people to date have been charged for every call that's outgoing and every minute of that call that's outgoing and, of course, the new proposals are that they will be charged, as well, for incoming calls - like the negative advertising we recall with Roger's Cable here some time ago, where you don't really have a choice when that call comes in, but you've got to pay for it anyway.

So the issue of affordability is one for Yukoners as well.

Accessibility is another issue, accessibility to affordable and reliable telephone service. We have citizens within less than 10 miles of the City of Whitehorse, the capital city in the Yukon, who aren't able to access regular, affordable telephone service. They need to pay a Ruraltel bill that might average $100 or $200, without much in the way of long-distance calls, or are simply unable to be added to the network, because the network is not there. I know, for example, in the riding of Lake Laberge we have people on the Takhini River Road, which is not very far out of Whitehorse, who simply are not able to access telephone service.

The present telephone service does not adequately serve the varied needs of rural Yukoners. In fact, if we examine what's described as the penetration rate of telephone service in the Yukon as compared to other parts of Canada, we find that in other rural areas of Canada it approaches 100 percent. Virtually every home in rural Canada in other parts of Canada south of 60 have a telephone. In the Yukon, Mr. Speaker, we have a penetration rate of less than 90 percent. That means about one in nine people does not have access to a telephone service. As I've mentioned already, that includes people that are less than 10 miles outside of this town.

In addition, we have small, remote communities that need to be treated specially. In the past, they have been treated specially in other parts of Canada, and this needs to continue here.

I know that Yukoners have been dissatisfied that service extensions have not really progressed very far in the last few years, and people are looking for that extension of service, and I would say, too, Mr. Speaker, that what was previously unrealistic to expect in terms of extension of service from the telephone service provider has now become quite feasible. New possibilities exist for the delivery of services. We have new participants that exist in the telecommunications sector. We have examples of local innovations. We have participants capable of spurring innovation and addressing some of the long-standing problems through adaptations of existing technology through new technology and so on.

I would note, too, Mr. Speaker, that the Canadian government also recognizes the need for good service to exist across the Yukon, and in fact, the 1993 Telecommunications Act establishes a benchmark objective to - and I quote - "render reliable and affordable telecom services of high quality, accessible to Canadians in both urban and rural areas in all regions of Canada." The commission, in Telecom decision 94-19 stressed that, "Any changes to the current regulatory framework must be conducive to the attainment of the following objectives," and I'd like to list these objectives: for universal accessibility to basic telephone services; that there should be an opportunity for telephone company shareholders to earn a reasonable return on their investment; there should be an equitable treatment of subscribers in terms of service and price - and of course that, once again, extends to rural customers as well as urban customers - there should be an assurance that telephone companies do not unfairly take advantage of their monopoly or dominant market positions in dealing with competitors; and finally, Mr. Speaker, encouragement of the development and widespread availability of new technology and innovative services to respond to the needs of business and residence customers.

So, how do we take these common objectives and apply them to our needs here in the Yukon? Well, Mr. Speaker, I have already addressed a couple of the problem areas, and I'm going to talk just a little bit more about the problems, because that will help us to have some context for then talking about some solutions.

We've all seen, in the last month or so in the Yukon, the concerns that Ruraltel subscribers have expressed.

They've had numerous public meetings. There's been a number of news stories on them, and they have basically three concerns. The first one is about costs and about the desire that their costs not increase for what really is a substandard service. Currently, they pay a cost for every outgoing call and, of course, they're facing now a tariff increase that would have them charged for every incoming call as well.

I think most members of the community are familiar with the concerns about reliability, about the recordings that you too frequently receive that say, "This phone service is not available at this time." Finally, on the area of quality, being able to access services such as fax services, Internet services, and so on, now those should be made available, one way or another, to rural telephone subscribers.

So, people are disappointed that improvement in technology is not coming as fast to the Yukon as it seems to be coming to the rest of the country. And there's a sense, certainly, that the gap continues to widen. Many Yukoners feel that data transmission and Internet services are substandard in many areas of the territory.

Frankly, Mr. Speaker, in new, competitive environments, we support innovative solutions to long-standing problems such as these.

Yukoners are also concerned about competitive rates, Mr. Speaker. In the Yukon, for a cross-Canada call, we pay in the order of 90 cents a minute. Other Canadians are paying 15 cents a minute. Even our neighbours in the Eastern Arctic, Mr. Speaker, are paying something in the order, I believe, of 46 cents a minute. That's their maximum rate for a cross-Canada call.

This is simply unacceptable, Mr. Speaker, and we can ask the question, I think, not only is this about calling family and friends across Canada, but it's also very difficult for a small business to compete with a business from any other region in Canada, when our long-distance costs are eight times as high. Just think of that, Mr. Speaker. We have to pay $800, for the $100 bill that a small business in southern Canada might face.

The benefits from regulated competition will be felt by businesses and by households that make extensive use of long-distance services. Lower communication costs support economic development and trade and investment initiatives, and we heard a little bit about some of the work that this government is facilitating and supporting yesterday in this House.

Clearly, competitive long-distance rates impact on our ability to keep in touch with family and friends and on our ability to compete effectively. This considerable discrepancy between Yukoners and other Canadians inhibits our ability to be competitive and, indeed, Northwestel quite vigorously polices any illegal bypass that anyone might be tempted to undertake.

So, the Yukon government has committed itself to positive response to competition simply because we see that regulated competition can help to create an environment that will support innovative solutions to some of these long-standing problems.

I would like to turn, Mr. Speaker, to point (3) in the motion, which talks about the CRTC and the responsibility that the CRTC has to Yukoners to ensure that regulated competition facilitates lower long-distance rates, improved service and an extension of services in under-served areas.

I would like to just start off with the CRTC. In the Yukon, we have a pretty fragile telecommunications market. In that context, competition is only welcomed if it can be regulated and if it can serve the purposes that we have for this monopoly utility in the Yukon. I have referenced the mandate provided under the 1993 Telecommunications Act that really underlines once again that there is a role for regulation in supporting these kinds of conditions within the Yukon for reliable, affordable and accessible service for all Yukoners, both urban and rural.

Regulated competition must be introduced and regulated in a way that the quality of service will not deteriorate. It needs to ensure that competition does not allow high-grade profitable telecommunications markets where we find competitors simply coming in and taking off the cream.

It is important for both Northwestel and the CRTC to ensure that changes in the competitive environment do not result in local access rates becoming unaffordable. And once again, we think about seniors and other people who are on lower incomes, in particular, but I know all Yukoners are concerned about this as well.

The active presence of several highly active entrepreneurial firms has created a competitive environment in some respects in the Yukon and we see this particularly in the area, I think, of Internet provision, where we have one of the higher rates, certainly, of Internet users across Canada. It has been suggested, in fact, that these local alternative service providers have temporarily buffeted Yukon consumers against price increases from Northwestel.

I think, given the general direction of telecommunications services across the country, where we have seen a significant lowering of long-distance rates and the benefits that has provided to consumers, whether they be residential or business consumers in the south, there is not much question of whether competition will be introduced, but the real test, of course, is how it will be introduced to the Yukon.

Yukoners and Yukon businesses are fully aware of improvements elsewhere in services and pricing and, hence, have pretty high expectations about what's possible there. We know that there's a considerable gap between our prices and prices in the south.

We also expect to see improved service through the regulated competition that CRTC can facilitate, particularly, and I note again, that Yukoners have a sense that service has declined. We know that improvements in technology are there, or certainly are potentially there, and we expect to see those in the Yukon. Regulated competition can help us to see that.

There's a sense as well that restructuring at our local telephone company in the last few years seems to have negatively affected the quality of service and once again regulated competition is one means of possibly addressing that.

There's a sense from Yukoners that data transmission Internet services are substandard here and Yukoners look to the Internet. I think we see the high rate of subscription here. They look to it for a variety of new opportunities, in education, tourism, in business and by the public generally. There is a sense that we want to be able to use this information highway for global sharing of information and, with the expansion of low-cost data services, I think businesses see this as an opportunity to access international markets and educators see it as an opportunity and, really, all Yukoners see it as an opportunity for lifelong learning and for accessing new information and concepts from a distance.

We assert, in point (4), that all telephone services directed toward basic home and business use in the Yukon should be regulated by the CRTC to ensure reliable, affordable and accessible service. I would note, once again, Mr. Speaker, that we have a monopoly utility in the Yukon and that's the condition that exists in most areas of the country, at least on the local network, in the maintenance and delivery of the local network services. So, even with long-distance competition, even with regulated competition in the long-distance market, we will still have a monopoly utility at the local end.

In any monopoly situation, there needs to be some protection of the public interest.

We know, for example, even in terms of how the ownership of the telephone industry is organized, that we have our local company, Northwestel, that has a wholly-owned subsidiary in NMI Mobility. Northwestel itself is owned by one of the largest corporations in Canada, Bell Canada. So we see a fairly interconnected type of system here, and while Northwestel has made some persuasive arguments to the CRTC about the high cost of delivering, the hardships of providing telecom service in a northern environment - they mention things like a harsh climate, extremely vast area, small, dispersed subscriber market - nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, we need to not lose sight of the fact that there are a lot of linkages throughout this system, and that's going to lead me, in a couple of moments, to my fifth point, which talks about the establishment of a national fund.

Mr. Speaker, I know that we had a newspaper ad out here last week from a small, less regulated telephone company that listed a lot of fictions, but I know from talking to other Yukoners that there are concerns about assets trading hands and companies on the one hand that are more regulated and other companies that are less regulated and wholly owned subsidiaries. There are questions around that, and, you know, there may be an appetite from that particular company to try to lay some of those concerns to rest, but there is a public interest here, because there is a monopoly utility.

Mr. Speaker, small, remote communities deserve special treatment to provide modern communications facilities and services. Yukoners are looking for competitive long-distance rates that allow them to compete with businesses in other parts of Canada and for all Yukon persons to be able to contact their family and friends at reasonable rates. So, that's why we need to have regulation of our telephone services, all telephone services, whether it be home or business use, to ensure that we're not trading one gain for significant losses in other areas. When we have one out of every nine homes in the Yukon not even having telephone service, we can't simply trade that away for a savings on long-distance markets.

We need to find some way of regulating and ensuring that we are moving forward on all of our objectives.

I believe that regulated competition by the CRTC can ensure reliable, affordable and accessible service despite corporate restructuring, despite a fragile telecommunications market and in a way that supports both good quality telephone service, as well as services like Internet access, fax service and other multi-media services.

The Yukon government has committed itself to a positive response to competition. We should welcome changes in attitude which reflect the new competitive environment and support innovative solutions to long-standing problems.

I think the fact that Yukoners currently feel they are underserved; the fact that we have the highest long-distance rates in the country; the fact that the Yukon is in the running to be the most underserved in the country, in terms of telephones, supports the contention that we need regulated competition overseen by the CRTC.

What kinds of levers can the CRTC use to achieve these many goals? The Yukon government is promoting the creation of an industry-maintained national support fund to allow competition to be introduced into the north without disruption to the provision and extension of affordable local service.

We recognize the importance of telecommunications in a country like Canada - the second largest nation in the world - and especially in Canada's north, where telecommunications is a vital link between family members, our schools and communities and businesses and the community that they serve.

This type of a national support fund, by the way, is advocated by the Government of the Northwest Territories, as well as by the Government of Saskatchewan. Both are jurisdictions, I would note, in this country that have larger than average rural areas.

It is also in line with what the United States has done.

The benefits from competition will be felt by businesses and by households that make extensive use of long-distance services. Lower communication costs support economic development and trade and investment initiatives, as I said earlier, and this type of a fund would go an awfully long way to supporting a more competitive tariff structure than we currently have, and it would not take away from the expectation that our local telephone provider will extend affordable services in the small, remote communities.

But this would not be a fund that the local telephone service provider would simply be able to write a cheque on. Indeed, we would expect that Northwestel's access to the fund would be governed by its success in meeting pre-set targets, such as extension of service and the quality of service delivered.

In this way, Yukoners should expect to see an improvement in service, service extended to rural and more remote areas, and significantly lower long-distance rates over the next five years, rather than what we've seen over the last five.

Indeed, this should strengthen the ability of Northwestel, our current service provider, and its workers to provide the kind of reliable, affordable, accessible service that Yukon citizens are looking for, and that's very much, Mr. Speaker, what this government wants to see.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the motion also speaks to the Government of the Yukon being committed - and we are committed - to actively pursuing all avenues to promote reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service in the territory. First of all, I would note that the Yukon government is playing an advocacy role. We're advocating, for example, that industry maintains a national support fund that I've just mentioned. The access to that fund, of course, would be governed by success in meeting those various targets.

This government has also made submissions to the CRTC, where we articulate public goals for the monopoly telecommunications industry, and our government's specific goals for Northwestel are, one, to undertake a program to extend affordable service to presently underserviced and underserved areas and, secondly, to undertake improvements to the quality of service throughout the Yukon and, third, to make substantial reductions in long-distance rates.

Mr. Speaker, this government has also requested that, through the CRTC, that Northwestel provide a three-year outline for any proposed tariff changes, and that would, I know, help Yukoners to anticipate, as they, for example, do business plans, as we would plan our own initiatives. It would give us some sense of what was coming a little bit further down the road.

So that's the first item, I think. The first role the Yukon government is playing is one of advocacy for interests of the Yukon public to the CRTC, the national regulatory body.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, from time to time the government will become directly involved where it seems appropriate. The spread of the Internet, an initiative for which the Yukon government took the lead, has been very important in this regard, initiating interest in the Internet services where very little existed before. I would thank the previous government for setting aside their ideology for a moment and for recognizing that government can play a lead role from time to time, and that's okay.

Certainly we've seen Internet use take off in this territory, and that would seem to have been a good initiative.

Third, Mr. Speaker, the Yukon government is intending to make some changes to the rural electrification and telephone program, the RETP, that will make this program more accessible to those communities that would choose to access it.

I know that over the coming weeks, the minister responsible will be leading those discussions and coming forward with some proposals in that particular area, and I look forward with a great deal of interest to what is going to occur there because I know that there are communities out there in my own riding that are interested in seeing affordable telephone services extended into those areas. This can be one of the tools that can help that to happen.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, this government should support new innovations and pilot projects where they make sense and where they meet our objectives of promoting reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service. To that end, members of the government caucus have met with officials of Northwestel to identify various ways of working to achieve these kinds of objectives. I know that this government will be open and interested in any affordable options that would move us in that direction.

This government recognizes the value of an expanded telecommunications infrastructure for this territory, both for the citizens in their day-to-day use, keeping in touch with their loved ones, communicating in cases of emergencies to hospitals and other services. Local businesses will accrue the benefits, given affordable types of services, of access to affordable service locally and through affordable long-distance rates.

We recognize the value of that solid telecommunications infrastructure, and in that sense we recognize that government has a role to play in ensuring this public good comes about.

We recognize that to take advantage of these new technologies and minimize the costs, long-term strategies and coordination are required. Relationships between governments, First Nations, citizens and suppliers of telecommunications services will be fundamentally altered by the emergence of both regulated competition and the new partnerships that will be essential to development of our system to its full potential.

Mr. Speaker, I know that Yukoners deserve reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service and I know that this government will do everything that it can within its financial and research abilities to bring this about.

Mr. Jenkins: The quality of Yukon's telecommunications service, while critically important to all Yukoners, is of primary concern to rural Yukoners. Rural business people, like their urban counterparts, must be able to contact their customers, suppliers and other associates. Rural contractors must be able to contact companies and government. Highway lodge owners who depend on the business generated by tour buses must be able to contact, and be contacted by, tour companies and travel agents. Camp operators, who have a very short operating season, must be able to place orders, contact customers and other businesses.

Rural business people encounter a variety of unique problems and challenges by virtue of operating a business in a rural location within a sparsely populated and vast territory. They must be able to depend upon receiving at least adequate telecommunications service on a consistent basis.

Rural residents, rural health stations, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police - they must be able to be contacted by, and contact. A telecommunications system which functions efficiently and effectively and meets their telecommunication needs on a day-to-day basis is of paramount importance, especially in the case of emergencies.

The cost of communications is a concern shared by many Yukoners, particularly those who believe that they are not currently receiving value for money spent on this vital service.

Yukon's size, our geographic features and the distance between communities present problems not only for those who deliver telecommunications but for those who receive and rely upon them.

When rural businesses cannot make, receive or complete calls when connections are poor, repairs slow, business is reduced and/or lost and time is consumed in travelling many miles to use another telecommunication service, even if that is an option, Mr. Speaker.

Of vital importance is Canada's northern development and it cannot efficiently and effectively be achieved without an adequate telecommunications infrastructure.

The tripod on which an economy is built is three-fold: energy, communications and transportation. Government plays a very important role in two of those. The third functions in a government-regulated environment.

Community development requires communications. Business development depends upon it. Telecommunications are not optional services or luxury services, and decisions respecting their delivery and costs are a fact. They're a fact of business today. They're a fact of operating any household. We've come to rely upon the telephone, and yet, here in the north, we are not served. One has to just look at the penetration rate that Northwestel has achieved in this area with respect to delivery of this vital service.

When Ruraltel was installed nearly 10 years ago, it was offered by Northwestel as being more efficient, wider-ranging than the land lines that were removed along the principal highways of Yukon that, at that time, provided basic phone service. This service was going to provide phone service to those within reasonable proximity to Northwestel transmitter sites. Problems associated with Ruraltel have been complex, numerous and have resulted in nothing but headaches for many, many of us, never mind the cost of this service, Mr. Speaker. Yet Yukoners are having to bear the brunt of inconveniences and costs required to operate this antiquated and obsolete system.

Customers of Ruraltel who already pay a premium for basic local access should not be faced with the additional cost, particularly when the service has proven to be unreliable and trouble-plagued since its installation.

The 400 system is now obsolete. The 800 system, which was advocated by many at the onset of cell-system phones here in the north, was ignored by Northwestel at that juncture. Northwestel advocated that it was too expensive an option, required many more cells, and they could provide much wider and better coverage at less rates.

History has proven them wrong.

It was Northwestel who also removed the land lines along the principal highways of the Yukon communities, promising a better telephone service with Ruraltel. Again, we are paying the price of this monopoly provider.

Perhaps the minister, or the mover of the motion - the Member for Lake Laberge - could, in his rebuttal or closing remarks, make comment to the advice that he offered the residences being serviced by Ruraltel. I refer, Mr. Speaker, to a newsclip from Friday, October 17, that says, "Livingston says the government is making changes that will make regular phone service more widely available in rural areas. He says people should keep that in mind and wait for a while if they're considering signing any contracts with NMI. That's what I'm, at this point, urging Yukoners to do, because I would hate to see them get locked into a two-year contract and then find out a month later that, in fact, there is another option available here. So I don't want people to get locked in before they really have the full story. Livingston says the NDP promised Yukoners better and more affordable phone service for rural customers. Now he says his government is taking action." Well, Mr. Speaker, what I am seeking from the Member for Lake Laberge is what he's suggesting that Ruraltel users do at this juncture.

Many, many Ruraltel customers are opposing rate hikes. When we look at the structure set up here in the north, Ma Bell, the owner of Northwestel, has identified one of its areas in which it's not making a profit - that being the eastern Arctic - and conveniently sold that off and created one rate zone all across northern Canada. It sounds great having one rate zone and having our own identity - our new 867 exchange. Now that it's changed over, more and more of you will find out that when you pick up your phone and dial a 1-800 number that used to work previously, it is now being declined.

This change, in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, was made by Northwestel and Ma Bell to maximize the profits of their various entities. Likewise, this new entity in the north, NMI Mobility, is being created to maximize their profits in another centre. This company is being spun off, although the umbilical cord is not being cut to Northwestel, to improve their profitability in a given area - an unregulated area, Mr. Speaker.

One area into which Northwestel does invite competition is this area of wireless. Northwestel, if you speak to them, will say it's open to anyone; just come on in. The reality of it is that the marketplace here in the north is so small, and the interconnect fees to Northwestel are so high, it is a fruitless exercise for any wireless company to look at. Oh, there might be small exceptions in some of the major centres, like Yellowknife, like Whitehorse, and perhaps up in the Mackenzie Delta but, overall, there doesn't appear to be any profit-making centres that could exist on their own, given the stringent requirements placed on the wireless company for interconnect to the Northwestel system.

We have, here in the north, one company with a monopoly. Profit is a cost, and they package a product to us. Service doesn't even enter into the scenario. Of late, there have been many steps taken by Northwestel to improve the level of service. In fact, if you phone what used to be called wait-1-1, which is 8-1-1, it is answered rather quickly today. Many months ago, you could hang on the line for a considerable length of time, then be placed on hold, or be shuffled from voice mailbox to voice mailbox, throughout their whole system. It's amazing how a company can run without people - with just voice mail.

Mr. Speaker, we could go on for hours and hours on end about this issue. The issue is that rural Yukoners - all Yukoners - require access to communication services at an affordable and reliable cost.

That's the aim. That's what we should all be aiming to achieve. Our various motions, Mr. Speaker - my motion and the motion from the Member for Lake Laberge - are not too dissimilar, but I would propose a friendly motion, or an amendment to Motion No. 72.

Amendment proposed

Mr. Jenkins: I move

THAT Motion No. 72 be amended by adding the following paragraph:

"(7) The Hansard of the debate on this motion be forwarded to CRTC to advise it of the views of the Yukon Legislative Assembly on this important issue."

Speaker: It has been moved by the Member for Klondike that Motion No. 72 be amended by adding the following paragraph:

"(7) The Hansard of the debate on this motion be forwarded to CRTC to advise it of the views of the Yukon Legislative Assembly on this important issue."

Mr. Jenkins: I would urge that the House support unanimously this friendly amendment to the motion with the hopes of achieving some results from our telco provider, Northwestel.

As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, one could go on at great lengths about Northwestel, but I believe we have to recognize that Northwestel has a monopoly: one product; profit is a cost to us. They are doing a poor job, although there have been improvements in service delivery, and they should be forced in their regulated monopoly to make every attempt to improve service and lower costs to Yukoners - indeed to all northerners. Thank you very much.

Mr. Livingston: Mr. Speaker, we certainly would have done that in any event and would support the amendment moved by the Member for Klondike.

Mrs. Edelman: On the amendment, this party has no problem with sending it forward, and putting out information is always useful.

Amendment to Motion 72 agreed to

Speaker: Is there any further debate on the main motion as amended?

Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to see this government bring forward a territorial issue for discussion on private members' day. That's been a rare occurrence in the past year.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support any initiative that promotes good service throughout the Yukon. Phones are life lines for many people. Phones are social outlets for some, and phones are valuable business tools for all of us who engage in the marketplace.

Speaking of the private sector, in B.C., the provincial government struck a positive and productive partnership with the private sector and developed a program called the electronic highway. I wonder if the Department of Community and Transportation Services has reviewed this program with an eye to using it here in the Yukon. We have limited resources here. Borrowing ideas, especially good ones, from other jurisdictions is a way to prevent continually re-inventing the wheel or, in this case, the phone.

Now, I have written the Minister of Community and Transportation Services about phone service in Tagish. Tagish is the fastest growing community in the Yukon right now. A great number of the people moving into this lakefront area are retirees. I know a number of the seniors out there, and they have a notion, apparently gleaned from the minister himself, that phone service is going to be brought into their area under a program similar to the rural electrification program. I wonder if this is still the plan.

I have not yet received a reply to my letter to the minister.

When my husband and myself built our cabin out at Marsh Lake, we paid a great deal of money to bring the phone line into our property and then we had to pay additional money to have a pole put in and bring the line in from the road. We did not get any deals from the phone company or the government to bring in the service, and thousands of other Yukoners did not get a deal either. I am wondering - and I know the minister speaks next - to what extent is the government willing to subsidize rural phone service with tax dollars, and if that subsidy is not to be funded with Yukon tax dollars, then who is going to be subsidizing the infrastructure development fund mentioned in subparagraph 5 of the motion?

Generally speaking, Mr. Chair, I support this motion, but I look forward to the minister's comments in some of the rather gray areas of this detail-lacking motion.

Hon. Mr. Keenan: It gives me pleasure to stand and speak on behalf of and in support of this motion. Let me first of all say why. I am a rural Yukoner. I come from a rural area and I live out in the boondocks, as you might say, and appreciate the quality of living that comes with it. Many people in the Yukon are in that same mode.

As I have been a part of government, as I took my position and my party's platform to the people within my riding, it became very apparent to me that there are no telephones out there and a lot of people, especially with an aging population, are moving to the country. It is a more quality of life, in my opinion. People deserve it.

Now, as the educated get older and people move, it does not mean that although they move to a rural area that the quality of living should diminish. Indeed, I do believe that the quality of living should be as expected of what they would wish and as they wish.

Certainly, a phone is more than a luxury. It is something that is essential to your life at this point in time. It connects you to family; it connects you to health; it connects you to your grandchildren. In the absence of a phone, it puts a risk factor that should definitely not be there and should not be in your life at all.

Mr. Speaker, as I speak I am reminded of folks from Tagish that told me about an almost-near disaster at Christmas of 1995 when they had their grandchildren out to see them and to be there with them during the Christmas break, and one of the grandchildren went into a convulsion for medical reasons. And it was Christmas and it was cold and it was blowing, and they barely got that child into a hospital situation. I find that intolerable, I guess I could say, and that people do not deserve that. If people are willing and desirous of quality living, then I do believe it is incumbent upon us to go forth in that manner.

This government is here to support affordable service in underserved areas, improvements in the quality of service, and certainly, Mr. Speaker, a substantial reduction in long-distance rates. And we want to do this in partnership. We want to do this in conjunction with people. We are certainly not here to throw out the baby with the bathwater, but more importantly we're here to provide a service to Yukoners, wherever you live.

As I said, a basic telephone service is an essential communication. It is very important to us that live out there and it must be made reliable and provided certainly at a reasonable cost.

It is also an objective - affordable basic service - of the Canadian telecommunications policy and it is central to the federal government's visions for the information highway. I've heard my colleague from Lake Laberge, the Member for Klondike, the Member for Riverdale North and South all speak quite eloquently about what it means, and certainly I will not take up too much time but let me embellish a little bit.

The way people live now and what we do, we're doing things differently than what we did 10 years ago, 15 or even 20 years ago. We're doing things differently. People do not simply go to school now for five years, to college or a learning institution, and then proceed to a job for 20 years. Times are different now, especially in Yukon. You must be flexible and willing to work within different areas in order to maintain a lifestyle.

The communication highway can be used for marketing the cottage industry at home. People can stay at home and work at home out of there. It can be used for marketing. It would encourage the marketing initiatives of small business. As people have said, for tourism, indeed in the bus traffic, it's simply unlimited. So that, Mr. Speaker, I do believe is a very, very important factor.

Many Yukoners feel that the data transmission and Internet services are substandard in most areas of the territory, and we must certainly improve upon that. Yukoners are very aware of the potential of the new technology and assisting with the learning as an educational tool that provides access to the global village.

Mr. Speaker, you've heard me speak many times about the environment and about communication. Simple talk, Mr. Speaker, amongst people will bring the world to a better place. It will make it a better place to live in. By communicating, Mr. Speaker, you will solve problems. You will not be lobbing mudshells, or whatever you would call them - mud balls, snowballs, whatever - into other people's places, and then waiting for one to come, but simple communication is, indeed, a part of healing the world in my vision.

Mr. Speaker, in order to accommodate that, we must work in partnerships between governments, all levels of governments, First Nations governments, the citizens and the suppliers of the telecommunications services. We'll all be needed to be encouraged to develop these new partnerships to meet the needs of the Yukoner. Indeed, that is what we are here for, for the needs of the Yukoner, and not the individual but all Yukoners.

These partnerships are very essential for Yukoners to minimize the costs and have access to the new technologies, and for developing the long-term strategies. That is what this will bring about.

I think, specifically, our goal, Mr. Speaker, must be to ensure access to essential services for all Yukoners at reasonable cost, including those that live in rural areas and those in lower income groups. Phone service should not be the right of the elite or where your geographical location is.

Areas such as the Mendenhall, the Klondike River valley, the Takhini River subdivision, the Marsh Lake subdivisions area, the Lake Laberge and Squanga Lake areas, the California Beach at Tagish, Taku subdivision, the cottage lots on Teslin, and other areas that I might have missed, have either no service at all or very, very expensive service options.

Mr. Speaker, people are looking for a better quality of life in the country. I think they deserve it, and I think that again it is incumbent upon government to help where we can within reasonable manners.

Mr. Speaker, the penetration rate has been mentioned, and I must reiterate. In southern Canada, the penetration rate for telephone service is 98.5 percent. By contrast, the penetration rate in the Yukon is only at 87 percent. I do realize that the population base is mostly in the Whitehorse area, in the southern area, but certainly, I reiterate again, that it should not be bound by geography. Where you choose to live, whether it's in Old Crow, Ross River or wherever, you do have that right.

Mr. Speaker, with that penetration rate, what it means is that at least three communities have penetration rates that range from 25 to 29 percent. That means that three-quarters of the people in Old Crow, Ross River, and more than two-thirds of the people in Pelly Crossing do not have the option of making telephone calls from their own homes, even from places of emergency, let alone elders that want to speak to their grandchildren, elders that want to speak to their families - just keeping in touch. They do not have that option.

As I say this, Mr. Speaker, it's very important to ensure that changes in the competitive environment do not result in local access rates becoming unaffordable.

This government is promoting the creation of an industry to maintain a national support fund to ensure that there will be no disruption to the provision and extension of universal access to telephone services at reasonable rates.

Mr. Speaker, it has been mentioned before by my colleague from Lake Laberge, who spoke of the RETP, the rural electrification and telephone program. This government has looked at the history of the RETP, has looked at what it was put forth for and what it accomplished, and then there was a certain period of stagnation where it was not used, so this government took it upon itself to look at it, to rework it and bring it forth once more to be more of a tool that can be used and operated as a delivery vehicle for telephones and not to be sitting on a shelf. That's what this government has done and will continue to do.

I feel that telephones are very, very important to a good quality of life. It's essential. I will stop short of saying "a right", but certainly it is very essential that we all work together to support this motion so that we will be able to provide to all Yukoners that quality of living.

It's been coined many years ago by a gentleman that's deeply respected here that we are the colourful five percent and I will continue to say that. It's the way we do things here in the Yukon that's a bit different, but just because we're a bit different from the rest of Canada does not mean that we should be prejudiced.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for your time and the House for its time. I am going to be speaking in support of this motion and voting for this motion. I would encourage all parties to vote in support of it. What we are about here in the Yukon is providing that quality of life and that lifestyle that we choose to have. It is not that Yukoners want something that others don't have. It's not that Yukoners are not willing to pay for it at reasonable cost, but what they expect is quality service. These are not unreasonable or untoward, Mr. Speaker - not at all.

In closing, I would encourage all people to work toward this end and to support this motion.

Mahsi Cho. Thank you.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Mr. Speaker, I am rising to support the motion put forward by the Member for Laberge about the subject of reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service for all Yukon residents.

I think we know that the present telephone service does not adequately serve the varied needs of rural and urban Yukoners. Particularly those of us who represent rural areas know that there are many pockets of the Yukon where there is no telephone service presently in place.

In my riding, that encompasses largely people in the Marsh Lake area, although there are some areas in the Carcross valley that are also not on the phone lines and rely either on the radio telephone service or Ruraltel or some of the other options available for communicating with people. Many of those services are inferior to the regular telephone service.

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission does have a responsibility to Yukoners to ensure that regulated competition can help to lower long-distance rates and can help to improve service and the extension of services in underserved areas.

The Yukon government's overall goals, with respect to telecommunications, are for universal, affordable access to quality telecommunications services for all Yukon residents and organizations. We also need to see the telecommunications industry available for use as a tool for economic and social development. This will improve the ability of our constituents to talk to other Yukon residents, to talk to government, to talk to people that they know outside the territory.

The Yukon government, in its submissions to the CRTC and in its work with Northwestel, has identified some specific goals for Northwestel to undertake a program to extend affordable service to the presently underserviced and underserved areas, and to undertake improvements to the quality of service throughout the Yukon. We know that these improvements are necessary and we also know that Yukon residents want an affordable telephone service.

They need to see the regular phone bills, providing them not just with regular phone service, but with access to the Internet and to the new telecommunications tools that are available, not just for personal use, but for economic use, particularly for people who are embarking on home-based businesses.

We have asked Northwestel to provide us with a three-year plan of what their tariff increases will be in the long term and of how it is going to come forward with plans to improve the service that is presently either not available or not acceptable in rural areas.

Small remote communities deserve special treatment in order to provide them with modern communication facilities and services.

Yukoners are experiencing problems in our ability to communicate effectively with the rest of the country. That deters our ability to compete effectively, not just with the rest of Canada but in the world. Improvements in technology are not coming as fast to the Yukon as they are to the rest of the country and this gap continues to widen.

Many Yukoners have spoken to me and to other members in this Legislature about data transmission and Internet services that they find to be substandard in most areas of the territory. Service extensions have not really progressed very far in the last few years and people are continuing to demand extensions of service. These rising expectations and consumer demand are a normal consequence when we see the improvements that are available in other parts of the country. The Yukon is no exception in wanting to see the spread of the Internet. The Yukon government took the lead in bringing Internet service to rural communities and that's been very important, but while we've seen them come to some communities, there is certainly a demand for that service to be available in other towns and villages in the Yukon as well.

What was previously unrealistic to expect of any telephone service provider has now become feasible. There are new possibilities for the delivery of service. There are also new participants in the telecommunications sector who are capable of innovation and who have been successful in developing markets around the territory.

The community of Marsh Lake, which has a growing population and is one of the largest, growing populations in the territory, remains very much an underserviced area, primarily due to the costs that are absorbed by families for basic service which remain exorbitantly expensive. It is not out of the ordinary for some domestic households to have monthly phone bills in the order of $500 per month. Most of this cost is due to them having to pay long-distance rates to Whitehorse. Marsh Lake residents pay the following tolls for calls to Whitehorse: 36 cents for the first minute and 21 cents for each additional minute between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. The 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. discount is 29 cents for the first minute and 14 cents for each additional minute.

Between 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., there's a 23 cent charge for the first minute and eight cents for each additional minute. It is cheaper to call from Vancouver to Hong Kong than it is to call from Marsh Lake to Whitehorse. It's only 35 miles from Marsh Lake to Whitehorse, and many of the people in that area are commuting on a daily basis to Whitehorse and are working in Whitehorse, and it is part of the Whitehorse economy. There's no technological reason for the Marsh Lake residents not to have a Whitehorse phone exchange. The technical ability is there. In fact, some households have Whitehorse phone numbers in their homes in Marsh Lake and don't pay the long-distance charges. It seems to be an error or a glitch, because the phone company wants to see those long-distance charges remain, but my constituents in Marsh Lake certainly question how that is reasonable.

There are as well many areas in Marsh Lake where there's no phone service at all. There have been a number of suggestions made on how Northwestel could improve the delivery of service to those underserviced areas. That hasn't taken place yet, and I think the CRTC has a fundamental responsibility to help hold the phone company accountable for providing this basic service to people in a very well-populated area.

Residents in Marsh Lake have also been trying for some time to achieve connection to Internet access, and it was only through concerted efforts of citizens in Marsh Lake lobbying over a two-year period, with submissions on the part of the government and the opposition caucus to the CRTC encouraging the development of this Internet access, that eventually toll-free Internet access was made available to 35 subscribers in Marsh Lake.

People in the valley who are limited to radio-telephone service are unable to use new technology such as the Internet and phone/fax systems. This makes a major marketing tool for business inaccessible to people, which is a further impediment to the growth of economic activity.

I think it's realistic, Mr. Speaker, to expect that in today's technological world, we should have the ability to communicate effectively with the latest technology and with the rest of the world.

My colleague, the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, spoke about the rural electrification and telephone program. This is a program that's available to help people get electrical service and telephone service. Under the program, people who have taken a petition around and achieved 75-percent support from lot owners to bring in telephone service can apply to have this service financed under the rural electrification and telephone program. Under that program, the money will be advanced by the government to enable the phone service to be put in, and the property owners will pay for that service by paying a fee on their taxes amortized over a 10 or 15-year period.

On many occasions, lot owners have expressed an interest in bringing in telephone service but have not achieved the required 75-percent support from lot owners in order to proceed with the RETP. This is happening because some lot owners are absentee lot owners. They may reside in other parts of Canada. They may reside in Germany. They may reside in the United States. If they're coming to Marsh Lake for recreational purposes once a year or once every two years, they don't take an interest in responding to a survey or in having phone service available.

Our government, as the minister indicated, has looked at the requests from the public to modify the RET program. We are presently considering that if 75-percent of the homeowners who respond to a survey wish to proceed with new service, they should be eligible to proceed with that service. I think that would be fair, because I know that in many cases, there are strong numbers of people who are year-round residents, who want to bring in either phone service or electrical service, and who have found the program criteria as they are presently administered to be too restrictive.

Residents of Marsh Lake have also formed a committee to look at other alternatives, including a petition to the CRTC to have Northwestel justify its service, its cost and any proposed changes to their wireless systems. Northwestel has presented options to the residents, but the residents feel it is too expensive.

Many people have installed cellular 800 service in a fixed application. Others are reliant on the Ruraltel system. Many other people would like to see a fibre optic line from Whitehorse, rather than an exchange at Judas Creek, in order to eliminate long-distance charges to Whitehorse.

I think, Mr. Speaker, that what this motion lays out before us is not only our responsibility as government to encourage Northwestel and to encourage the CRTC to do the right thing, it also puts forward that the CRTC needs to look at many ways to improve service in the territory. The CRTC could direct telecommunications companies operating in Canada to establish a fund to help to expand the Yukon's telecommunications infrastructure.

We, as a government, will continue to actively pursue all the avenues we can to promote reliable, affordable and accessible telephone service in the territory. I know that the CRTC has been asked in the past to look at the mileage charges that are applied to my constituents in the Carcross valley. Those mileage charges were initially levied to recoup the cost of installing the phone lines. Those costs have now paid for the installation of those phone lines many times over. So, I think a serious attempt has to be made by Northwestel and by the CRTC to ensure that the service it is offering is responsible, is cost effective and meets the needs of all of the residents in all of our ridings.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Phillips: I am pleased to rise today in support of the motion that is before us and I was pleased to hear the comments made by many of the members who spoke previous to this.

I am also pleased, Mr. Speaker, that the member has seen fit to accept the friendly amendment from the Member for Klondike ensuring that it's clear in the motion that CRTC will, in fact, be able to look at this motion and things that members here have been saying.

Mr. Speaker, Northwestel has been serving Yukoners for a great number of years and we here today have been somewhat critical of that service. And I'm going to do the same but, on the other hand, I do want to say a couple of things in a positive light about Northwestel.

The fact is that they are here and the fact is that there are a lot of people who work for Northwestel that are dedicated in providing good-quality phone service to the territory - some of them are long-term residents who have lived here for a long time and raised their family here and have purchased goods and services here for many, many years. Northwestel and its employees have made a contribution. Northwestel as a corporate citizen has a series of awards and things that it carries on every year and supports the arts community, so Northwestel has, in some respects, had a positive impact on our community.

The problem I have, Mr. Speaker, is that it appears that with the takeover of Northwestel by Bell Canada, Ma Bell, there seems to be a bit of a change and there also seems to be a bit of a panic in the wind with respect to Northwestel's fear that competition is coming.

Unfortunately, I don't think Northwestel has reacted in a way that will help them keep the customers they have if competition ever comes. In fact, I was at a meeting the other day where I spoke to the vice president of Northwestel and hopefully gave them a clear warning about the way they are doing things in this territory. I said if a competitor ever arrives here, Yukoners, I believe, will leave in droves because of the way they have been treated, and I would hope that Northwestel keeps that in mind because it will be too late to be fairer to Yukoners only because they are forced to do so by a competing company.

Other members have spoken today about the phone service as being an essential service, and indeed it is an essential service. This is 1997, and I certainly don't know how I would ever operate without a telephone or how very many people do.

I grew up in the City of Whitehorse and never thought a lot about the telephone service other than the fact that my long-distance bills were rather high, but the phone always worked. The repair service was usually pretty quick and pretty dependable. In those days, you actually could talk to somebody that was here, and that was a positive move, and sometimes you even knew the person who was on the phone on the other end. But that has changed for me, because my partner and I have recently made a change in our lives, and we've decided to move to another beautiful riding in the territory out near Marsh Lake.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Phillips: The Member for Mount Lorne has encouraged me to throw my hat in the ring in her riding, and I have to tell the member that she's not the only one who is doing that, so I'll just leave it at that. She can line up with many of her constituents in the lobby effort, and I appreciate the positive comments from the member in having confidence in me to run in that area.

Mr. Chair, like I said, when I moved to Marsh Lake I got a wake-up with respect to phone service. I'm on the cellular 800. I have had my service since April, paid $250 to buy my little black box, and I am now told that if Northwestel is successful in its rate application my rates are going to double. I'm going to pay for calls in and out. I'm going to pay for long-distance rates. I'm going to pay for other things. I'm told that if I want to switch, I have to pay another $500 for another black box that I just bought. This one I'll own; the other one I paid $250 for, and then I paid $40 a month renting it, so I paid $250, I guess, for the right to put it in my house. I don't know. I haven't quite figured that one out yet.

I've blown up three black boxes. They've disintegrated in the middle of phone calls and whatever. I was told at one time by the person in Winnipeg who takes the trouble calls - it was on a Sunday - that I needed my phone hooked up the next morning because it went out. I was phoning from a neighbour's phone. My phone blew up. And they said, "Well, you realize, Mr. Phillips, we have five days to reconnect your phone." And I said, "Well, you realize that you probably have one day or I will be in your president's office tomorrow morning and I will disconnect his phone until mine is reconnected and maybe we'll argue over that." Because a phone is an essential service to me and an essential service, I think, to the individuals at Northwestel. The next day, somebody was out to fix my phone. But it's happened three or four times.

Quality of service - just the other day I was in my office and my phone rang. It was me. For some reason, my telephone calls the last number I called and that morning, before I'd come to work, I'd phoned my office and talked to somebody in my office, then hung up and came in. About four hours later, my answering machine called me. I said, "Hello, hello, hello." There was no one on the other end. I hung up the phone and when I got home at night my answering machine indicated that I had a message. When I played it, it was me saying, "Hello, hello, hello."

To Northwestel, "Hello, they need to fix the service." They told me that it was my answering machine that was wrong. I've reported the incident two or three different times and last time I reported the incident happening again - it hasn't happened in probably a week or two now - they told me that it's not my answering machine, they found the same problem in Yellowknife. Somebody's got the same problem in Yellowknife where their answering machine is calling the last people they called.

That's just some of the minor problems associated with this phone system. I have to say, though, that when it comes to repairs and actually someone in Whitehorse gets the message that the phone has to be repaired, the technicians that come out are very efficient and do their best job to get the service back up and running as quickly as possible.

Phone service has to be affordable. I made that point to Northwestel a couple of weeks ago at a public meeting and one of the answers to me was that if I switched over to this NMI Mobility and their prices started to get out of line, it wouldn't be competition that would hold the prices down. It would be me, because I would cease to use their service if their prices went too high, and that's the only thing that will keep their prices down. I reminded the fellow that I haven't got too many other options. If I cease to use their service, I won't have any other option.

We are in a bit of a dilemma right now in rural Yukon. There is a lot of uncertainty. There is a rate hike that has been applied for by Northwestel. There is the rather glossy and polished presentation by NMI Mobility for us to switch over to a new, supposedly less costly system to begin with, and one, I think, in fact, Mr. Speaker, it was all put together for rural Yukon until we raised the issue that there was nothing in the presentation to accommodate businesses in rural Yukon. It was all primarily just for the average household.

There is another uncertainty, I think. One, is the rate hike, one is NMI Mobility. The other one is the statements by our own territorial government. Mr. Livingston, who attended a public meeting and said that the Yukon government was going to help us, and again today, I think, the Minister of Community and Transportation Services talked briefly about some options and the Minister of Justice just spoke again about changing the percentage of the number of people who could respond so that they could go that route with the taxes and spread the cost of land-line service over a longer period of time.

I guess the difficulty I have is that I would have hoped that if the Yukon government had some solutions to this problem after a year in office we would have heard them. I know a year ago when they were elected they talked about rural telephone service to rural Yukon, and where I am disappointed, Mr. Speaker, is that rural Yukoners are in a dilemma right now. There is a lot of uncertainty. They do not know about the rate hikes; they do not know NMI; they do not know about Mr. Livingston's comments.

I guess if I were to suggest anything to the government, I would suggest that they burn the midnight oil and that they come in here this session with a ministerial statement, laying out the fact that they are changing the ground rules, that they are going to make a difference so that people can make choices. We do not have a lot of time. NMI is coming on stream, I think in probably either December or January. It is sometime in January that I think the CRTC is going to make a decision, and people are going to have to decide what they are going to do.

After a senior citizen on a fixed income in my new riding of Mount Lorne purchases a black box for $500, it will be too late for that individual to throw the black box out and pay an extra $100 or $200 a year on their taxes to pay for a land line.

So there is some urgency to this matter now, and I was almost expecting today, in fact, a ministerial statement prior to this motion laying the groundwork or, lacking that, the minister standing up during the presentation and saying, "This is what we're going to do," because they have created some real uncertainty out there. I went to a meeting where there was a senior from the Mount Lorne riding who was on a fixed income, had a phone only for use in emergencies and rarely phoned out any other time, and wanted it for health reasons, because she and her husband had some minor health issues, and they wanted to make sure they were close to a phone in case they had to contact the officials. That person was very, very concerned about having to buy another system, having to spend some more money and not knowing whether this was the end of it, whether this would be enough to do.

Like this woman said, she doesn't make a lot of phone calls, and the phone calls she does make are usually very important, and so she needs a phone. I think that needs to be addressed very, very quickly by this government, and I would hope that in the next week or 10 days, there would be a ministerial statement. They have had a year to work on it. I know some of them there haven't been around much to hold the fort, but this is an issue that they made a commitment on, and they made a commitment over a year ago that they were going to do something about it, so I would hope that rather than raising our expectations and then waiting for another six months or a year or another legislative session, or whatever we have to do, let's get on with it. Let's get the job done.

One of the issues out there with the telephone service is that - and I think it was mentioned by the Minister of Justice - many people now are moving out to rural Yukon from the centres, and many of those people are operating their own home-based businesses from their home, and there is a real necessity to have telephones as an essential service for that.

I think as well, Mr. Speaker, about the tourism industry. Some touched briefly on that, but phone service is essential nowadays to the tourism industry. I had some complaints when I was the Minister of Tourism from some people on some of the highway lodges up and down the Alaska Highway where in today's world of technology, when someone pulls in with an RV that takes a couple of hundred dollars' worth of fuel, or a hundred dollars' worth of fuel, and the person hands you a VISA card, you have to verify it.

One indi