Whitehorse, Yukon

Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

We will proceed at this time with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

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

Tributes.

Introduction of visitors.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. McLarnon: Mr. Speaker, it's my honour to introduce to the House a member of our audience today, Clifton Fred. Clifton Fred is a Yukon artist. I am fortunate enough to say I grew up with him. He's now living and working in Vancouver. His art is currently in galleries throughout the city, and he's well-known for his portrait of Elijah Smith that still hangs in the Elijah Smith Building today.

He's visiting the Yukon currently and is sitting with his mother, Barbara Fred.

Applause

Speaker: Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

Are there any reports of committees?

Petitions.

PETITIONS

Clerk: Mr. Speaker and hon. members of the Assembly, I have had the honour to review a petition, being Petition No. 1 of the First Session of the 30^th Legislative Assembly, as presented by the leader of the third party on July 4, 2000. This petition meets the requirements as to form of the Standing Orders of the Yukon Legislative Assembly.

Speaker: Petition No. 1 is accordingly deemed to be read and received.

Are there any bills to be introduced? Are there any notices of motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of the House that

(1) it is in the public's best interest to expedite the business of the House; and

(2) expediting the passage of the 2000-01 budget will create certainty among all Yukoners; and

(3) the Yukon government is willing to work toward the constructive resolution of all outstanding issues; and

THAT beginning Monday, July 10, 2000, the Legislative Assembly shall sit from 1:30 to 5:30 p.m. and 7:30 to 10:00 p.m, Monday through Thursday, until the business of the House is completed.

Speaker: Are there any further notices of motion?

Mr. McLarnon: I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) during the last election the Yukon Liberal Party campaigned on a promise of modelling professional behaviour in the House, and have delivered on that promise; and

(2) it is the opposition House leaders' duty to be willing and able to work respectfully and constructively with the government House leader; and

(3) the opposition parties have broken numerous House rules of decorum; and

(4) the opposition parties have refused to disclose the absence of members on numerous occasions; and

THAT this House urges that the opposition members, with the co-operation of their respective House leaders, to model professional and courteous behaviour in the House at all times.

Chair: Are there any further motions?

Are there any statements by ministers?

This then brings us to Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Mr. Fentie: My question is for the Acting Premier. Yesterday I asked this government what it is doing to close the deal on the tidewater facilities in Skagway. Once again, I got the tired, old Liberal line, that it is being evaluated, with no decision until the fall. That is unacceptable. We know there are other potential buyers interested in this very same property. The Acting Premier has the power to instruct her officials to conclude this deal immediately. Will she do that? Or does this government intend to squander this once in a lifetime opportunity for Yukon's economic future?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, it was said yesterday - and I will say it again - that we are evaluating all of our options on this property. We will have a decision on the port access in Skagway and in Haines by early fall of this year.

Mr. Fentie: Well, that may very well be too late for the Skagway property. The deal could have been closed at least by the end of June. Due diligence has already been done. The lion's share of the purchase price is already in the budget. Every day that this part-time government dilly-dallies and is afraid to make a decision on anything, the chances get better and better that someone else who can make a decision will scoop up this deal. Why won't the Acting Premier call her boss in Calgary this afternoon and get the go ahead to get this deal done, now.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Well, Mr. Speaker, I take issue with the member opposite's comments about how this is a part-time government. I don't think there is anybody, on this side of the House at least, who isn't working 14- and 16-hour days right now. The member opposite's comments are just ill-informed.

Mr. Speaker, the government is taking all of the information into consideration - not all of that information is available to us right now. We will be giving a decision on this in the early fall. This is a very, very large investment for the Yukon Territory and possibly a very important one for our future. We want to make sure that we make a good decision - a very good decision. We will be making that decision in the fall.

Mr. Fentie: Well, it's important to note that the Deputy Premier has just stated that this is possibly a very important decision for Yukon. I would argue that this is a vital decision for the Yukon to ensure that we have access to tidewater. It's obvious the government is terrified of making a decision on anything, and this one's a no-brainer; the work has been done. It just takes one decision by the Deputy Premier. They can evaluate and review until the cows come home, Mr. Speaker; the only thing that will change is that someone else will pick up the property and leave this territory landlocked.

Will the Acting Premier now admit that the decision not to proceed has already been made and the delay of several months is just a smokescreen to give the government time to make up an excuse for not taking action?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, taking time to make intelligent decisions is not an excuse; it's a mandate of this government.

Question re: Haines and Skagway port access

Mr. Fentie: Well, it's evident that the problems are starting to compound on the Liberal side. The work has been done on this particular initiative - done to the point where a decision to complete the sale is what is necessary. It looks like the Skagway option is now history.

So let's look at the other option - the Haines possibilities. Again, for the Acting Premier, Mr. Speaker - although the word "acting" does not seem to apply to this Liberal government at all - it's obvious they may have blown their chances in Skagway, so I'd like to ask the minister about port facilities in Haines, Alaska. Once again, this is a deal that required a decision by June 30. The Premier herself pointed that out earlier in this Legislature. Can the Acting Premier provide assurances that the necessary steps are being taken to ensure that the Yukon will continue to have access to tidewater at Haines, Alaska?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, all of the information is not in. There is still information that has to be gathered. When that information is gathered, the Cabinet will sit down, as they always have in the Yukon government, and make an informed decision about this issue. The options are not closed. We still have the ability to make the decision on this property.

Mr. Fentie: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Premier herself said that the deadline for the Haines property was June 30. The due diligence on these matters has been done. What information is the Deputy Premier alluding to as far as information that needs to be gathered?

Mr. Speaker, the Premier has paid lip service to the important role of infrastructure improving the Yukon's economy. Yesterday, she admitted that Yukon people support the government investing to secure tidewater access. Those are the Premier's own words, but we haven't seen any action to back up those words.

Can the Acting Premier tell us what direction Economic Development officials have been given about either extending the existing option or buying the Haines facilities outright?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, things have changed since the side opposite was in government. There is other information out there that needs to be considered, other information that needs to be gathered, and possibly a different way of doing business in this government.

Mr. Speaker, I can just say that the information on this port is not all available at the moment. We cannot make an informed decision yet, but we will be making an informed decision and giving the results of our deliberations to the Yukon public in the fall.

Mr. Fentie:Well, the Deputy Premier is right about one thing: there's a new way of doing business in government, and that is by not conducting business at all, because the Liberal side has no ability to make a decision.

Mr. Speaker, the former government, the NDP government, had the vision to realize that the port facility at Haines would give producers like Dakwakada Forest Products a competitive edge in reaching Asian markets - important markets to the future of our forest industry, by the way. The community of Haines Junction, the Champagne-Aishihik First Nation and Dakwakada Forest Products, among others, want to know what this Liberal government is doing to provide certainty to local exporters.

Will the government take action now to purchase the port facilities at Haines and table a supplementary budget to cover the cost? Will the Deputy Premier do so now?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, it is true that the purchase of this property is going to require a considerable amount of money. That's why we have to spend time making a good decision about this property in Haines, as well as in Skagway. We are gathering information. There is more to this than when the side opposite was in government. This is a very different deal. We will be giving that information - the final results of our discussions at the Cabinet level - to the public in the fall.

Question re: FAS/FAE identification and services

Mr. Jenkins: I have a question for the Minister of Health and Social Services.

The legacy of Yukon's chronic alcohol abuse problem is fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects. FAS/FAE is a preventable affliction that requires lifetime care. Now, in reviewing the Liberal platform document, however, I have found no direct reference to this major health, social and educational problem. In the section on caring for children, there is a statement that Yukon Liberals will initiate confidential testing in the schools to determine levels of development disorders to enable appropriate and effective educational programs development. The identification of children with FAS/FAE is a first step. Even the previous NDP government will ultimately be forced to take that step. So, the Liberal statement is nothing new. You first have to recognize that you have a problem before you can deal with it.

Now, action speaks louder than words. For example, the Yukon Party has proposed the creation of a team of specialists trained in psychology, personal counselling, social work and health to provide services to Yukon schools in support of students with FAS/FAE and their families. Is this something that the minister might be prepared to consider, or is it still under study?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: The Member for Klondike is absolutely correct. We basically have to look at where we're at, and this is one of our first options. We were trying to find out where we're at in the whole area of FAS and FAE. We know it is a serious problem, much like the member opposite has just made comment to. This is not something we just rush into. We basically have to look at where we're going with it, and we hope that, over the next couple of months, we will have some type of an idea or plan for the future.

Mr. Jenkins: Sounds like we have a plan over there in the Liberal benches. I just don't know how long it is before this plan comes into focus. The earlier the diagnosis of FAS/FAE is much the better. The Liberal position is to conduct initial, confidential testing of school-aged children. However, that testing comes far too late. Experts call for very early diagnosis - in fact, before the age of six. Can the minister advise the House what measures he will implement to ensure diagnosis before the children reach school age?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: My understanding is that there is in place already an identification process for newborns. This is something that we will continue with, with additional support coming from the professionals, communities, and people who would like to be part of the solution. Obviously, we will be looking at other ways of trying to identify. We are not going to wait until they hit school. The sooner the better - that is where we're at. We would like to try, like the member opposite has suggested, to eradicate this disease as soon as possible.

Mr. Jenkins: The minister and I agree - how unusual. But he's starting to listen to common sense and it's prevailing.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated previously, FAS and FAE is a lifelong affliction. Today, many adults with FAS/FAE are incarcerated because they were never diagnosed and there were no programs to deal with them, even if they were diagnosed. The Yukon Party was proposing investigating the feasibility of establishing special group homes for adults with FAS/FAE. Is this something the minister might also be considering? If he is, will he advise the House?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't want to be hypothetical about where we're going. I can only comment on where we are. We already do have a residence for FAS people. In my understanding, it was set up by the last government. We do have an identification plan in place at this point. We're hoping that, in the future, we can look at even doing more in the sense of trying to eradicate this disease. We would like to look at how we deal with our adults because, basically, the member is absolutely correct. The member opposite has made the observation that our jails are full of people who probably haven't been diagnosed with that ailment. We would rather look for other alternatives. We believe that that's the route we have to seek out. We don't have all the evidence at this point. We don't have to reinvent the wheel, although I think that's another problem that we sometimes run into. There is a lot of evidence out there at this point. It just means getting together. It means looking at where we can go and using our resources to do the best possible plan for the Yukon.

Question re: Yukon hire policy under review

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, construction has started on the extended care facility in Whitehorse and, later this summer, it will start on the new Mayo school. Many Yukoners are hoping to get jobs on these two major construction projects, but the Minister of Health and Social Services says that the government's Yukon hire policy is up for review.

So, I'd like to ask the Minister of Government Services, who is the one who should decide the policy direction for his department, and is the Yukon hire policy of this government now under review?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, the Yukon hire policy is tabled. A lot of the proposals made by the commission have been enacted already. There are only, I think, some seven recommendations that came from the commission that are not being looked at. Other than that, the Yukon hire policy is ongoing.

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, we heard on the radio the Minister of Health and Social Services say that he was going to suggest that it should be under review. We have the minister in charge of the department saying that it's not going to be under review; that things are ongoing. I would just like to know, in the minister's own words, how are you committed to keeping the jobs in the Yukon for Yukoners?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, local hire is an important priority for this government. Immediate action has been taken by this government to include - one of the recommendations was to have a hiring agency. This will not be implemented, but instead Government Services implemented a Yukon hire roundtable on the continuing care project to solicit suggestions regarding Yukon hire for that project and future projects.

We are continuing to offer an increased business incentive policy - labour rebate - which is available to contractors when 80 percent or more of wages on government construction projects are paid to Yukon residents. For the Mayo school project, as with the continuing care facility, the rebate has been increased to 10 percent, from 5 percent.

The mandate of the Bid Challenge Committee will be reviewed, and consultation with stakeholders will begin in the near future, possibly this fall. Yukon-made office furniture will soon be available for purchase to Yukon departments, so we are doing a few things that give the incentive of local hire in Yukon.

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, the initiatives that the member opposite has brought forward are all NDP initiatives. I'm certainly glad to hear the minister speak about local hire being a priority. Of course, it was never campaigned upon; the Minister of Health and Social Services was going to review it; the minister himself says we're going to stick with the priorities of the New Democratic government. Well, I'm pleased to hear you're making it a priority of your own.

Can the minister commit to the Yukon hire, as well as to the youth hire, for the two upcoming projects?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, I wasn't quite paying attention. Could the member opposite please ask the question again?

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, the honeymoon period is still on. Could the minister commit to Yukon hire as well as the youth hire and the two upcoming government construction projects?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, the commitment is already there; it's already in place. We have already talked about Yukon hire; we are already looking at youth hire - it's included in the businesses incentive program - I don't know exactly where the member opposite is asking for a commitment. I'm not really clear on his question.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Jim: The Minister for Health and Social Services was talking about the suggestion that it should be looked at in order to keep attracting health professionals. There was nothing that stated it was under review.

Thank you.

Question re: Land use planning, public consultation on 10-02 lands

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Liberals promised to consult the public and respect land use planning before inviting the oil and gas industry to nominate areas for development. The Porcupine Caribou Management Board, the environmental community, the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation and others have asked the government to live up to their word for land use planning to occur first. This is a sensitive time for the Porcupine caribou herd, which are now calving in the north Yukon. With the U.S. presidential election underway, many people are trying to get permanent protection for the 10-02 lands. My question is for the Acting Premier. What are the government's plans for consulting Yukoners? Will it be after the oil and gas rights are sold, or before?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I am not too sure which area the member is referring to. If he is talking about southeast Yukon, the consultation process is already underway. That process is government-to-government consultation. If he is talking about the 1002 lands, that consultation is also taking place on the government-to-government level. That is part of the consultation series. We are the only jurisdiction in Canada that has public consultation and that is something that we all have to be proud of. It is public consultation in the oil and gas land sale process. I think that it is important to realize that this government treats other levels of government with respect and that we do work with them and consult them on matters that affect them most closely.

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I asked the Acting Premier whether or not they would consult with Yukoners before or after the land gas rights are sold? The Premier issued a media release about her lunch in Calgary today with the petroleum industry executives to discuss Yukon's upcoming second issuance of oil and gas rights. During the election campaign, the Premier stated, "Land use planning is very important and should take place before these oil and gas leases are made." Will the Acting Premier confirm that the Liberal government does indeed plan to respect the land use planning process and consult with Yukoners before offering more oil and gas leases for sale to the industry?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, bringing oil and gas leases to fruition is a long process. First of all, you start by giving people the right to go out and explore. Then you give them the right to go out and drill, then you give them the right to actually go and get something, but long before any of that happens, you have a consultation process. The Government of Yukon is committed to that consultation process.

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, this is not what's happening today. The Premier is in Calgary trying to drum up interest for oil and gas in the Yukon. This government said that they would model professional behaviour in this Legislature and be open and accountable to the Yukon public.

Now, the NDP, when in government, created Fishing Branch and also created a protected areas strategy that the Liberal government is now following. They are not doing anything new. The Liberals are in government now, and they must be responsible for their actions. I don't know why the Acting Premier is trying to hide on this.

Is the Acting Premier going to give her word today, in this House, that the Liberal government will do what they said they would do and complete the public consultation process before they offer any more oil and gas leases for sale, or will they continue to be a part-time government, not respecting Yukoners, and cater to the oil and gas industry?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, the side opposite loves to repeat the same silly lines over and over and over again. One of them is the fact that this is a part-time government. Quite clearly, this is not a part-time government. We have taken the responsibility to govern the Yukon. We take that responsibility very seriously. Part of that responsibility is to ensure that our economy comes back. That is why the Premier is in Calgary right now trying to drum up interest in people coming to the Yukon to invest their dollars in oil and gas interests.

The government is not down on the corner in Calgary doing land sales for oil and gas companies. That's not what we're doing. We're saying, "Hey, the Yukon is a great place to invest." And it is. We all know that. That's what we're down there telling people. There's nothing wrong with that. It's a good thing. We are very, very committed to the consultation process. We are very committed to the process required before you go into oil and gas development on land within the Yukon Territory. That was an act that I voted for in this Legislature and the Liberal Party voted on in this Legislature. The processes are very clear within that act. The member opposite knows that; they were the government that brought it in.

Question re: Family day homes, CSA standards

Mr. Harding: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Health and Social Services, and I want to ask my question by reading a question that the Member for Riverdale South asked only three months ago, on March 2, in this House.

She said at that time that the CSA guidelines don't make a lot of sense. "The Canadian Standards Association standards for playgrounds say that play equipment must be surrounded by sand, because it is a soft material for children to land on when they come off play equipment; hence, the issue about impact. Sand in Yukon playgrounds is frozen for nine months of the year. It doesn't matter whether you land on sand or pavement when the ground is frozen, yet the minister's department is forcing people to make their backyards into giant litter boxes.

"When is the minister going to utilize a little common sense, like the Province of Ontario did initially, and work with the Society of Yukon Family Day Homes to develop appropriate standards for outdoor play spaces for family day homes?"

Given the position of the Liberals at that time on this question, is he going to develop these standards the Liberals called for, or adopt the CSA standards?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: We are aware of that issue, of course. It was a major issue in the last round. The issue with the standards set by the Canadian Standards Association has to do with developing of appropriate standards for the appropriate environment. This issue was on my desk, as I told you yesterday, when I assumed the office of Minister of Health and Social Services. It was an issue raised by my colleague, as the member opposite has just read. And, of course, the issue was not dealt with, as I said yesterday.

The moratorium is still in place and that's where it's going to be until the full review is done, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Harding: Well, Mr. Speaker, that's just not good enough, because the Liberals had a firm position before the election, so one would have assumed that they consulted with everybody and developed the position. Now the minister is complaining that all issues weren't completely resolved when he came into government. It's just not reality to think that the minister isn't going to be handed some issues to deal with, and in this case he should be happy because the Liberals had a position to take before the election.

So, the answer is there for him, and I want to ask him,once again, with regard to this issue, is he going to do what the Liberals said before the election and make some made-in-the-Yukon standards for family day homes, or is he going to adopt the CSA standards?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Once again, we have a problem. And it's the problem, of what I call "honest consultation". That's what we Liberals are all about. Unfortunately, the past government doesn't know what that means. We as a government believe in working with all parties that are affected by whatever the rules or policies are. They have to remember that the former government put these rules in place. They imposed them on everyone and then ran with it. In order to make changes - and of course, again, that's correcting mistakes of the past government because they didn't review it properly, they didn't consult properly - we have to do some work. Every time we turn a corner here, we find that the former government has made major mistakes and so we have got to find out how we're going to correct them. A review is an inclusive process where all stakeholders can be heard - not just a select few. So, we hope that by next month we will have these conclusions and we will have an announcement to make.

Thank you.

Mr. Harding: It's the Liberals who opposed the honest consultation that the NDP was doing prior to the election and the moratorium. Now the minister is saying it is they who are promoting consultation; uh uh. The Member for Riverdale South was saying, as judge, jury and execution, that the CSA standards were ridiculous. Now, before the election, a legal opinion was obtained; it's on the minister's desk - he's got a legal opinion on this particular issue with regard to liability. I would like to ask the minister if he can give an assurance to Yukoners that the Yukon taxpayers will have no legal liability on this question by not proceeding with the CSA standards?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: I guess once again I have to mention he does not want to hear what I have to say. He has his own agenda and his own agenda is to perpetuate this problem as a problem that belongs to us when really it's their problem.

I have some information to offer to the member. What happens when you consult? You have to make sure all parties - not just a select few - are involved. It is my understanding, and very good understanding, that the previous government spoke to just a few people and basically did not consult with the day home operators.

They put a moratorium on the whole issue when the election came about, because they knew they had a hot potato and they didn't know how to handle it. So guess what? We not only have one legal opinion, Mr. Speaker; we have three legal opinions. So, basically, they knew they were on the wrong track, and again, Mr. Speaker, as I shared with you earlier, we're trying to fix another one of their mistakes, but we're going to do it right. We're not going to do it instantly, as they want us to do in everything they ask us. We're going to make sure that we consult with all the stakeholders, and we're going to ensure that we do it right from the beginning, because that is what the Liberal government is all about.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

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

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

Motion agreed to

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

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

Some Hon. Members: Agreed

Chair: We will now take a 15-minute recess.

Recess

Chair: I will now call Committee of the Whole to order. The Committee is dealing with Bill No. 2, First Appropriation Act, 2000-01.

Bill No. 19 - First Appropriation Act, 2000-01 - continued

Chair: Is there any general debate?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I do have some questions that I didn't get answered yesterday in my preamble, and if I may, I would like to continue answering those now in case they don't come up in general debate. There were a number of them.

One of the questions was about participation in and progress of the 2000-01 mosquito control program. For the member's information, participating communities include Beaver Creek, Burwash Landing, Dawson City, Destruction Bay, Faro, Haines Junction -

Chair: Order please. As a preamble to questions previously asked, Ms. Buckway, since we are in general debate on transportation division, you can only refer your comments to transportation division.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Well, I have a number of them here. I'll sort them out, I guess, and answer them in due course.

Mr. Jenkins: When we left general debate, we were in the highway maintenance area, and we were discussing right-of-way and the clearing, and the double standard that has been created in the Yukon with respect to the clearing of the foliage on the side of the highways. It seems, Mr. Chair, as you travel farther out of Whitehorse, the amount of foliage increases, and I was requesting from the minister an understanding of why this double standard has been created by her department with respect to the foliage clearing, and what steps she is going to take.

This is a safety issue and a very clear abdication of her responsibilities. The highways are less safe as a consequence of the tremendous increase in foliage that is allowed to accumulate along the sides of the highway and the highway right-of-way. What steps is she going to take to remove it, especially as you go further out of Whitehorse, and especially in close proximity to the highway signage - either signage indicating directional changes or indicating facilities or attractions?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: As I explained repeatedly to the member yesterday, there is no double standard. He persists in his assertion that there is. There is no double standard. The situation he is referring to is caused by cuts to the O&M budget over the last few years, and brush clearing is one of the things that has been reduced; however, there is no double standard.

Mr. Jenkins: I submit there is a double standard because the cuts have occurred quite remote from Whitehorse. In close proximity to Whitehorse, there has been no curtailment of the foliage removal. It just appears to increase in intensity as you go farther from Whitehorse, and I'd urge the minister to travel the Klondike Highway north of Pelly Crossing, and she can come to an understanding of what I'm saying here in the House.

The other issue where I didn't get a clear answer from the minister, Mr. Chair, was with respect to the Klondike Highway between Dawson and the residential areas as far out as Henderson's Corner. This highway currently has a traffic load that requires that it be widened. Now, that is a safety issue once again. There's a safety issue surrounding the pedestrian traffic, bicycle traffic, traffic to the residences and little, if any, street lighting. Street lighting finishes just out of Dawson where you go up the Dome Road. From there, there is no street lighting except at the entrances to Callison subdivision and, farther out, there are four additional street lights in, basically, a 10-mile corridor.

Now, if this situation were in Carmacks or Pelly or going into Watson Lake, we would have a tremendous amount of street lighting, and the highway would be widened. Again, Mr. Chair, I submit that there is a double standard. By the department's own statistics, it supports that this highway is inadequate. Why isn't this highway being widened?

I'm sure that the minister is going to stand up and say that they're going to study it and spend $50,000 on doing it. It's an issue that has come face to face with the department many times. I believe that the traffic study, Mr. Chair, was done some seven years ago, and at that time, it warranted widening. Why hasn't the department taken action to widen this highway in this area?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the member knows full well the answer I'm going to give him, because I gave it to him, word for word, yesterday, if he would review his Hansard.

The department does traffic counts every year. The member knows that. The member also knows that planning for upgrading of the Klondike Highway in the area he is describing is ongoing, and it will include consideration of such issues as street lighting and accommodation of pedestrians and cyclists.

The planning work is $50,000 - the member is quite correct - and is included in this budget, which we are dealing with today, to complete the planning and design phase. It is expected that the work will be done in the next budget year. The member is well aware of this.

Even if I had issued orders to rush the planning, which is never a good idea, and start work on May 6, I doubt we would get it done to the member's satisfaction.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, according to the information I have, the planning is already completed. It's on the shelf. It's ready to go, and it has been for quite a number of years; it just hasn't been a priority.

Let me cite another example where the department previously turned down a request on a safety issue: it's the street lighting going into Ross River. That was turned down, denied. It took unfortunate deaths before street lighting was installed. We're talking about, I believe, 29 street lights that were requested, time and time again. The department turned it down, turned it down. Is that what has to happen to speed up the process? Does somebody have to die here in the Yukon for the department to react, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: The member opposite is fear-mongering, as he loves to do. When the planning and design work is done, which should be done in this fiscal year, the work will then be carried out.

Mr. Jenkins: There's no fear-mongering on this side, Mr. Chair. Reality is something else. Fear-mongering is one thing. I cited numerous examples around the Yukon that required increased street lighting - the approaches to the bridge in Pelly Crossing, Carmacks - but then, these were all done. Street lighting has actually been installed across the bridge in Pelly, and it's a safer crossing now. But on the highway leading out of Dawson, that could be done in this cycle. Street lighting would improve the safety of that highway corridor, and, believe it or not, in another month or so, we are going to have darkness at night. We still have a lot of traffic, a lot of pedestrian traffic and a lot of bicycle traffic, and it is a safety issue. Why can't the minister address the safety issue in this cycle? We're not talking about a great deal of money, because the street lighting is installed by Yukon Energy and there is just the ongoing O&M cost. There has to be a request from the department to install them.

Now, there are existing poles. There's just the ongoing monthly cost of maintaining the street lighting, and we're not talking a great amount of money, Mr. Chair. It could be done in this cycle, and it could be done to the advantage of the residents who frequent the Klondike Highway going out of Dawson. Why can't the minister instruct her officials to install street lighting?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, let me get this right. The member would like me to put in the street lighting, like right now. Then, next year, he'd like me to rip it all out so we can widen the road. This doesn't make a lot of sense, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, Mr. Chair, if the minister had an understanding of what she was speaking of, we might get further along in this department.

The pole lines on which the street lights would be attached currently exist. They have been used, Mr. Chair, for the lighting standards. There would be a few places where additional poles may or may not have to be installed, but the cost of installing street lighting is - one has to send over a request to Yukon Energy, and they install them, and they bill on a monthly basis. Now, it doesn't require a new string of pole lighting. It requires the installation of the street lighting on a lot of the existing power poles that currently exist in the Klondike, as far out as Henderson's Corner. There are some poles on the cliffs out by Rock Creek that couldn't be utilized - I'll give the minister that. But we're talking about the last three-quarters of a mile of a 10- or 11-mile stretch of highway, Mr. Chair.

So, it's not a big initiative; it's not a big cost. The monthly cost for the street lighting could be borne within the department's budgets. So, is it the minister's intention to keep us all in the dark, or will she install street lighting?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I'm glad that the member opposite has added "highway engineer" to his list of qualifications. It is in our plan to light the sections from Callison into town at the time that the road is reconstructed. It would not make sense to put in the street lighting and then rip it out when the road is widened to accommodate the reconstruction. I think this is only common sense.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, the existing power lines in the Klondike Valley are for power distribution and they currently are used to attach the street lights to. Now why can't the current poles be used for street lighting? They wouldn't require another set of poles for street lighting and I don't believe, when the highway is widened, that another set of poles will be installed. We're not looking for nice, big, steel lamp standards coming out of the ground; we are just looking for an adequate lighting system along the initial stage of the Klondike Highway. The minister is referring to probably the first two and a half miles. What is required is widening as far out as Henderson's Corner.

There are residential subdivisions, established by the Government of Yukon at Henderson's Corner, Rock Creek, Bear Creek and now in the tailings piles. All of these areas are and will be built up over time. Street lighting has been installed in the new tailing subdivision to light that area - for safety reasons, I might add, Mr. Chair. The only area that is not being addressed is the Klondike Highway. Now surely, Mr. Chair, the minister has exhausted all the excuses possible. It doesn't require a new set of poles; it requires attachments of the light standards to the existing power poles in many, many cases. Why can the government not take it upon itself to have those installed? They are billed a monthly rate by Yukon Energy, or in the case of Yukon Electrical Company Ltd. providing the power, the same formula is applied, and street lighting is billed on a monthly basis.

We're not looking for a great amount of capital. We are just looking toward the minister to address a safety issue. Will she do that, and do it this summer so that something is in place for this fall?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I will be happy to review the plans with my officials to see if what the member is suggesting is indeed factual. I repeat that we expect to conclude the planning and design for this project this season and do the construction work the next year.

Mr. Jenkins: So, I take it from the minister that that's a firm no and that constituents in my riding, once again, will be very pleased to hear from a government that doesn't want to address its responsibilities for safety issues, Mr. Chair. I can only add that I am extremely disappointed.

Highway signage along the highways - is there any change in policies with respect to highway signage, both commercial and otherwise?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, we of course recognize the importance of commercial highway signs to Yukon businesses and the importance of other signs to the travelling public. We are making every effort to work with business owners to make sure they are provided with the signage opportunities that are permitted in the regulations. The transportation and maintenance branch is always happy to inform business owners of the regulations and rules surrounding commercial signage and ensure that new sign requests meet the criteria set out in the existing regulations.

Mr. Jenkins: That doesn't answer the question, Mr. Chair. The question of the minister was: is there any change in the Liberal government with respect to their policy for commercial signage, and if they are going to continue being permitted, will the minister undertake to cut down the brush so that we can at least see them?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I agree that we can look at brush clearing around signs. That would be a good idea. The department has brought some proposals to me concerning new formats for commercial signs on the highway. I am looking those over and, as time permits, I will be doing a bit more work on it.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, will there be a consultation process with the public - with the current owners of the commercial signs? There was a consultation process done quite a number of years ago. The Department of Tourism was quite involved and our Tourism Industry Association of Yukon was quite involved. A policy ensued. Is this the policy that's being looked at? If so, what is being contemplated?

The minister made mention of a number of proposals she has before her. Could she share with the House what those proposals are and what we're looking at in this review? It sounds like an in-house review that the minister is focusing on. Or is it going to be a public consultation?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the department has prepared a number of options for consideration, based on feedback from the public that gathered during previous consultations, some of which go back to the time when the member's own party was in power. Some are more recent.

If the member would like me to go into vast detail on this, we can probably accomplish that by about mid-August.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Speaker, this arrogance has got to stop. We have to move ahead. We have to clear a budget. I'm asking for policy changes. Perhaps the minister can table the anticipated policy changes or the various positions she's looking at. I know that the Minister of Tourism just passed her a note, so I'm sure she has more of an understanding of the issue before her. I would urge the minister to table the various positions that are anticipated or being looked by the department with respect to commercial highway signs.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: With respect, Mr. Chair, I don't believe the proposals are in a form yet that's ready to be tabled.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, Mr. Chair, it has been looked at for quite some time. How long does such a format take? If we're looking at excuses to not address the issue, or if we're looking at ways to hide it behind a closed door and make the decision remote from the industry, then why doesn't the minister come clean and tell the House accordingly? All I'm asking the minister to do is to table the various scenarios that she is looking at. Will she do that? Before a decision is made, I believe it is very important that the industry be consulted and that some input be allowed from the industry and the current owners of these commercial highway signs before any changes are instituted.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, there will be public consultation before any changes are finalized.

Mr. Jenkins: Once again, Mr. Chair, I'd ask the minister to table the various scenarios, and what does she anticipate the timelines would be for her department to get this in a format that can be presented to the public?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, we expect we should be in a position to deal with this in the late summer or early fall.

Mr. Jenkins: I would take it that that is this year, Mr. Chair. If it's not, the minister can advise the House the next time she's on her feet.

Let's move into the rural roads area of the minister's portfolio. There have been a number of initiatives where various contractors were hired to upgrade some of our rural roads. By and large, the project was well-received, but the overall coordination of these various contractors appeared to be a kind of loosey-goosey type situation and the overall product sometimes is lacking. Let's look at the Duncan Creek Road. What steps are going to be taken this year to bring it up to an accepted standard for its entire length, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, this would more properly be dealt with under the capital section of the budget.

Mr. Jenkins: On the contrary, Mr. Chair, the capital has been expended. Now it's back in the hands of the Government of the Yukon. It comes under maintenance - to maintain it and maintain the standard through the whole road system. So, I submit, Mr. Chair, that we're into maintenance; it's a maintenance issue. What steps is this government going to take now that these contractors are finished? What steps is the department going to take to oversee and maintain this road?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, once the work under the rural roads upgrading project is done on a road, then the department simply maintains the road.

Mr. Jenkins: That begs the question: when are they going to start?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: For the Duncan Creek Road, we do maintain it and there is a schedule in place for the said maintenance.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, there are a lot of individuals out there, Mr. Chair, who would like to know when this schedule comes into effect and what will be carried on under this schedule, because to date there has been very little, if any, activity with respect to maintaining the sections that were rebuilt last year under the rural roads program.

So, I ask the minister once again: when will this scheduled maintenance start?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: I believe the maintenance of the Duncan Creek Road has already started, but since the member appears to have a specific concern, we would be glad to check that for him.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, there seems to be an issue with the rural roads and the mining roads, that the amount of activity on them, in maintenance, has been reduced considerably over the last few budget cycles and doesn't appear to even be in the hoop until very, very late in the season. Now once again, I ask the minister: what is the maintenance cycle and when will it begin?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: I just answered that question for the member.

Mr. Jenkins: My question to the minister: what is the maintenance cycle on these rural roads? The minister stated that the department had a program. What is it?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: I stated that I would be happy to provide that to the member. I do not have it here at my fingertips.

Mr. Jenkins: I guess we're beating a dead horse. Either the minister doesn't know or doesn't want to convey the information to the House, and she's going to go back and get back-

Some Hon. Member: Point of order.

Unparliamentary language

Chair: Ms. Buckway, on a point of order.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: The phrase "beating a dead horse" is a violent statement, which I do not believe is appropriate in this House.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. Jenkins: There is no intention of making any statement in this House that is not acceptable. If it doesn't concur with the House, I withdraw the statement "beating a dead horse" and submit "beating a dead issue", then. We'll change the phrase, Mr. Chair.

Chair: We will accept the change. Thank you, Mr. Jenkins.

Mr. Jenkins: I'm still looking for a response to my question.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I have said that I would undertake to get that information for the member opposite.

Mr. Jenkins: I'm just looking for some timelines, Mr. Chair. If the minister, when she agrees to provide information, would also provide some timelines, I would be very much obliged.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: That would probably be possible late next week or early the week after.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, I see we'll be in debate on this department quite extensively this fall, given the timelines that the minister assigns to very simple tasks. I can appreciate that she is a new minister in a portfolio that she has very little, if any, understanding of.

One of the other issues surrounding highways is the reporting of highway conditions. It has been suggested that the reports be faxed out from the department of highways to the visitor reception centres in places like Tok and northern British Columbia. Is such an initiative something that the minister can undertake on her own, or is it another initiative that we have to study and review?

I'm just asking that this information go out on a daily basis to the visitor reception centres where people check in - in northern British Columbia and Tok - before they travel our highways. They would like to know what kind of road conditions they're getting into. It is currently not done on a consistent basis, Mr. Chair. Who is responsible? I understand that it's under the highway maintenance report or conditions report, and that is Community and Transportation Services. It would reflect into the Department of Tourism.

I'm not looking for the minister to pass the buck to the Department of Tourism. I'm just looking for a way to inform travellers coming to the Yukon, on a consistent and regular basis, as to highway driving conditions here in Yukon, particularly during the summer months - May to September.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the member is touching on a subject that is dear to my heart as I took issue with the former Minister of Community and Transportation Services repeatedly last fall and over the winter because of the delayed availability of the road report. I believe that it is already made available to visitor reception centres and certainly we are happy to fax it to any group who wishes to receive it. For people who are hooked up to the Internet, of course - such as I suggest the Tok visitor centre probably is - it is available on the Internet and is changed before 9:00 a.m. every working day.

Mr. Jenkins: That's another problem, "Every working day". There are only so many days in our visitor season and the only days that this information is available and updated are the days that government works. Why can't we do it everyday during the summer, weekends and holidays included? Because if you want to look right now, Mr. Chair, over this long weekend, all you could get on Tuesday, up until a certain time, was the highway report from the previous Friday. So you have got Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday morning before it is changed. Now, why can't it be done everyday during the season?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I am happy to note that, thanks to my representations to the former Minister of Community and Transportation Services, at least the road report on the Internet now says that it is not updated weekends and holidays. However, the telephone number is given and, if there is a change in road conditions, that is noted on the updated telephone report over the weekend and on holidays.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, that is probably one of the poorest examples of customer service that I have heard in a long time, and I would like to commend the minister for overseeing a department that can't address customer issues. This is another area where we could make our visitors much, much happier if the information was current and up-to-date. I believe, Mr. Chair, that down the road we should probably present the Minister of C&TS an award for her outstanding ability in this regard to not change a situation that should be changed and must be changed in order to ensure our travelling public who want to visit the Yukon that the information is accurate and current. And that includes updating that information seven days a week, irrespective of weekends and holidays.

Now, I guess the issue is one of money, and I would ask the minister how much more money is it going to take for the department to upgrade that information on a daily basis during the summer visitor season.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, as I have previously indicated, if there is a change in road conditions the information is updated on the telephone recording, weekends and holidays. That information is transmitted to the visitor reception centres for the convenience of the travelling public. The member knows that.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, well, it looks like we have a minister who would rather argue the point than take the advice and implement a change in policy that, while not too costly, could benefit the travelling public and could improve the understanding of highway conditions in the Yukon. I am just appalled that this minister would choose to stand on her feet and argue a situation, rather than take the advice and look at implementing it after addressing her responsibilities, finding out how many more costs we would occur as a department. Will she do that?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, as I have said, the visitor reception centres are aware of changes in road conditions. The visitor reception centres are our primary contact with the travelling public and the visitors to the Yukon.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, I guess she's going to follow the corporate policy now, and she has got her back up and won't take good, solid, reasonable advice. I'm very disappointed. The issue is, of the outlying visitor reception centres - I refer specifically to Tok and the ones in northern British Columbia where a lot of our visitors travel through, check in with the visitors reception centres, and one of the first questions they ask at those centres is "What are the road conditions like through the Yukon?" The nicest thing to have in those visitor reception centres is a fax, saying what the Yukon conditions are; it's provided to us daily from the Government of the Yukon. Would the minister not like that kind of kudo? The travelling public would appreciate it much more than being told to just go over to that phone, and it may or may not be upgraded, and you dial and it'll say this road report is valid as of Friday, such and such, and it might be Sunday, and you get off the phone and say to yourself, "Well, it's Sunday, and that was Friday morning." Now, what could happen? Should I go there or not go there. The decision is sometimes made on that basis.

With the approach that this minister is taking, Mr. Chair, I submit that she's an impediment to the growth of our visitor industry. All she has to do is to take some good, solid advice, look at the overall program, find out how much more it would cost, and implement it. Why won't she do that, Mr. Chair? I ask the minister, once again: will she take that good, solid advice, and do something with it, implement it?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I have two points. One, at the end of the road-report recording on the telephone, it does say that if there are changes to road conditions, the recording will be updated. Therefore, if it has not been updated, one can safely assume that no changes have occurred. Number two, the visitor reception centres do get advised of changes in road conditions. I will be happy to double-check and ensure that any visitor reception centre in the area that is not currently posting that information for the general public does so in the future.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, Mr. Chair, the Yukon visitor reception centres do post that road information. That, I'm very much aware of, but I'm not concerned with the Yukon visitor reception centres. They are doing a very good job, thanks in part to the previous Minister of Tourism and the current Minister of Tourism. What I'm looking for is for the Minister of Community and Transportation Services to do her job and provide the Department of Tourism with some important, relevant information, and getting that information to the visitor reception centres, faxing it to the outlying visitor reception centres outside the Yukon. Why can't that be done?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, every time I have stopped at the Tok visitor reception centre, which is every time I go through Tok, the Yukon road report is always there, so I would assume that somehow they're getting it.

Mr. Jenkins: I'll tell the minister how it's being sent over to Tok, and it's not thanks, in a large part, to any initiative on the part of the Government of Yukon in many respects. It is the same with the road report that goes out to the Matsu visitor reception centre - no thanks to the Government of Yukon, but it does get over there. It's an initiative that the Government of Yukon should be aware of and should undertake. It's good, solid advice. I don't want to belabour the point, Mr. Chair. I don't want to just continue to argue the point with the minister. It is good, solid advice. Take it. I urge the minister to take it and do something with it. It will improve conditions for all of us.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I don't wish to belabour the point either. I have already said to the member opposite that I will undertake to see that anyone who doesn't currently have it - and needs it - gets it and, furthermore, that they post it.

Mr. Jenkins: I would urge the Minister of Community and Transportation Services to get together with her colleague, the Minister of Tourism. She would probably come to a better understanding of what is needed. They might talk about these issues internally, Mr. Chair.

The other issue that has not been addressed, which I would urge the minister to consider, is that the report be upgraded on a daily basis through the summer visitor season. Now, the first question I would ask my department is how much money this would cost. It should be costed out first. Then, if it is a reasonable cost, run with the information and get it out there on a daily basis. There is no excuse. There was $56.2 million left in the bank when the Liberals took office, Mr. Chair. I don't think we're talking about a vast sum of money. Will the minister do that?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: There was not $56.2 million in the bank when the Liberals took office. We've said that again and again, and they know that.

We will cost out what it would take to update that report daily. I stress again that when there is a change in road conditions, the report on the telephone is updated and visitor reception centres are advised.

Chair: Is there any further general debate on transportation division? We will proceed with line-by-line debate.

On Transportation Engineering Administration

Mr. Jenkins: If the minister could just send over a list of the sections of Yukon highways that are going to be chipsealed this year, I would appreciate it, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I don't have that in my possession at the moment, but I will be glad to send it over when I have it.

Chair: Any further questions or debate on highway maintenance?

Highway Maintenance in the amount of $28,263,000 agreed to

Mr. Jenkins: When will the Whitehorse Airport be fully operational, its complete length used for both landing and takeoffs? When was the NOTAM going to be removed on the Whitehorse Airport? Probably, when she's in there looking around, I guess the next issue that we're going to have to face with the Whitehorse Airport is the widening of the strip. It's 150 feet, and for wide-bodies, that's considered to be just marginal. The Transport Canada standard is wider than that. Is the department looking at the widening of the Whitehorse runway? The initiative to expand the airport is one that our party supported, but the runway width and length has to be usable for it's entire distance for both landing and takeoffs. When is that going to happen, and what's the game plan with respect to widening the strip?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: On the NOTAM removal, we have the full length of the runway for takeoff. We don't have the full length for landing, but it's my understanding that it isn't required. As for widening the runway at the Whitehorse Airport, that has not been considered to this point.

Mr. Jenkins: Are there any initiatives or approaches being made to Transport Canada to get the entire length of the runway certified for landing?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: As I have just said to the member, the full length of the runway is not required for landing.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, the minister suddenly becomes an expert on aviation. I just hope that one day soon the minister's not up there wishing she was down there - she remains down there wishing she was up there.

Mr. Chair, it's an issue that probably should be addressed and I would just like to know if any of the department officials are making any approach to Transport Canada - the certifying agency - to move the threshold back so that the entire length of the Whitehorse Airport runway can be used for landing.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, as the member well knows, because he goes on at length about this in every C&TS debate, there are some obstacles at the north end of the runway. We have had some discussions with Transport Canada on this, but don't see anything moving very quickly. And again, as to the widening of the runway, the Minister of Tourism advises me that not widening the runway is part of her clever tourism plan to keep visitors here a little longer.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, Mr. Chair, the minister might want to take the time to review the reports done on the Whitehorse Airport under the previous government. It's very accurate and factual information and one of the recommendations in there - if we want to attract and continue to attract wide bodies - is the width of the runway; it is minimum now, but it would serve a greater purpose if the runway was widened.

I would urge the minister that that's probably the next step she should be taking, along with negotiating with Transport Canada an arrangement whereby the obstacles in the flight path are marked and identified and the full runway width and length can be then utilized.

Now, all I'm asking her to do is instruct her officials to move forward with the task at hand. If no one does anything, nothing is going to change. The minister is charged with the responsibility of overseeing airports, so will she undertake to do that? It will better serve the visitor industry and all of the travellers here in Yukon - those we wish to attract and those of us who want to get in and out on a regular, scheduled basis.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I am confident that discussions with Transport Canada will continue.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, the success of discussions with Transport Canada by the government as of late is very minimal.

While we are on airports, what is the game plan with the airport in Dawson City? When are we going to see some improvements there, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the Dawson City Airport has a 20-year development plan. Support for that was obtained from the community in January of this year, as I am sure the member is aware. The community's top priority for airport development is hard surfacing the runway. Transport Canada is being made application to for funding of these improvements.

The highest priority from an operational and safety perspective, of course - and we have spoken about this before - is relocating the DIAND air tanker base to the south side of the runway. DIAND has started work on the design of a new air tanker base facility to be completed - the study to be completed this summer.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, the other safety issue that the minister is failing to recognize and do anything about is the issue of ramp parking. We used to have fly-ins of up to 50 aircraft, and no longer can they come into this airport and stay because of the inadequacy - I guess let's put it this way, Mr. Chair: Transport Canada is enforcing the regulations as to the distance from the centre line where you can park. Actually the Klondike Highway comes into too close proximity to the runway centreline. I would ask the minister: what steps are officials taking to provide additional ramp parking for aircraft?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, as the member knows, more apron parking is part of the overall plan for the Dawson airport.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, I do have concerns with it being a 20-year game plan. We used to have ramp parking and it used to be okay when Transport Canada owned the airport, operated the airport and were the enforcement arm. Now, the airport has been offloaded or given to the Government of Yukon, and Transport Canada remains the enforcement arm. It is no longer proper to park in the areas that used to be available for aircraft parking. There is an inadequacy of ramp parking for aircraft.

What are the timelines - and I don't want to hear a 20-year game plan - and steps is the minister taking to ensure that there is adequate parking for aircraft? We are losing a lot of visitor business as a consequence of this recently implemented enforcement by Transport Canada.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the critical thing is for the tanker base to move, which will open a great deal of parking. As well, C&TS people are meeting with Transport Canada - today, I believe - to discuss the improvements, and funding applications will be going in shortly.

Mr. Jenkins: What we have is an uninformed minister. If the tanker base moves, when it does move, it will not free up any additional parking for any other aircraft, because aircraft parked where the tankers park are currently illegal.

If the minister, on her next trip to Dawson, cares to look, she will find a dotted blue line. Between the centre line on the runway and that blue line is where the tankers park. So, it's inside of an area in which parking is illegal. Moving the tanker base will not make any more parking available for transient aircraft, Mr. Chair.

It's a very small area, currently designated, where Transport Canada will permit aircraft to park. There's probably room for about 18 small aircraft, Mr. Chair. We used to have fly-ins of upwards of 50 aircraft. Where are they going to park? What steps is the department taking to provide ramp parking?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I presume the member opposite is telling me that all these fly-in aircraft were parking illegally. When the tanker base moves, there are tanks and some bush in that area to be moved, which will open up more apron parking.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, there's a lot more than just that there, Mr. Chair, and there's a lot of development costs that would have to be incurred. We're not looking for - this is a solution that's probably several years in the making, but there's the immediate concern of ramp parking.

Why was it legal or why was it overlooked for almost 30 years under Transport Canada, and now the hard and fast hammer of Transport Canada is coming down on the Government of the Yukon and it's no longer permitted? The air regulations haven't changed. It's just the enforcement that's much more definite.

When these fly-ins used to occur, all of these aircraft used to park right in front of the terminal, on the grassed area between the runway and the terminal, and there was space for probably about 40 or 50 aircraft there. In all of that area, you're no longer allowed to park aircraft. It's not permitted. Transport Canada is enforcing the regulations. There's not enough space off the ramp in the designated aircraft parking area for very many aircraft. Now, what steps is the department taking to provide ramp parking for transient aircraft who want to remain in Dawson?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I'm certainly not going to suggest to Transport Canada that they not enforce the regulations, in the interest of safety. I'm extremely disappointed that the member opposite is suggesting that the regulations are there to be broken.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, what I'm endeavouring to do is look for solutions, not a confrontation attack on the reality of the situation. The minister can't answer the question; she has no solutions. I'd like her to keep in mind that the airports are under her department. Transportation is a necessary tool of economic development. Her approach is proving to be an impediment to our visitor industry and to aircraft coming and remaining in the community of Dawson.

Is she going to send over an offsetting amount of dollars to compensate for the loss of business that's directly attributable to this portfolio that she has, that she can't address her tasks before her, Mr. Chair? If she can't fix it and can't find a solution, I guess there's something wrong. Try another portfolio. But there's a problem with parking. Now, a 20-year plan is not a solution. We have to have this situation addressed and addressed very quickly.

The other side of the tanker base - there's still a vast area that could be cleared out and an immediate parking area could be made there. That could be done in the next couple of weeks. There's a solution. Why isn't that being looked at? Why do we have to wait for Indian Affairs to move their tanker base? They only occupy a small area. Let's not blame everything on Indian and Northern Affairs. Let's not pass the buck. All of that area could be developed to the east of the existing tanker base for off-ramp parking, and it would be legal. Why isn't this being done?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I agree with the member opposite that it is a concern. A taxiway would also need to be built, were there to be an area cleared on the other side, I believe - I see the member shaking his head. If I said black, he'd say white, and vice versa, so the member is not going to agree with me on anything. We agree that it is a priority to do some airport improvements in Dawson.

One of the problems is that the department had been looking at a relocated airport in Dawson, up until fairly recently, and funding for the Dawson Airport infrastructure wasn't included, in anticipation of Transport Canada building a new relocated airport. We have to get this situation back on track, since the decision has been made to leave the airport where it is.

We will take the members' suggestion under advisement, but I think his time frame of two weeks to build additional aircraft parking is a little short.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, once again the minister is wrong. It's probably less than two weeks to create parking in the area that I'm suggesting. There's quite an area from the tanker base to the east - to the two-zero approach end of the Dawson Airport - that could be utilized for parking, and could be developed extremely quickly. I just shake my head wondering what is wrong with a government that would just bow to the federal government, and not ask for or receive an extension until a two-week project was undertaken and delivered.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Jenkins: Where's this special Liberal relationship between the Yukon Liberals and the Liberals in Ottawa? I guess it has deteriorated now that they're in power.

Ramp parking is an extremely critical issue. The lack of it is impeding the growth of our visitor industry and the responsibility for same rests solely on the shoulders of this minister. I have provided this minister with a very viable option - very low-cost, viable option - but to no avail. They're going to take it under advisement. At least we got that far this time, so I'd like to thank the minister for her overview of the airport situation in Dawson.

Let's move to some of the other Yukon airports and see what we're doing. There was a study undertaken monitoring aircraft in Haines Junction. Just what results have we produced there?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I don't have any details on that. I'll be pleased to ask my officials to check and see if there is any information that can be provided to the member.

Airports in the amount of $5,308,000 agreed to

Chair: Are there any questions on the supplementary information?

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, road equipment reserve - are there any anticipated changes in the policy that had been in place?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: No, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Any further questions on the supplementary information? Are there any questions on the statistics?

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, if we can just look at the statistics for motor vehicle registration. Again, we are looking at a downturn in private, no change in commercial, no change in dealers; is that the economy driving this situation?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Yes, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Jenkins: We have finally got the minister on the record that the economy is in poor shape and it's driving down the motor vehicle registration. So I would like to thank the minister for same.

Just to bring the minister's attention to the statistics under the Motor Transport Board operating authorities. When are we going to be in the loop with the rest of Canada, or out of the loop with the rest of Canada and North America with respect to operating authority? When are we going to become consistent with Canada, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I gave that answer yesterday, and since I don't have it engraved in my brain, if the member will be patient while I find it, I will read it into the record a second time.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, the minister, to bring her memory back into recollection, dealt with CAVR and IRP. She didn't deal with the consistency of application of operating authorities.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the federal government is responsible for the operating authority for movements between territories and provinces. There was deregulation last January, which accounts for the reduction in the statistics. Internally, we are still regulated, and that is something we are considering taking a look at.

Mr. Jenkins: That's what I'd like to target, Mr. Chair. The rest of Canada is deregulated. Interprovincially it's deregulated and internationally we're in a North American economy. Why are we still regulated interterritorially?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, this is something the department brought to my attention as an issue shortly after the Liberal government was sworn in. I have said we would be taking a look at it.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, the rest of Canada got into the program at the beginning of this century. Have we got a timeline as to when we're going to be involving ourselves, the same as the rest of Canada, into a deregulated environment? I know it's being looked at. What are the timelines for a decision coming out of the department or at the Cabinet level, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, if the member is wishing to criticize the Yukon government for not deregulating at the same time as the rest of Canada, he would be referring, of course, to the previous administration.

I have said we will look at it and we will. It will take a bit of work. I can't give him a specific date. I apologize.

Mr. Jenkins: The minister does recognize that she didn't cover this area yesterday. She was dealing with a different matter, so I'm sure she'll retract her statement and make an apology.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I'm so glad the member pointed that out to me.

Chair: Are there any further questions on statistics for Community and Transportation Services?

Transportation Division in the amount of $37,509,000 agreed to

Chair: Is there any general debate?

Mr. Jenkins: Some of the issues surrounding C&TS - and specifically, municipal affairs - that I would like to take up with the minister include the review that was undertaken a couple of years ago by the previous government with respect to the services provided to unorganized communities and the inconsistencies in the rates charged, specifically for water and sewer, and, if any, for landfill maintenance.

I would like to know if there will be any programs brought into place by municipal affairs to provide consistency for the provision of services to unorganized communities. Is that being entertained, or are we going to continue on our merry road of apples, oranges and bananas, and a real mixed bag with respect to the provision of these services?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: I'm aware that there are some inequities with respect to sewer and water delivery charges in unincorporated communities. The rates are out of date and in need of review. I have directed the department to provide me with a detailed analysis of the relationship between rural services and rural taxation, including sewer and water charges.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, that's the first step. Where do we go from there?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: The member is putting the cart before the horse again. One step at a time.

Mr. Jenkins: On the contrary, here we have a government that has the ability to mandate that the price of a bottle of beer is consistent across the Yukon Territory and the price of a bottle of whiskey is consistent across the Yukon Territory, but when it comes to the basic provision of water, we're all over the wall.

Now, we have been able to get a handle on electricity. There's a basic block of electricity that is provided throughout the Yukon at the same price, whether you're in Old Crow, Watson Lake, Whitehorse or Beaver Creek. It begs the question as to why the government, this minister and this Department of C&TS can't get a handle on the most basic provisions of human life, which is water? Why can't there be a fixed cost for a provision of that service across the areas served by this government?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: As I said, we recognize that there is currently very little relationship between property tax rates and the cost of providing municipal-type services in unincorporated communities. In my initial briefings with department officials, the issue of rural services and rural taxation was identified as an area of critical concern. As I said previously, I have asked the department to give me a thorough analysis of the present structure and to present options to equalize the playing field for Yukon communities. I am not going to prejudge what that analysis will contain.

Mr. Jenkins: One of the other issues that comes up under this area is how successful we are at controlling mosquitoes in rural Yukon and, by and large, I guess in all areas, it has proven to be very unsuccessful this year. Has the minister got any explanation as to why we have been so unsuccessful? I don't want her to rush out and buy us all a fly swatter. I urge her to have a look at the program that's in place and find out what went wrong with it. Has there been any change in the larvicide used or applied this year from last year?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: No, there hasn't, Mr. Chair. We believe the increase in the mosquito population is due to the previous government supplying Viagra.

Mr. Jenkins: I thought Viagra was a drug used by males, not females who lay the eggs. If female mosquitoes are subject to the application of Viagra, as the minister states, I guess we really do have a problem.

One of the reasons provided in one of the newspaper articles was that the material applied - the Vectobac, if that was the product used consistently across the Yukon - couldn't be applied to streams or water where there are fish or fowl. I'll send over a copy of the specimen label from Vectobac for the minister's use. It's approved for use in streams, streams only, metered, undiluted, Vectobac 600L for one to 15 minutes to attain a concentration of .001 to .05 millimetres of Vectobac 600L per litre of stream water; use higher rates when streams or river contain higher concentration of organic material, silt and/or very cold water. So, the excuse that you can't apply it in running water is not an excuse. The fish can eat it; the animals can ingest it; it has no adverse affect, Mr. Chair. We've heard all sorts of excuses, but the program hasn't been very successful this year, and I think it deserves an analysis.

Furthermore, I'd like to ask the minister to table the evaluation of the various individuals who submitted bids as to why it was awarded in the manner it was, because I'm aware of the costs, and it appears to have gone to a higher bidder. I was just wondering why. So if the minister could table the review, I certainly appreciate it.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, first of all, I believe that male mosquitoes do have some tiny part to play in the number of female mosquitoes around.

We will see what material we are able to table, subject to contractual regulation.

As the member knows, the larvicide used is naturally occurring and non-toxic to humans and other insects or animals, but the mosquito control program does not apply the material within 10 metres of fish-bearing waters or rivers. There is some discussion involved there with the Department of Renewable Resources, which has a definite stake in this, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Jenkins: That was the issue I was taking exception to and I did check out with the rest of Canada, and for blackflies application, and for mosquitoes, it can be right into fish-bearing waters of all types. It's approved in the rest of Canada. Why there's a concern here, I don't know. I guess we're not part of the rest of Canada in many respects.

I'm pleased to hear, Mr. Chair, that the minister has acknowledged that male mosquitoes have small parts. I'd like to thank her for that very valuable bit of information.

I have some further items for debate, Mr. Chair, under municipal affairs.

Mr. Chair, in her preamble yesterday, the minister provided an overview of borrowing by municipal governments and the formula that is used. Not to go into a long debate on this subject, it's three percent of municipal assessments that a municipal government is allowed to borrow. That's the limit, and there's a caveat on that - three percent of the municipal assessments of which grant-in-lieu or taxes are paid.

If the department was doing a quick and dirty analysis of the amount of borrowing limit of any municipality, they would certainly first look to the column where that municipal government accrued the taxes received from the private taxpayers and the grant-in-lieu from governments and the various government agencies. I am sure that is very much the case, but if there was a budgeted amount, and that budgeted amount was overstated by some $300,000, and that was back-filled with a transfer from reserves, I am sure that the minister would agree with me that that could skew the quick and dirty analysis that the department would take of a municipality when they established the borrowing limits. Can we stop there and get a yes or no from the minister?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, this is an area that the member is extremely familiar with, due to his vast years of experience in municipal politics. It is an area that I have only two months' familiarity with, so would he mind repeating the question?

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, when we look at a municipality's borrowing limit, it's set by the Municipal Act as three percent of the total assessment of that municipality. Now, there is a caveat on that, and that's the three percent of the assessment on which taxes are paid or in which grant-in-lieu are received.

So there is kind of a gap. You have a total assessment of the municipality, and the only amount you are allowed to borrow against is for those properties on which grant-in-lieu are received or taxes are paid.

Now, has that sunk in? Okay, we can move forward.

Now, the quick and dirty analysis that any financial individual would do would be to look at the column in revenues that picked up the amount of grants-in-lieu paid or received by that municipality and the amount of taxes received by that municipality, and they would kind of work it backwards to get kind of an indication on the amount of assessment on which they were receiving taxes and grant-in-lieu.

Are we following each other so far? I'm trying to put this, Mr. Chair, in as simple terms as possible. The figure you look at in the financial statement of the municipality is the total figure budgeted for grants-in-lieu and taxes. If that were overstated by some $300,000 and it was picked up and met with a transfer from reserves, does the minister not agree with me that that would skew the quick and dirty analysis as to the borrowing limits for a municipality?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the minister agrees with the member that this is a complicated area, so perhaps I had best review Hansard where I can see all these numbers in writing and work my way through it and then I can give him an answer.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, I would like to thank the minister for undertaking that initiative, but after you start looking at this equation for a number of the Yukon municipalities, Mr. Chair, there is no consistent reporting and no consistent accounting practice applied across all municipalities. So when you start looking at them, you are comparing apples to oranges and it begs the question: why haven't the municipalities been instructed to adopt a uniform accounting system? That's where we are heading.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: We have talked about a uniform accounting system with the Association for Yukon Communities. The Association of Yukon Communities has expressed some interest but certainly not unanimous, so it is something we are going to continue to work toward. And just to forestall the member, no, I don't have a timeline for him.

Mr. Jenkins: I have another question for the minister. Virtually all municipalities, when they borrow money, borrow it from the Government of the Yukon. Given that there's one fixed annual principal and interest payment and it's simple interest, it's not compounded. So, your borrowing costs and your debt servicing are considerably lower dealing with the government than dealing with a chartered bank, where you have to make monthly interest payments and also everything is compounded, usually twice annually. So, your total cost of borrowing, over, say, a five-year window on a million bucks - I had it worked out once, but it was considerable, given that in a lot of cases the interest rate varies when you borrow from a chartered bank versus the Government of the Yukon, where it's fixed. So, why would a municipality borrow from a chartered bank a sum approaching $1 million when it would be considerably less expensive to borrow from the Government of the Yukon, and the money is readily available from the Government of the Yukon? Why would a municipality do that?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: A municipality is free to borrow money wherever they want, so long as they meet the three-percent limit. The department does check to make sure they are doing that. But, they are free to choose where they are going to borrow.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, given the variance in the amount of cost of borrowing from the Government of the Yukon vis-à-vis the chartered banks, I guess, why would a municipality choose to borrow from the bank over the government? The exercise is to get the best bang for the taxpayers they represent. If you need to borrow money, you certainly want to borrow it at the lowest possible cost. When you're dealing with sums of money approaching $1 million, does it make sense to borrow from a chartered bank when those types of funds are available from the Government of the Yukon and the interest rates - total cost of borrowing - is considerably less? Does it make sense? Why would you go to a chartered bank? I know they're free to do that, but why would you?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, I don't know why a municipality would make a decision like that. As I said, it's up to the municipality to decide, based on criteria that they set.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, we'll leave that, Mr. Chair, but I'd like the minister to spend a bit of time looking at a uniform accounting system for all municipalities, because we're going to get into a number of capital projects in and around the Yukon Territory where contributions are being made and reserves are being looked at, and you want to be consistent and you want to be fair in your approach. The only way to do so is to look at all of the categories and see that we are comparing the same areas to the same areas. I'm sure the minister would agree with that statement.

So, I very much urge the minister to have a look at that. I know it probably won't be acceptable to all members of the Yukon communities, because they each have different accounting firms but, unless we have a uniform accounting policy with respect to reporting assets, reserves, and how reserves are set up, we're at a loss. It is very, very difficult to compare one community to another when you're looking at providing additional funding or providing for basic infrastructure such as water and sewer.

We have a number of initiatives underway today to provide for sewage treatment infrastructure to communities, which is a needed requirement, but our application has to be consistent, fair and reasonable to all. As I said earlier, we have a government currently that has the ability to regulate the price of a bottle of beer and a bottle of whisky, so that it's consistent in every liquor store throughout the Yukon and we have a government that has the ability to legislate or regulate the basic amount of electricity for each household. From one end of the Yukon to the other, it's the same price, but the basic provision of water and sewer is an area that's all over the wall, and it shouldn't be. There should be a consistent rate for the same service.

More and more we hear of cost of service. The order of magnitude dictates that, when you service a great big population centre, your order of magnitude investment on a per capita basis is going to be considerably less than your order of magnitude investment for a community of 50 or 500.

That's the equation we have to work with. I will leave it with the minister, and we can move on, but there is a major issue. I'm sure that the department officials and those in the bean-counting area will be looking seriously at this issue of borrowing limits and how they define and determine the amount of borrowing for various municipalities. They will look at it in light of taxes and grants-in-lieu that are overstated and covered off by transferring contingency reserves that are basically cashed in to cover the shortfall. So, I will leave that with the minister. We will get back to it this fall, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: For the record, as I have already indicated to the member, we are in agreement that a uniform accounting system would be a good idea. I have said that we are already working on that. There is some resistance from some parts of the Association of Yukon Communities, but we are looking at it because we think it would be a good idea.

Chair: Is there any further debate on municipal and community affairs division? We will go line by line then.

On Assistant Deputy Minister's Office

Mr. Jenkins: Is there additional money in here for the fire smart program, Mr. Chair, or is that outside of this area?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, that is not in the Department of Community and Transportation Services. Fire smart funding is in the Department of Economic Development.

Public Safety in the amount of $1,507,000 agreed to

Chair: Are there any questions on the allotments? Are there any questions on the statistics?

Municipal and Community Affairs Division in the amount of $24,119,000 agreed to

Chair: We will now refer to questions on the recoveries from Community and Transportation Services.

Mr. Jenkins: EMO recoveries, Mr. Chair - I know the minister went over it, what does this $158,000 refer specifically to?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, there's a decrease of $220,000 from the 1999-2000 fiscal year to the 2000-01 fiscal year. Recovery of emergency responses - mainly the Burwash forest fire in 1999-2000 at $274,000, offset by increases. There was a $54,000 increase in the joint emergency preparedness program, JEPP, recoverable expenditure in this fiscal year, and an increase of $262,000 from 1998-99 to 1999-2000 due to recovery of emergency response's expenditure, again mainly relating to the Burwash forest fire, offset by a net decrease of $12,000 in the previous fiscal year as a result of corresponding reduction in expenditure.

Mr. Jenkins: Has the department obtained a legal opinion with respect to the potential of liability arising out of the Burwash fire as a consequence of an employee of C&TS or a contract employee of C&TS having set the fire in the dump?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, there was a fire at the Burwash dump. The fire was put out. The Department of Community and Transportation Services does not feel it is liable for the starting of the fire.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, so it looks like we are into a disagreement there.

On recoveries further - if the minister dovetails mosquito control from the estimates 2000-01, $17,000 recoverable, the forecasted amount last year was $27,000, the 1998-1999 actual was $16,000. You dovetail that to the other pages, and communities participating in larvicide program were nine and nine. It has been consistent, and the amount spent - the 1999 forecast and the 2000 estimate - are the same. Why such a drop in the recoveries in this area?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, there was a decrease of $10,000 from the previous fiscal year, as a result of one community, Carmacks, not participating in 1999-2000. As well, there was a reduced number of visits by the mosquito control coordinator to Dawson, as local staff managed the post-aerial monitoring program, and then there was an increase of $11,000 from 1998-1999 to the previous fiscal year due to some municipalities not participating and lower program costs two years ago.

Mr. Jenkins: If the minister could bear with me for a moment - what she is saying is that 1999-2000 forecast for communities participating in the larvicide program was eight instead of nine, as stated. Is that what she is stating?

Just go back to page 3-22 - I know we've cleared it, but I am just trying to dovetail recoveries with the statistics, and it is sometimes very hard to do.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, we recover money from municipalities, but not from unincorporated communities. This year, Beaver Creek, Burwash Landing, Dawson City, Destruction Bay, Faro, Haines Junction, Ross River, Stewart Crossing and Teslin are taking part.

Mr. Jenkins: If the minister goes to the statistics on page 3-22, it says "Communities Participating in Larvicide Program"; it doesn't list the communities. So we have no idea which communities they are. From background information I'm aware of it, but it states that 1998-99 actual was nine, so what I'm asking the minister: is the reduction from $27,000 forecasted recoveries to the estimates for this current budget period as a consequence of this figure over here - "nine" should be "eight" - or will eventually be eight. Is that the answer?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, there are different communities participating each year, but the number nine is correct and there was less recoverable cost from Dawson, as I said, as local staff were managing the post-monitoring program.

Mr. Jenkins: While we're on that area, this year we appear to have been very ineffective in mosquito control. What are we going to do about it, Mr Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, as the member knows, the Yukon government's mosquito control program makes one annual application of larvicide, aimed at eliminating the early snow-melt mosquitoes. Parts of the Yukon have had an unseasonably wet summer so far, or large quantities of snow-melt water, and that can result in more mosquitoes hatching from larvae which were unaffected by the mid-May larvicide campaign.

Mr. Jenkins: So, it sounds like we have another area in government where common sense doesn't prevail. If we have a late spring, we still apply it early, or if we have unseasonably cold weather and a resurgence of larvae that continues to grow, we don't go out and do a second application or anything. We just grin and bear it. All Yukoners grin and bear it, Mr. Chair.

Why can't we apply some common sense to this program? If the weather is inclement or changes from what we have had, which has been quite an unseasonably dry series of springs this last number of years, with an abundance of forest fires, the smoke subsequently chased away the mosquitoes. We don't have that this year. Very few forest fires; very few applications of larvicide. Just one application. Why can't we design a program that works? We have the technology, we have the people and we have the product. We just have to have the political will to accomplish this initiative.

Why can't we take a simple task like mosquito control and address it?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the Yukon government's mosquito control program hires an expert consultant who monitors the program and makes changes, depending on weather conditions and other factors. The local helpers are very important to this program in communities like Dawson City. Municipalities have the ability to kill the adult mosquitoes should they wish to do so.

Under certain weather conditions beyond our control, we will inevitably have more mosquitoes in some years than others and in some parts of the Yukon. That appears to be the case this year.

Mr. Jenkins: So, at any given time we don't have control over the weather conditions, Mr. Chair, so we have to alter the program to take into consideration what the weather is doing. Now, I'm sure the minister is going to say that it's the federal Liberals who are responsible for the environment, so they're responsible for the weather, but where's this wonderful relationship between the Yukon Liberals and the federal Liberals?

All I'm asking is for the minister to look at developing a program that works. Certainly, this year and in some prior years, it hasn't worked. All it takes is an initiative on the minister's part, but it seems like we get in there once a year, bang, and that's it. After that, nothing really happens. A helicopter goes around, dumps the larvicide on the suspected areas where the larvae is growing - no follow-up really, other than maybe a little bit of fogging or a little bit of ground treatment. Sometimes, in some years like this year, it probably would be prudent to go for a second treatment. Does the minister not agree? Will she undertake to do a comprehensive review and see what we can do in this area?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: As I said, the mosquito control program hires an expert consultant and pre-application and post-application monitoring of larvae development is performed to measure the success of the application program. The consultant, I believe, has the ability to order a further application of larvicide if he deems it necessary.

Mr. Jenkins: Then I guess the other issue that has to be addressed head-on is the controversy within Renewable, and I don't know if Fisheries are within the equation with respect to what streams you can treat. What are the timelines for solving this dilemma, because Vectobac is authorized for treatment in all sorts of water? This year seems to be the first year that this issue has reared its ugly head. This larvicide is approved for free-running water, fish-bearing waters, waters with all sorts of waterfowl in it, and humans can ingest this product. Maybe that's what the minister's doing; she's having a daily dose of this larvicide so the mosquitoes don't bother her, and she isn't aware that the mosquito population is growing alarmingly around the Yukon. I never thought of that approach.

This Vectobac - she might want to read the label that I sent over to her, Mr. Chair, and probably advise the House as to what steps she is going to take to bring resolution of this issue for the application of Vectobac in its permitted areas, like the rest of Canada.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, if the member opposite wants to ingest Vectobac he is welcome to. I certainly wouldn't care to. However, it would be a good idea to discuss the issue with the Department of Renewable Resources and I will undertake to do so.

Chair: Are there any further questions on recoveries?

Mr. Jenkins: On recoveries Mr. Chair, if I can look at the transport division, aviation operations. Just where are we at with the recoveries of CARS and all of our costs that we are incurring on behalf of Nav Canada. I take it that that's where that recovery is from, for the operation of our CARS facilities. I could stand corrected, but our cost to operate CARS has been increasing and yet we are looking at the same estimate for 2000 as our forecast for 1999, which is up some $20,000 over the 1998-99 actual. Is that the case?

How are we going to meet our obligations for these new contracts with the CARS operators?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the cost of the CARS agreements went up, but we are also getting more money back from Nav Canada.

Mr. Jenkins: Where is that reflected in these recoveries?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair; airports, $1,305,000.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, if we look at page 3-24, there's an aviation operations recovery of $723,000. Is that landing fees and permits? What does it relate to?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, page 3-24 is revenue, not recoveries.

Mr. Jenkins: So, all of the CARS additional contracts are covered off by additional transfers from Nav Canada to the Government of the Yukon? Because, from my recollection, our increase in CARS operation went up substantially if I look through the contract registry for this period. Is that the case, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, there was an increase of $18,000 from 1999-2000 to 2000-01, an increase of $25,000 in this year, mainly due to higher bids expected for the CARS agreement, which expired at the end of March, offset by a $7,000 increase in the previous fiscal year due to emergency response services coverage by staff for scheduled flights outside regular hours of operation - and that was 100-percent recoverable from the airlines - and an increase of $156,000 from 1998-1999 to 1999-2000 mainly due to new CARS funding agreements with Nav Canada, and that includes the move to 24-hour operation at Watson Lake.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, the minister mentioned an amount of $7,000 recoverable from the airlines. Now the only cases that I am aware of, where CARS are asked to come out after hours are for medevac purposes. Is that where most of that is recovered from - from the medevac flights? I am not aware of any CARS that opens up above and beyond their normal hours for the schedule. They will stick around if it's a short period of time, but when they have to come back in the middle of the night, that is a call-out, and I believe that is what that refers to. So is this just an internal transfer from Health and Social Services to C&TS for recoveries on medevac flights?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, no, that would cover when, for example, Canadian Airlines is late in Whitehorse, when it arrives here after hours.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, staffing at the Whitehorse Airport is Transport Canada, Nav Canada - how does CARS get into the equation?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, that figure is not all CARS, it is partially CARS.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, the CARS I am familiar with is in my community of Dawson and the only time they are called in after hours are for medevac flights, so there is a call-out paid. I believe there is a four-hour call-out charge for the CARS operator to go out and talk to the carrier and put the runway lights on and the beacon and the navigation aids and give a local weather report. Now, who pays for that call-out charge?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, none of that $7,000 was for medevacs. It was for, for example, having a fire truck standing by at the Whitehorse Airport when Canadian Airlines is late.

Mr. Jenkins: I'm asking the minister who pays the call-out charge when CARS are called out in Dawson City for a medevac?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: I believe it's Transport Canada, but I would be more than pleased to check for the member.

Mr. Jenkins: Okay. I'm not getting the answer that I believe is the correct one, Mr. Chair. I can understand NavCan paying the bill, not Transport Canada.

I'm just a little unsure about the answers I'm receiving with respect to the CARS operations. They have a fixed contract for a fixed period of time. Their hours are extended in the summer season and shortened in the winter. There are many occasions, due to the inability of the Minister of Health and Social Services to address the doctors on-call situation in Dawson, where medevacs occur in our community. How is it set up where NavCan - I believe it's NavCan - pays this bill for the CARS call-out?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Yes, the member is correct. I misspoke; it is Nav Canada and not Transport Canada.

Mr. Jenkins: Thank you. But, how does Nav Canada pay this bill? Is this an arrangement above and beyond the basic funding, and we just bill them at the end of a fiscal period? I'm not aware of this undertaking. It's pretty open-ended, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: I said I believe it is Nav Canada. I will be pleased to check for the member.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, I'd certainly like a copy of the agreement between the Government of Yukon and Nav Canada for the payment of these call-out fees after the normal extended hours. I'm not totally comfortable that this is the case, Mr. Chair.

I know the minister misspoke herself with respect to Transport Canada, not recognizing that there's another agency - a Crown corporation - which is Nav Canada. I just want the taxpayers of the Yukon to get the best bang for the buck. How this is done is usually by offloading to our senior level of government some of the costs that they used to incur. Now that they've downloaded this responsibility to the Yukon government, it sounds like there's a failsafe in this agreement, with Nav Canada and the Government of Yukon. Is that the case, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, it would certainly be a dull Legislature if the members opposite knew the answer to every question they asked. I have said I will check on this for the member and I will do so.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, I'm sure the agreement between Nav Canada and the Yukon government is a public document. Could the minister just send over a copy of that at her convenience. Next week will do.

Chair: Are there any further questions on recoveries?

Mr. Jenkins: I didn't get a yes or no on that request for the information, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: If I can supply the information, I certainly will.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, we want to expedite the business of this House, and all I'm looking for is a yes or no. It's a public document. I'm not asking for the moon; I'm asking for the minister to do her job. All I'm asking for is a copy of the undertaking between the Government of Yukon and Nav Canada.

I'd like to see it and get an understanding of the issue. Unlike the minister, who is green, who hasn't got a clue about many of the areas we are discussing, I'd like to be up to speed and have an understanding of the portfolios that I'm a critic of, and it would help me greatly if I could get yes-and-no answers and not all of these suggestions - if I can, or if I may, or perhaps, or maybe, or it's under review. Can the minister please provide a yes or no answer?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Yes, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Are there any further questions on recoveries?

Some Hon. Members: Clear.

Chair: Next page. Are there any questions on revenues?

Some Hon. Members: Clear.

Chair: Are there any questions on the transfer payments?

Some Hon. Members: Clear.

Chair: I'll refer again right now to page 3-4. Does the total operation and maintenance of $64,105,000 carry?

Operation and Maintenance Expenditures for Department of Community and Transportation Services in the amount of $64,105,000 agreed to

Chair: Do members wish to take a brief recess before we get into capital?

Some Hon. Members: Agreed.

Chair: We will take a 10-minute recess.

Recess

Chair: I will now call Committee of the Whole to order. We will continue with Community and Transportation Services and go right into the line items for capital.

On Capital Expenditures

Chair: Is there any debate on capital for the office of the deputy minister, emergency measures?

On Office of the Deputy Minister

Mr. Jenkins: I was looking for general debate on capital.

Chair: Mr. Jenkins, as I understand it, general debate for all departments goes through when we are talking about operation and maintenance. On the capital side, we discuss only line items.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chair, office of the deputy minister - could the minister provide a breakdown of what we are spending the capital on?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, emergency measures - $10,000 for the seismic design of the joint emergency operation coordinations centre to meet the post-disaster standard by adding some steel bracing to the building. Community television and radio, there is $5,000 required for the purchase of satellite receivers and transmitters. The MDMRS, multi-departmental mobile radio system: $15,000 will be used to purchase replacement mobile and portable radios, and prior years' projects pertains to funding that was required for regulatory project work in 1998-1999.

Emergency Measures in the amount of $10,000 agreed to

Chair: Before we go any further, Mr. Jenkins, since there seems to be some confusion with the format, we are wondering if you would prefer to have a minister talk generally about it or line by line on each one of these?

Mr. Jenkins: I'll just ask questions in line-by-line debate. If I would like an explanation, I will ask for it. Thank you.

On Corporate Services Division

On Maintenance Camp Facilities and Equipment

Mr. Jenkins: Somewhere in this area, Mr. Chair, there is a capital cost associated with implementing the solid waste regulations. Just where is it, and how much cost did we incur?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, that will be under municipal and community affairs, later on.

Maintenance Camp Facilities and Equipment in the amount of $450,000 agreed to

Mr. Jenkins: Is this painting of the bridges that the now Premier made the great to-do about?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: The $391,000 is for five projects. $100,000 is for repainting the Takhanne River bridge at kilometre 159.3 on the Haines Highway. $50,000 is for the design of a pedestrian walkway on the Nisutlin River bridge at Teslin. $101,000 is to upgrade the M'Clintock bridge and approach rail at Marsh Lake; reconstruction of the Wheaton River bridge at kilometre 25 on the Annie Lake Road at $55,000 and the Nahanni Range Road bridge at kilometre 174 on the Nahanni Range Road at $85,000. Both of those were washed out by high water.

Bridges - Numbered Highways in the amount of $391,000 agreed to

Mr. Jenkins: Could the minister please provide a breakdown of the $1,000,000 for other roads, please?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, that is for the rural road upgrading program for roads mostly in or adjacent to unincorporated communities to improve them to a reasonable condition. Is the member wanting a complete breakdown of the projects for this year?

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Okay. Tagish Estates roads in Tagish, $20,000; Taku Subdivision roads in Tagish, $25,000; the Bonanza Creek Road in the Dawson area, $92,000; Henderson's Corner subdivision roads in the Dawson area, $15,000; the Sunnydale access road in the Dawson area, $25,000; the Blind Creek Road in Faro, $40,000; roads in the Little Salmon subdivision in the Faro area, $20,000; and the Mt. Mye sheep viewing road in Faro, $20,000. There are two projects on the Aishihik Road, kilometre 0 to 42, $50,000, and kilometre 42 to 125, $50,000. Pine Lake cottage lots roads in Haines Junction, $30,000; the Signpost Road in Keno, $10,000; the Duncan Creek Road in the Mayo area, $80,000; several locations on the Pelly Ranch Road in the Pelly Crossing area, $55,000; bridges on the north Canol Road in the Ross River area, $40,000; Johnson's Crossing, east side road, in the Teslin area, $40,000; the Johnson's Crossing boat launch in the Teslin area, $7,000; completion of the Upper Liard boat ramp in Upper Liard, $20,000; the Deep Creek south road in the Laberge area, $75,000; the Policeman's Point Road in the Laberge area, $70,000; the Fox Creek Road in the Laberge area, $10,000; Gentian Lane, south of Whitehorse, $12,000; the Kusawa Lake road, west of Whitehorse, $50,000; various spots on the Fish Lake Road, west of Whitehorse, $50,000; and roads in the Mendenhall subdivision, $10,000.

Mr. Jenkins: Is this work going to be tendered to the locals, or is it going to be sole-sourced, or is it going to be done in-house, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the work is mostly performed by local contractors. There will be some contracts entered into with First Nations for this work.

Mr. Jenkins: How much of this work will be sole-sourced with First Nations, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the Aishihik Road, kilometre 42 to 125, and various locations on the Pelly Ranch Road will be contracted with First Nations.

Mr. Jenkins: Does the minister have a total? I know that there are two jobs on the Aishihik Road for $50,000. What's the total that's going to be sole-sourced to First Nations, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: $105,000, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Keenan: I'd like a breakdown on the north Canol projects. I do believe I heard in my ears that it was strictly bridge work. Is that correct?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Yes, Mr. Chair, it is for north Canol bridges.

Mr. Keenan: And who is going to be doing that work, Mr. Chair, and has the minister or the department had any connection with the round table of the First Nation of Ross River to ask for their input into this project?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, the work project for the north Canol bridges was put forward by the department because of safety concerns on these bridges. Some of the money will be for engineering work, and the rest, I presume, will go to local contractors.

Mr. Keenan: Well, Mr. Chair, that's just not good enough. We've been spending money building capacity in the community of Ross River. We've been working with all aspects of the community. This has been a much-needed source of work for the community. I understand that, when you say that you're looking at safety issues first, there are certainly plenty of safety issues that could be accommodated through general labour around the community. I'm certainly disappointed and I don't accept the minister's answer. The department is not to be taking a sole lead in this; it's there for the communities to participate in.

I would ask the minister if the minister would contact the round table in the First Nation - as we have in the past - to talk about community priorities. We've been building capacity within the community, and I'd like to see us continue to build capacity in the community, and $40,000 in bridges out of rural roads with a total budget of a million dollars just does not cut it.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, in the previous year, Ross River had $220,000 of this program. That was the second largest of the projects last year. The money, as the member well knows, is spread out throughout the territory, and every community can't expect to have the same amount of work each year necessarily. There are many, many, many requests received each year for work under this program, as the member is aware.

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Chair, I don't want to belabour the point, but I take exception to the minister's answer because that's absolutely and categorically not correct. If the minister would read back some of the items that she listed out - and there are some 20-odd projects, and many of them are a continuation of what happened in the past, in the previous three years. So I take exception to it. It sounds like it's another case of the government punishing rural Yukon for not going that way. For not putting one Liberal seat into rural Yukon, we now have them being punished. And I take exception to the fact that the minister can stand here - we had a backbencher stand here and read into the record a motion about all of the wonderful infrastructure development that is going to take place throughout Yukon. Oh, it sounded like I just wanted to run over there and give him a big hug because it was going to be so good - just another falsehood.

Unparliamentary language

Chair: Mr. Keenan, we would remind you to use parliamentary language. "Falsehood" is definitely an unparliamentary term. We would ask you to retract that.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. Keenan: Certainly, Mr. Chair, I'll retract that, but the judge and jury will be the Yukon public, and the judge and jury will not have to retract that at that point in time, because certainly I see it that way personally. My constituents see it that way as I explain it to them. This is going to make one heck of a good mail-out, I've got to say, because they say something on one hand and giveth, and on the other hand they take away-eth. It's all politics to the government at this point in time, and I surely wish that the government would start to show a little bit of leadership.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Chair, it is not all politics at this time; it is all about fixing rural roads. Let me see: Tagish, I believe, is in the member's riding; Dawson - there are several pr