Whitehorse, Yukon

Wednesday, October 25, 2000 - 1:30 p.m.

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.

TRIBUTES

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the House to pay tribute to two important events for Yukon women that take place this month.

October is Women's History Month as well as Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

I'll speak first about Women's History Month. October was chosen in recognition of the historical importance of the Persons case. Last week, the federal government honoured the Famous Five by unveiling a bronze monument on Parliament Hill depicting the five women sipping tea and studying the document declaring them "persons".

I mention this, Mr. Speaker, because it is important to know our history and to honour it.

Without the vision, strength and persistence of women like the Famous Five, women might not be standing in this House today.

In the Yukon, we have particular reason to be proud. Women like Kaushee Harris, Victoria Faulkner, Emilie Tremblay, Belinda Mulroney and Martha Black have helped make the Yukon what it is today.

To honour Yukon women, the Women's Directorate has created a Yukon Women's Hall of Fame. This is online. The hall features previous award winners and nominees from the past 10 years. As it has always been a struggle to select only five award winners, the Yukon Women's Hall of Fame replaces the awards night. Anyone can now submit the name of a woman to be included on the Web site.

As well, the directorate helped fund the Yukon women in music tour throughout the territory this month. Accompanying the tour was an archival display of women and children, courtesy of Yukon Archives. These wonderful photographs provide a glimpse into the lives of Yukon women through the past century. I invite all members to submit the names of those women they admire for inclusion in the Yukon Women's Hall of Fame. The Yukon has a wealth of wonderful women, and it's time the world knows about it.

I want also to speak about pink October, or national breast month across the Yukon, Canada and North America. According to the Yukon medical officer of health, only 30 percent of Yukon women who should have mammograms are having them. This is an important health step women can take for themselves. I want to pay a special tribute to a small group of women who are working to create an awareness of the importance of breast health in the Yukon Territory. These women, who represent the Yukon mammography program at Whitehorse General Hospital, the Department of Health and Social Services, the Canadian Cancer Society, the Breast Cancer Navigator project, the Circle of Hope and the breast cancer survivor group - they have done a wonderful job of spreading the news.

I don't think you can go into any women's washroom, anywhere in the Yukon, and not see one of their posters. I commend them for their commitment to raise awareness, with the hope of increasing the number of Yukon women who take the time to examine and pay attention to breast health.

Breast cancer doesn't just affect women; it affects men as well, and it affects those who care for and support them.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Netro: I rise today on behalf of the official opposition. I would like to offer a tribute to National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

I would like to recognize the impact that breast cancer has on all of our lives. We all know someone whose life has been affected by breast cancer. They are our mothers, our sisters, our cousins or our friends. The Yukon has a number of projects and programs that are dedicated to helping Yukoners recognize, identify and cope with the impacts of breast cancer. These projects and programs include the breast self-examination program, the Navigator project and the mammography unit at the hospital. A unique forum on breast cancer took place in Whitehorse earlier this year.

These are important steps in helping all of us deal with breast cancer in our communities. We would especially like to recognize the efforts that are made by doctors and nurses in the Yukon to support patients on a daily basis.

Mahsi.

Mr. Jenkins: I also rise on behalf of the Yukon Party to pay tribute to National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, dedicated to raising increasing awareness of breast cancer issues and the importance of early detection.

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in Canadian women, and is currently the leading cause of death among women between the ages of 35 and 49. This year alone an estimated 19,200 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in Canada, and approximately 5,500 will pass away because of this disease. While these statistics are disturbing, there have been great strides in reducing mortality rate among women with breast cancer as a result of early detection.

As a consequence of early detection, more tumours are being found at an earlier stage in their development, and the mortality rates among Canadian women with breast cancer has dropped by an estimated 10 to 15 percent since 1986. Similar trends of decreasing breast cancer mortality rates have also been observed in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia, and are attributed to screening and improved treatment.

Clearly the best weapon against breast cancer is early detection and having knowledge about this disease. Breast Cancer Awareness Month provides an opportunity to not only increase our efforts to raise awareness about breast cancer, but how women can protect themselves from this disease.

I am pleased to offer our party support to this life-saving initiative. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the many volunteers across the territory for their continuing effort to help raise funds for cancer research, and for helping spread awareness about breast cancer during October and all year-round.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: Introduction of visitors.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Ms. Duncan: I'm honoured to introduce Nancy MacBeth in the gallery today. Ms. MacBeth is the Leader of the Alberta Liberal Party and the leader of the official opposition in that Legislature. And she's joined in her visit to the Yukon by her husband, Hilliard. Welcome, please, Nancy MacBeth.

Mr. Kent: I'd like to introduce Mr. Paul Deuling and his grade 11 Social Studies class from F.H. Collins Senior Secondary School.

Hon. Mr. Jim: I'd like to introduce our chair for the Yukon Housing Corporation, Mr. Frank Bachmier.

Speaker: Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: I have for tabling the Yukon Advisory Council on Women's Issues Annual Report, April 1, 1999, to March 31, 2000.

Mr. Fentie: Given the high-handed manner in which the Liberals opposite are changing the rules and procedures of this Legislature, I have for tabling the minutes of the meeting, September 30 of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges, documenting agenda items, night sittings and the all-party Standing Committee on Appointments.

Speaker: Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) the Liberal government has made a commitment to restore public confidence in government and to improve decorum in the Legislative Assembly; and

(2) on numerous occasions, unelected individuals who are members of the Cabinet staff of the Yukon Liberal government have taken it upon themselves to make disparaging and insulting comments in the public media about elected members of this Assembly; and

(3) such conduct is inappropriate, unprofessional, insulting to Yukon people, and counterproductive to the goal of restoring public confidence in government; and

THAT this House urges the Premier and her ministers to advise unelected members of their political staff that such public behaviour will not be tolerated in the future.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the rising cost of home heating is creating economic hardship for many Yukon seniors; and

THAT this House urges the Government of Yukon to immediately provide a 25-percent increase in the pioneer utility grant and index it against inflation.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon government should make electrical power rates more affordable by eliminating the clawback for those consumers who utilize more than 1,500 kilowatts of electricity per month.

I give notice of the following motion:

THAT Ray Wells, the Chair of the Yukon Development Corporation, and Rob McWilliam, the President of the Yukon Development Corporation, appear as witnesses before Committee of the Whole from 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, October 30, 2000, to discuss the corporation's plans to construct the Mayo-Dawson transmission line.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) the Standing Orders of the Yukon Legislative Assembly lay out the rules and procedures of this Assembly that have been agreed upon from time to time by elected representatives from both sides of this House;

(2) any changes to the Standing Orders should have the prior input and agreement of the majority of elected members; and

(3) the appropriate forum for discussing proposed changes is the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges, which includes representatives of all three parties in this House; and

(4) any move by the majority party in the House to usurp the function of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges is inappropriate and an offence to the rights of all members; and

THAT this House urges the government party not to proceed with the introduction of any proposed changes to the rules and procedures of this House until such proposed changes have been thoroughly discussed and decided upon by the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges, and until that committee has recommended such changes to this Legislative Assembly.

Speaker's statement re ministerial statements

Speaker: Before calling for ministerial statements today, the Chair wishes to provide some brief comments about the point of order raised by the official opposition House leader yesterday.

The main concern expressed by the official opposition House leader was that the ministerial statement given by the Minister of Justice was overly long.

Standing Order 11(3) states that a ministerial statement should be a "short factual statement of government policy." Also, former Speaker Bruce, in a ruling given on November 24, 1999, emphasized that "Ministerial statements and the responses to them should be brief, factual and specific."

There has never been, however, a definitive guideline provided through the Standing Orders, past Speakers' rulings nor reports of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges as to the exact length of time a ministerial statement should take. Presiding officers of this Assembly have appealed, on a number of occasions, to the House to develop and adopt what Deputy Speaker McRobb, on November 8, 1999, called "a more definite and helpful description of the purpose of ministerial statements." Had the House done that, it undoubtedly would have provided direction, if not specifics, as to how the word "short" should be interpreted by the Chair. The House, however, has not taken presiding officers up on the invitation to review the rules respecting ministerial statements.

The fact the House must face is that, with the advent of television coverage in this Chamber, ministerial statements have been put to increased use and have taken up an ever-greater amount of House time. These changed circumstances, from the time when the rules governing ministerial statements were first adopted, have made it imperative that members give urgent consideration to this matter. The House can take action and provide direction on this matter in a variety of ways.

Perhaps the most obvious would be through recommendation of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges, and, if desired, subsequent amendment of the Standing Orders.

In the meantime the Chair must ask that greater consideration be given by ministers to the number of such statements, and that greater efforts be made to adhere to the Standing Order requirement that these be "short".

The Chair thanks the members for their attention.

Are there any statements by ministers today?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, first of all I'd like to say that this subject is an important subject, and that it includes all of us in the future. By yea or nay, we still will become elderly or we will become seniors.

It gives me great pleasure to rise today to inform the hon. members of this House of the measures this government is taking to address the housing needs and preferences of Yukon seniors.

Mr. Speaker, we can expect the number of Yukoners who are 50 years of age and older to grow from 20 percent of today's population to between 27 and 32 percent of all Yukoners by 2009. This trend is expected to continue.

Most seniors currently live in the conventional housing that was designed and built to meet the ordinary requirements of the general population. Many of our seniors have, or will have, housing requirements that are not commonly available in conventional housing. Seniors may also find it more difficult with home and yard maintenance. It may be difficult for many seniors to meet household expenses on a fixed income.

While this government has made considerable progress in addressing the needs of those seniors requiring continuing care, there is much to do to address the housing conditions of the 93 percent of seniors who do not require high-level support.

Mr. Speaker, in order to meet the housing needs of our seniors, I have instructed the Yukon Housing Corporation to proceed with the development of the many proposals contained in the seniors housing action plan. The seniors housing action plan provides a framework for the development of a comprehensive seniors housing policy for the Yukon. The action plan includes 49 proposals for the improvement of seniors housing. Some of the proposals are small, while others are major. Taken together, I believe the planned proposals are visionary and will serve Yukoners well for decades to come.

Mr. Speaker, the seniors housing conference succeeded in providing us with better awareness and understanding of seniors, their housing requirements and preferences. While there were many important results from the conference, five recurring messages were delivered by the conference participants. First, not all seniors and elders are the same. There is diversity in the older Yukon population.

Second, seniors and elders want to stay in their own homes and live independently as long as they can.

Third, seniors and elders see a need for housing options between their own home and residence care facilities.

Fourth, seniors and elders want affordable housing.

The fifth and final message, Mr. Speaker, is that seniors and elders would like to see better in-home care and support options.

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the seniors housing action plan is to establish the government's direction for seniors housing and to introduce a number of concepts and ideas for further consideration. The proposals in the seniors housing action plan are founded on two fundamental principles. First, we believe Yukon seniors should have access to supports and services that enable them to remain in their home as they age and as their needs change. Second, this government believes Yukon seniors require a variety of housing options to accommodate the diversity of their needs and preferences.

Mr. Speaker, these overarching principles provide a broad framework for a number of separate seniors housing initiatives contained in the action plan.

Many Yukon seniors are committed to residing indefinitely in their own current residence; therefore, the action plan includes proposals to improve the services and supports available to seniors who choose to age in place in their current home.

We want to do more to help Yukon seniors upgrade their homes for accessibility, comfort and safety. We want to do more to help seniors upgrade their homes. We want to do more to help seniors afford their own homes, and we want to help seniors with home and yard maintenance.

The Yukon Housing Corporation expects there to be a demand for a range of housing options designed for the specific needs and preferences of seniors. The requirement for specially built seniors housing will steadily increase over the next three decades as the ageing population trend continues. To meet this future demand, the action plan includes proposals to improve the availability of specially built or converted housing that meets the specific needs and preferences of Yukon seniors.

We want to promote awareness of the options for the feature of specially built seniors housing, and we want to focus Yukon Housing Corporation programs to support the development of new and converted seniors housing.

Mr. Speaker, much of the anticipated demand for new seniors housing alternatives stems from the fact that conventional housing is not typically designed for people with mobility difficulties. If new housing could address these concerns when constructed, more people, including younger people with disabilities, may be able to age in place comfortably and safely in their own family home.

To prepare for the long-term needs of our seniors, the action plan promotes and supports senior user-friendly design in residential construction. We want to develop and promote design guidelines for senior user-friendly residential construction, and we want to provide incentives for the construction of senior user-friendly housing, such as the proposed accommodating home mortgage program.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, the action plan includes proposals to focus the resources and assets of the Yukon Housing Corporation to support ageing in place and to promote diversity in the supply of seniors housing.

I want to establish a sustainable source of funding for seniors housing programs, and we want to ensure that housing provided by the Yukon Housing Corporation to our senior clients meets their specific needs and preferences.

Mr Speaker, it is essential that the seniors continue to be involved in the development of -

Some Hon. Member: Point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: Order. The leader of the third party, on a point of order.

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 11(3), a minister may make a short factual statement on government policy.

Mr. Speaker, this is neither a short factual statement nor government policy. Nine times, sentences were prefaced with "we want to". That is not government policy. That is something down the road that may or may not occur, but it is not government policy.

I would ask that we have a ruling on this issue, because these ministerial statements are being abused. While I respect the ruling you gave earlier today, I believe that there is still room for you to manoeuvre and provide a better and more encompassing interpretation of a ministerial statement than we currently have in place.

Speaker: The government House leader on the point of order.

Ms. Tucker: The ministerial statement that is being delivered conforms to the current rules. There is absolutely no doubt about that. If the members opposite were available to attend meetings, this matter could be resolved expeditiously in the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges.

Speaker: The official opposition House leader on the point of order.

Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, I must concur with the leader of the third party. You have just ruled here this afternoon that a ministerial statement must be a short factual statement of government policy. As the member of the third party pointed out, this is neither short nor factual government policy, given the statements including "we want to", alluding to something in the future.

I think that the government House leader should also be aware that the opposition was present at the first meeting of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges. We discussed these items, and we all agreed at that meeting to set a subsequent date of November 1, 2000, to meet and bring forward the recommendations to this Legislative Assembly on these matters.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: Order please. These kinds of points have been raised consistently for the past couple of years and I recall, during the last sitting of the House, the same issues came up. And I struggled with them at that time. Today's events simply demonstrate how important it is for the members of the House to give consideration to this matter. It was suggested through SCREP. In the meantime, the Chair will provide a copy of Speaker Bruce's statement of November 24, 1999. In that ruling, Speaker Bruce made suggestions as to guidelines which might govern the content of ministerial statements. For today, the minister will be permitted to conclude and the opposition members to respond. That concludes my ruling.

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, I've instructed the corporation to consult directly with the seniors to determine how they want to be involved in the development of the action plan initiatives. We make this statement, and I thought this statement is government direction. Government direction is government policy, and that's what I've stood by. Mr. Speaker, we believe it will take two to three years to fully consider the many proposals within the seniors housing action plan. The corporation has already started work on several proposals and will implement the proposals as they are approved.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that the Yukon Housing Corporation Board of Directors has committed to this important initiative and the high priority given to seniors housing by the board. I would also like to extend my appreciation to the corporation staff members who have provided the support for the development of the action plan proposals. And once again I would like to thank all the seniors and near-seniors who have taken the time to help us establish a clear direction for seniors housing. If we start now, we will be in a very good position to provide for the needs and preferences of our seniors, as the demand for seniors housing increases in the coming decades. By supporting this worthy initiative, it is my hope that this Assembly will be sending a strong message that we value our seniors and their contributions to the Yukon.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Keenan: I'd like to thank the minister for her statement. I'd also like to say that we, the NDP caucus, are fully supportive of this New Democratic initiative. We started this initiative when we were in government, Mr. Speaker, so we cannot be anything other than supportive of this initiative.

We developed the Growing Older in the Yukon strategy in the Yukon. As well, we were responsible for hosting the seniors housing conference and the seniors housing survey, where most of these action plan proposals were generated.

We initiated the development of a seniors action plan, and we were instrumental in garnering the comments from Yukon seniors from across the territory, as well as the extras from around the continent.

The creation of the seniors housing trust fund and the unveiling of this policy was announced on March 22, 1999 by the Minister of the Yukon Housing Corporation, the Member for Mayo-Tatchun. The initiative was applauded at that time by both opposition parties, and in fact, the Member for Riverdale South commented on it in the House, by saying that this was a forward-looking initiative.

The increase of seniors in the Yukon population is a significant change in the demographics of the territory, and the needs of seniors need to be addressed now in government. Yukon seniors of today need to be given an opportunity for affordable and accessible housing. Action is needed now to provide seniors a better quality of life.

Implementation of a strong and sound, comprehensive and effective strategy for seniors housing will involve all departments in government, and I look forward to seeing the implementation of this plan done swiftly and wholeheartedly within the government departments.

There seem to be a lot of motherhood statements being put forth in this rather lengthy, non-policy statement. There are 49 proposals identified in this plan to improve seniors housing in the Yukon, and I don't see these proposals listed in the statement. There's no commitment to implement the bulk of these proposals. Obviously the minister is starting to do another review of a good NDP initiative.

What proposals in the action plan will be implemented immediately? Has there been a cost analysis of these proposals? Will implementation of these proposals require extra personnel within the government? There are transportation, health care and government service issues. Are you prepared? Has there been an interdepartmental committee struck to deal with the many issues?

With respect to the seniors housing fund, I'd like to know the current status and the balance. When will the Yukon seniors actually see the use of this money in the actual development of affordable seniors housing?

So, Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to show my support for this good New Democratic Party initiative and to thank the Yukon Housing Corporation board, the staff and directors for their hard and dedicated work.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Jenkins: What we have once again, Mr. Speaker, is a ministerial statement that does not comply with the Standing Orders, which require that a minister make a short factual statement of government policy. The statement just given by the minister should have been made in the Speech from the Throne. Instead of a short factual statement of government policy, the minister has outlined what we could call a "what-we-want-to-do wish list". Virtually all of his remarks are prefaced by the words "we want to".

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this moment to thank all of the seniors who had input into this seniors survey. Now that all of the information has been gathered, what we have is the Liberal government taking a concrete position, and they're going to review it and review it - or, "we want to do this". But nothing concrete has come out of this review.

Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago, I read into the record a motion that would help Yukon seniors meet the current high cost of heating their homes this winter. Now, that's a definite, positive move forward, and I proposed that there would be a 25-percent increase in the pioneer utility grant and that the grant be indexed against inflation to help elders and seniors meet the current high cost of living in Yukon immediately, Mr. Speaker.

This is something that the minister can do right now, and I'm seeking his commitment to do that when he rises on his feet to respond. While I applaud many of the initiatives outlined in the action plan, Yukon seniors and elders are looking for some help right now, not two years or three years from now, and they are certainly not looking for another review.

Accordingly, I'm asking the minister to commit to increasing the pioneer utility grant in the supplementary budget he tabled this session, when he next stands.

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, I rise to respond to what has been said here. First of all, I would like to say - and I give this message to the public - that the NDP claims that we would have done that or we might have done that or we wish to have done that. That was a good plan. That is our plan. The fact of the matter is that we are getting old. Yukoners are tired of listening to the NDP attitude, saying that the fact is that the NDP did not do it. The bottom line is that the NDP didn't do it. We, in six months, are doing something about it. We are not sitting down and talking about reviews. We are actually standing up and making a plan. We have a plan in place.

As we speak, I have directed the Yukon Housing Corporation to table this document, and this document is going to be tabled.

The other thing is that, with respect to reviews and the Member for Klondike, he states that he was tired of reviews. Well, we are tired of reviews. We are acting now. We are doing something about it, and you will have it in the briefing.

Thank you.

Speaker: If there are no further statements from ministers, I'll proceed.

Speaker's statement re unparliamentary language

Speaker: Before proceeding with Question Period, a point of order was raised during yesterday's sitting, questioning whether unparliamentary language was used by the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes when directing a supplementary question to the Minister of Government Services. Upon reviewing the Blues, the Chair has found that the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes said, "Well, Mr. Speaker, the member knows that that's fundamentally untrue."

The rules adopted by this House to govern the conduct of all hon. members are quite clear in this regard. Standing Order 19(1) states, "A member will be called to order by the Speaker if that member: (h) imputes false or unavowed motives to another member; and (i) charges another member with uttering a deliberate falsehood."

Also, as is set out in Annotation 494 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, Sixth Edition, "It is not unparliamentary temperately to criticize statements made by Members as being contrary to the facts; but no imputation of intentional falsehood is permissible. On rare occasions this may result in the House having to accept two contradictory accounts of the same incident."

At page 522 of Marleau and Montpetit's House of Commons Procedure and Practice, it is stated, "Remarks directed specifically at another Member which question that Member's integrity, honesty or character are not in order. A Member will be requested to withdraw offensive remarks, allegations or accusations of impropriety directed towards another Member."

It is clear that accusing another member, directly or indirectly, of misleading the House is out of order. The Chair would ask the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes and all members of this House to take greater care that unparliamentary language not be used in this House.

We will now proceed with Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Land claim settlements

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, the Liberals say that settling land claims is their first, top priority. The Deputy Minister of ECO stated publicly, this summer, that a number of claims could be completed within the next few months. The Premier herself said that she is prepared to move on some outstanding territorial issues. My question to the Premier: has the Premier given the Yukon territorial government negotiators a new mandate to negotiate these territorial issues at the main table with each of the First Nations with outstanding claims?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for this question on what is clearly a major priority of the Government of Yukon.

I have instructed officials to review overall negotiation mandates as they relate to the outstanding issues to determine if we have any greater flexibility. This review is not holding up any negotiations. We are not negotiating outside of the umbrella final agreement. We are looking at what flexibility we have within the existing arrangements of that treaty.

Mr. Fairclough: It appears that we do have another review. After this has been a top priority, now we are putting issues with regard to negotiating land claims under review. Yukon people are anxious to see these claims settled. The Premier herself admitted that the key to providing economic certainty is the completion of land claims.

The Premier said that there are territorial issues, and that she is prepared to move on them. She has said it here today, again. We are not asking her to negotiate in this House, as she has mentioned so many times in the past when we have asked about a mandate and whether or not they have given out a new mandate. We just want to know, really, if there is a new mandate for her negotiators.

The question is, are these outstanding territorial issues being negotiated at the main table, as the Premier had authorized, or are they side-table negotiations with the First Nations? Now, she has said that it is not happening beyond the umbrella final agreement. I would like to know whether there is a side table going?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Among the rhetoric was the question: is there a side table going on in negotiations? Given the rhetoric coming from the member opposite, perhaps he didn't hear my original response, which was that the review that we are doing is not holding up any negotiations. It's going on simultaneously. We are so concerned and have settlement of land claims as such a priority with this government that we are looking for solutions. We're looking for what can be done. The member is perhaps trying to get at whether or not there has been a common forum established to review the Yukon issues. In fact, yes, that is the case.

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, is that a side table that we've asking about? It appears that the Premier is hinting on that but not really wanting to say it. They talk a lot about restoring confidence in government, and that's one of her top priorities, but is the government open to the general public with regard to negotiations? Will the Premier tell the House, then, if the territorial issues that she refers to involve land quantum?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Perhaps the member opposite didn't fully read the throne speech. The common forum is outlined in the Speech from the Throne. The discussion is there.

I have said to the member that our review is not holding up any negotiations and that our top priority is the settlement of land claims, and we are doing everything we can to do that, including Yukon issues, as well as such matters as - the member opposite knows that section 87 is one of the difficulties at the land claims negotiating table and that I have met, as I said I would do, with Minister Martin to achieve some movement on that, as well as with officials on the other federal outstanding issue, which is the loan repayment. So this government has treated the settlement of land claims as a top priority, and we will continue to do so.

Question re: Pioneer utility grant increase

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, today I have a question for the Minister of Health and Social Services.

We heard on Monday, in the throne speech, their promise to tackle seniors housing issues head-on. Well, today I'm going to ask the minister some questions on how we're going to heat them.

Yukon seniors and elders, Mr. Speaker, are facing an incredible increase in the cost of home heating fuel, and today's news of fuel shortages are making it even worse. Now that the minister finally understands that this pioneer utility grant comes under his department, can the minister actually give me some assurance - or Yukon seniors some assurance - that an increase of at least 25 percent in the utility grant will be upcoming in the supplementary budget?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: I thank the member opposite for his question. I am very fully aware of the fact that PUG is under the Health jurisdiction. We understand the concerns that are facing many of our seniors and many Yukoners, if not all Yukoners, and we are, again, as we have said in the past, very concerned about where this is going to end up. I hope you appreciate that we are trying to develop ideas and thoughts in this area so that we can move on.

Mr. Keenan: Well, Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate that there wasn't an answer there. It's not a review; it's nothing.

Mr. Speaker, it wouldn't cost the price of one Liberal patronage appointment. It would cost approximately 60 percent of a Liberal patronage appointment - $75,000 - to bring this program in for the seniors of this community.

If the minister can't - or won't - commit to increasing the pioneer utility grant, will they at least take the steps to ensure that the existing program will apply to First Nations elders and seniors on their lands?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Mr. Speaker, the whole idea of trying to look at this issue is not a simple one. It's a complicated one. Just recently, the federal government has, in its mini-budget, put forward the idea of presenting to seniors and elders some compensation for fuel, for heating costs. We are not there yet. Hopefully, as we see how we're approaching this issue, we can move in this direction, but right now we are not at that particular stance.

Mr. Keenan: I'd like to point out that in all of that bafflegab, Mr. Speaker, there was not an answer to the question I asked the minister. That question was: will they extend this program to seniors and elders on First Nation lands?

I'm obviously not going to get anywhere with Dr. No sitting in the back benches over there, so I'd like to direct this question to the Minister of Finance. Without spoiling her party and the Christmas spirit coming up, can you tell Yukoners if we have any reason to hope that this government will do something for this very real problem of escalating fuel costs for our seniors?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Well, Mr. Speaker, that supplementary was directed to the Minister of Finance, therefore I will respond.

With regard to the rising fuel prices, which are affecting all Yukoners, we are very concerned about this issue. Unfortunately, we are not able to do anything about the war in the Middle East. We are, however, very concerned about - the pioneer utility grant is one option. Unfortunately, the pioneer utility grant does not affect the middle and poorer income groups. What does affect -

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Ms. Duncan: I thought the member opposite was interested in a response about fuel prices and their effect on Yukoners, and that's what I'm endeavouring to try to give the member opposite.

As the member knows, we have the lowest fuel taxes in the country, and we do not tax home-heating fuel or propane. So, that option is not open to us.

One of the options has been activated by the federal Minister of Finance in his mini-budget. That option will affect 54.6 percent of Yukoners.

And, in answer to the member opposite's specific question with regard to the pioneer utility grant, as my colleague has indicated, we are interested in examining that option, and we're doing that.

Question re: Connect Yukon project

Mr. Jenkins: I have a question today for the Minister of Community and Transportation Services with regard to her responsibilities for Connect Yukon.

Despite the fact that Connect Yukon will not be providing basic telephone service to rural Yukoners as originally promised, and is costing Yukoners $23.5 million, this government has chosen to implement the project unchanged, with no attempts to renegotiate the deal with Northwestel. So much for fiscal responsibility, Mr. Speaker.

Prior to the election call on October 17, the federal Liberal government announced the plan to spend well over $1 billion to allow every community in Canada to have extra-fast access to the Internet by the year 2004. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Perhaps the federal Liberals are going to call it Connect Canada. Can the minister explain why the Yukon government will be spending $23.5 million on a project the federal Liberals have committed the Government of Canada to do?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Well, I would point out that the Connect Yukon was signed, sealed and delivered by the previous NDP government before this government took office.

We have also said, again and again, that we do not rip up signed contracts. The penalty for doing so would be prohibitive. As well, the Connect Yukon project precedes the announcement by the federal minister that the Member for Klondike is talking about. So, somebody's crystal-ball gazing didn't go very well there. It wasn't the Liberal government; it was the previous NDP government.

Mr. Jenkins: Well, aren't Liberals wonderful when it comes to election time and spending our tax dollars? They are just great.

Can the minister advise the House if she has sent an invoice for $23.5 million for Connect Yukon to her federal Liberal counterpart? If she has not, why not? Has she even investigated how she is going to recover the money from the Government of Canada?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member for Klondike does love to dream and speculate, and I'm sure I will get the appropriate information on this federal initiative at the appropriate time. At that point, I'll provide it to him.

Mr. Jenkins: Thank you very much. So much for the special relationship between the Yukon Liberal government and the federal Liberal government, Mr. Speaker. This minister doesn't even have a clue about this new federal government initiative - connect Canada. It's a major project -

Speaker: Order please. I'd ask the member not to use insulting language - "doesn't have a clue".

Mr. Jenkins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I don't believe "doesn't have a clue" is insulting language.

Speaker: Please proceed.

Mr. Jenkins: Let me re-phrase it for the minister, Mr. Speaker. The member doesn't have an understanding of what the federal Liberals are doing in this regard, or know what her own government is doing with respect to it.

What we have, Mr. Speaker, is a federal government initiative to connect all towns and all communities in Canada. We have a parallel situation in the Yukon.

Why isn't the minister aware of the federal initiative? How is she going to recover the Yukon's costs from the federal government for this initiative taking place here in the Yukon?

We're not asking her to tear up any contract with Northwestel - perhaps renegotiate it. But how are we going to recover $23.5 million from the federal Liberal government to cover our involvement in this similar initiative here in Yukon, Mr. Speaker?

Hon. Ms. Buckway: As the member opposite well knows, it's a little premature to be sending the federal government an invoice for this. When the time comes, we'll look into it.

Question re: J.V. Clark School, construction, consultation with Nacho Nyak Dun

Mr. Fairclough: Well, Mr. Speaker, that's one heck of an answer to that question.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier said that her government does its best every day to live up to the intergovernmental agreements with First Nations. The Chief of Nacho Nyak Dun told the media that he was not consulted before the government decided to postpone the construction of the new school in Mayo. Will the Premier now acknowledge that there was no appropriate consultation with Nacho Nyak Dun before Cabinet made its decision?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: As we indicated in the House yesterday, as soon as Cabinet did discuss the issue of postponing the Mayo school construction as an operational, as a process item, being fiscally responsible and acknowledging that the cost overruns were unacceptable to this government, I immediately phoned the First Nation office in Mayo. Unfortunately, the chief was not there, so I talked to the deputy chief. I immediately touched base then with the principal of the school, with the Mayor of the Village of Mayo and with a member of the school council to let them know of Cabinet's decision on this issue.

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, there was no answer to the question. I don't believe the members opposite have even read the intergovernmental agreements. I'd ask them to sit down and go through that document. It's not very long.

Yesterday, the minister told the House that Cabinet made a decision and then he phoned to tell the deputy chief of Nacho Nyak Dun. That's information, not consultation.

Then the minister tried a whole variety of excuses about why the project was delayed, and when he failed to satisfy anyone, he was finally shamed into going to Mayo to confront the people. Those were his words - "confront the people of Mayo".

Now, does the Premier agree with this approach, which certainly does not demonstrate respectful government-to-government relationships? Does she approve of consultation by confrontation?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: It certainly is a pleasure to hear the words come from the opposition with respect to acknowledging that the school has been delayed. I am pleased to hear that. The Mayo school is a community issue, not just a First Nation issue. We have consulted, not only with the First Nation, but with the village and with the community. Had the MLA for Mayo-Tatchun been there, he would have fully appreciated the dialogue that did occur - questions and answers - with the people who were there as well.

Mr. Fairclough: The Premier refuses to answer the question about whether or not she approves of consultation by confrontation. And that's what has taken place by the Minister of Education. Now the Premier seems to have a rogue Minister of Education on her hands - the same rogue minister who bragged about settling the contract dispute with teachers; the same rogue minister who admitted that he had acted on his own to give the former Liberal Party leader a $125,000 patronage appointment to head up the Education Act review; the same minister who hasn't lifted a finger to help solve the job situation in the forest sector, which he is also responsible for. Will the Premier now admit that the Minister of Education screwed up and remind the government minister that -

Speaker's statement

Speaker: Order please. I would ask that the member be cautious with the words that he is using. "Screwed up" is not appropriate.

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, would the Premier remind all her ministers of their obligation to consult under the intergovernmental agreement with the First Nations?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, I guess that it's a foreign idea to the members opposite - of team. This side works on a team premise.

I am not quite sure what the member opposite's question is. I think we have made every attempt to answer his questions.

First of all, he says to go to Mayo, then he says to not go to Mayo. He's not sure if he's coming or going himself. Mr. Speaker, if he would spend a little more time in the riding - just as a team of us went there to dialogue, to exchange, to inform, to be aware and to listen - and if he could do that in his riding, maybe his members would know who he is.

Question re: J.V. Clark School, construction jobs in Mayo

Ms. Netro: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Education said he has had some discussions with the Chief of Nacho Nyak Dun about possible work options for Mayo residents who took the carpentry training in order to work on the Mayo school project. Can the minister advise the House how many of these trained Mayo residents are working right now as a result of those discussions?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the question, because it was the day following our trip to Mayo that we did sit down with Chief Hager. In an information exchange with the Premier, Minister Wayne Jim and me, he did discuss his concerns with respect to the positions that were just mentioned. We are looking at options to keep these folks working through the winter months.

Ms. Netro: These 12 people who completed the carpentry training had good reason to believe that the training was going to result in jobs in Mayo this fall and winter. Today, on the radio, we heard Chief Hager say that six of those people are already making plans to leave the community. Can the minister tell us when the people of Mayo can expect some concrete results in the form of jobs from these make-work options he's talking about?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, we will get these folks in Mayo working. I am working in partnership with the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, and he will be getting back to me in due order so that we will get these folks to work.

Ms. Netro: The best solution for the minister is to change his mind and get on with replacing this school right away. If he won't do that, I hope he will at least make sure there is no delay in getting these trained people employed in their own community. Will the minister tell us how much this Liberal government is prepared to invest to provide work for these 12 people this fall and winter and when they can expect to report for duty?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, in 26 years, consecutive governments did nothing with respect to the new school in Mayo. In six months, we have a foundation there. Come this spring, there will be a brand new building there, and in January 2002, there will be a school.

When we met with the chief, he had indicated to us that there were four to six people in the community in need of work. We had agreed that we would find work for these people, and we will. Minister Wayne Jim and I are working on that as we speak.

Question re: J.V. Clark School, construction delay

Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Government Services, but I can say that I expect the Cabinet would want him to stand on his feet and answer it.

Every time he turns around, the Minister of Education seems to have a different story about why the Mayo school construction was postponed. First, there was a cost overrun of $168,000, and then it was half a million dollars. Then he said there was a problem with the bid. He even wants us to believe that he's saving taxpayers' money by avoiding this winter construction.

Does the Minister of Government Services also believe that this delay will result in a cost saving to the taxpayer?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, he's right about one thing. The bids received were both substantially over budget. There were not enough funds to allow for the award of the contract, and there was a low risk assessment in leaving the foundation as constructed until its restart in the spring. However, we do see that there are ways and means there. When we say "redesign", we don't mean substantially redesigning it. And this is not a delay of 26 years. This is a delay of four months.

We do care about the people in the Yukon. We do care about the children and their education. And when we say four months, we mean four months, not 26 years.

We are looking at making sure and reassuring people that the school is built for the people in Mayo, and we are working our hardest. We say that we are targeting January 2002 as the date for the doors to open.

Mr. Keenan: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for all that political bafflegab, but the minister did not answer the question. The question: did the Minister of Government Services believe that this delay will result in a cost saving to the taxpayer? It wasn't answered.

The ministers may be the only two people in the Yukon who believe that. The foundation is already built. If it's not heated, it may have to be replaced. Changes in design to keep the government out of court for bid shopping - the foundation may have to be replaced anyway.

Can the minister tell us what best case and worst case scenarios and financial analysis his department conducted before deciding to postpone this construction until next spring?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, I guess we can get into some hypothetical questions, but we're not going to go there today.

Yes, I believe we will save money. I believe we will save money by cutting costs between the walls, so to speak, by saving the dollar and that there. We also say that we do not bid shop, as this member opposite reiterates and reiterates time and time again.

This government is more into good management, good fiscal responsibility, and we are looking at ways in which we can cut costs and be effective in producing our product and services for people of the Yukon.

Mr. Keenan: Well, Mr. Speaker, instead of standing there with their hands in their pockets, I wish the government would just answer a few of the questions. Obviously, by lack of an answer, they proved that, no, they did not do a cost analysis on this.

Now, the Minister of Education has already admitted that this may go to court, and if it does, the government could face a huge financial settlement.

Yesterday we heard about some make-work projects, and it was reiterated again today, to create jobs for the Mayo residents who took this carpenter training. We have no idea how much this is going to cost.

So the Liberals talk about sound financial management, but does the minister really believe that this was a wise, financial decision, and not just a reckless gamble for political gain?

Do you believe that?

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, I must commend this person on his question, but it's very straightforward to us. We do have figures, and those figures say that the Management Board approved a budget of $7.98 million for construction of the Mayo school.

The school contract was separated into two parts; the foundation cost $1.07 million. There was $5.7 million left in the budget for the construction of the rest of the school.

Again, I don't know where this gentleman - the member opposite - is coming from on our figures, but our figures are pretty much based on what is coming from our staff in Government Services, our staff in the Department of Education. We stand wholeheartedly behind them.

Moreover, to make it more clear to the public eye, we're not here to say that we're not going to be helping the children of the Yukon -

Speaker: Order please. I'd just ask the minister to conclude his statements.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Jim: I've answered the question. The question was hypothetical, and I said I wasn't going to get into that.

Thank you.

Speaker:The time for Question period is now elapsed.

Speaker's statement re members addressing comments through the Chair

Speaker: Before we proceed, I've made some notes here and I would dearly like to make some comments. But I'm not in a competition for television time, so I was waiting for the television time to expire.

I would like to address some comments to all ministers regarding comments made by some members yesterday during the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne and Question Period today. First of all, from time to time, members named other members. They named other members in their comments. This was done in a respectful manner, and I believe, inadvertently. However, it's my duty to remind members that naming members is not appropriate. In future, I must insist that members be addressed by their portfolio or their constituency.

Similarly, from time to time, members referred to members opposite by "you" or "your" in their speeches, as opposed to their portfolios or their electoral district. I remind members that this is inappropriate. I must insist from now on that members address their comments through the Chair.

Further, from time to time, comments that could be interpreted to be inflammatory were made. I admit, I may have been remiss in not catching them at the time. I don't think that the members making the comments really intended them to be inflammatory; however, I thank the other members for their tolerance in accepting the comments in the light that they were made. However, the possibility of taking the comments personally and in an offensive manner always exists.

In summary, it's not my desire to interrupt the flow of a member's presentation to the Legislature; however, I must insist on professionalism and respect. May I ask the members to keep their remarks on a professional, respectful level. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation, and we'll proceed with Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne.

Motion No. 10 - adjourned debate

Clerk: Motion for Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne, moved by Mr. McLarnon; adjourned debate, Mr. Fairclough.

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, there have been many comments in regard to the throne speech so far. We have pointed out time and time again what is not in the throne speech and how little there is in it. There are priorities here that have been laid out by the Liberal government. I don't believe it goes far enough. There are seven points on which they say they would like to be graded. I think there is a lot more we would bring forward in grading the government's performance from year to year.

There's not much in the throne speech. This is the second one in six months. It left a lot of messages out that I believe the government could have been sending out through the throne speech. It said nothing about the environment - very little. There is going to be a review of the protected areas strategy.

It is full of New Democrat initiatives, where the Liberals would like to pat themselves on the back when it comes to the wind turbine, for example, cutting the ribbon and setting that up. The Liberals know it was not their initiative. It was the New Democrats who put that forward. The school in Ross River is another one.

They talk about how, in six months, they finally got the foundation down on the Mayo school, something that hasn't been done for the past 25 years. I raised this yesterday, saying that we, as a New Democratic government, were following a process. That process was led by the people of the Yukon and the chairs of school councils - something this government doesn't seem to be following - and by the department's recommendations on priorities for the replacement of schools.

Now, what we'll see - and I know that the Liberal government is going to prove this - is that there is going to be political interference and priorities, such as capital projects, particularly when it comes to schools. I see Grey Mountain School being built when it's not on the priority list, where there has been a decline in population in that area for the last three years, and where there is room for students to fill other schools in Whitehorse.

Now, of course, those plans to have school replacements or partial replacements - not the whole school - in two communities, probably amount to the cost of one school. It's pretty important to them. The trailer unit is still being used, even the one that is still in Pelly Crossing. Tests were done on the condition of the place, including the water on the floor and everything. To walk through and visually inspect it, you would never even consider passing it like that. But it did pass. Sometimes I really question whether the tests being done are valid at all.

I will give you one example that maybe the Minister of Renewable Resources is interested in. In Mayo, they tested the meat that the outfitters were bringing in. They felt that it was spoiled and not fit to eat. The tests came back, saying, "you can't eat this meat." But I guess some people can - not the local people. They don't eat rotten meat. I don't believe that a lot of the tests really reflect how the community is feeling about its facilities.

The Mayo school - the member said I haven't been there. I was up there a week before the members opposite were. They played a good TV time, I guess, but not to the people back home, because they know the difference. I walked through that school. I walked through the school with one of the councillors from the First Nation. The very first room we went into was the Yukon College section. Right above there, the tiles are off, and pots are put on top of the walls to catch the water before it even hits the ceiling tiles. Of course, maintenance probably did a pretty good job in that school, spray-painting white paint to cover up some of the water stains throughout the school.

I wasn't able to get to every classroom, but I went into the library and the smell was there. I know the Minister of Education cannot ignore that, if you walk through the library.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fairclough: The minister is saying, "Why didn't we build it earlier?" We had a priority list and we followed it, and the people of Mayo accepted that, too. The school in Old Crow burned down. We replaced it. We were doing one each year. The Ross River school, we replaced that, and the Mayo school was in the budget. It was budgeted for and money was put aside. The Liberals couldn't even follow through with that. We had given them a good work plan. It's all there. Their throne speech has it riddled right through it. I tell you, it's so powerful that it's going to be part of the Liberal platform for the next four years. That's how powerful it is.

They say they poured concrete, but they covered it up right away because they didn't know what to do after that. They put poly on it, nailed down the poly to try and save the wood. But they're saving money. That's the big thing. They're saving money.

This winter they're saving money. They're going to start construction, what, next spring during some cold weather, throughout the summer and the winter. So you're going to go through one winter of building, no matter how you look at it.

But it was an insult to the community of Mayo. Here you've got a foundation. You're teasing them. The kids look at that every day, knowing that they were going to get a school, and yet you couldn't find it enough to concentrate and make sure that this project would go through. It's an outrage. It's an outrage to the people of Mayo.

And that's not the only place we have had delays. There are other communities. It appears that the Liberal government does not want to respect the communities. The first thing they do is cancel the community development fund, call it "under review", but it's cancelled.

Of course, for the communities, that's their priority. There may be small projects, $5,000 projects. Other organizations put hundreds of thousands of dollars into projects that are being approved by the community development fund. Liberals cancelled that. I guess it put people to work.

They didn't say anything in their throne speech about how they are going to look at new initiatives to put people to work. Their concentration was on mining and oil and gas; that's it. They mentioned the forest sector. They didn't even have the respect to go down to the community of Watson Lake to support the industry at all.

Now, their actions are certainly different than what they say they want to do in their throne speech over the next four years. It's pretty hollow to tell the general public that this is what the Liberal government is going to do over the next four years. This is pretty hollow.

They are going to achieve devolution. They say they will achieve devolution. The Member for Whitehorse Centre said that negotiations are going well on devolution. What negotiations? The date is April 1. It was set way before the Liberal government even got in. So, what they're telling the public is that they will wiggle their thumbs until April 1 and say, "We achieved devolution." Right now, the Yukon Act is being worked on. It's in the process of the federal government right now. It's pretty embarrassing to even put that in. They could say they look forward to it and are preparing and will prepare for devolution, but that hasn't happened. I don't see that happening within the Liberal government at all. What are they doing? Why can't they say to the general public that they will be ready to bring down programs from the federal government? Why can't they say that and be open to the general public? No, they're hiding something.

Just the inexperience, I suppose, that is speaking here.

Their number one top priority of settling land claims - this one gets to me. Settling outstanding land claims - top priority, first top priority. But what are the reasons that they say - the reason for settling land claims - in the throne speech? Well, it's because it's key to the increased economic activity. That's what the reasons for settling land claims are in this throne speech. That's an insult to all the aboriginal people and those who have helped in negotiating the land claims agreement.

It didn't say anything about how First Nations will move ahead, self-governing. There's not one word about self-government agreements in this throne speech. Senior governments - is that respect? Is that restoring confidence in government? I think not.

I don't believe that the Liberal government even understands the UFA and what's in it, and what its responsibilities are. The UFA is signed off. Seven have ratified agreements, which the Yukon government has signed off to them. What are in the agreements? Do you care?

A bigger job than negotiations, when it comes to land claims, is implementing those agreements. Right now, I would have expected, if you're really sincere about land claims being a number one issue - why can't you say to the First Nations out there that you will go out and lobby and show support for them, and lobby the Liberal government to make sure that these land claims agreements are implemented - not just the land claims agreements, but the self-government agreements? Why can't you do that?

I guess the care and the thought just wasn't there in the last six months when the Liberal government sat down to write out a throne speech. It just wasn't there. I'm sure that they're thinking about it now.

They made no mention of the development assessment process or the program service transfer agreements, or PSTAs. That would make Yukon a better place. That would bring First Nations more responsibility. That would help Yukon First Nations build an economy, working from the ground up. Why isn't the support there from the Yukon government?

They haven't been talking to anybody, I suppose. There is no respect for process. Chief Robert Hager proved that yesterday; they couldn't even consult with him, the chief, about decisions that affect them the most. After three years of planning, it took just a matter of days for the Liberal government to throw that down the drain, keep people out of work. Now that the heat is on with the Mayo school, of course, the government is scrambling to try to find jobs in the community.

There's potential in Mayo - lots. The hydro line is, of course, just one of them that they are looking at. There is mining. Of course, base metals and precious metals are going to determine that. But there's potential in tourism. We certainly have to do a lot of work with communities in that regard.

But why isn't there more concentration on them, to even work with them? Say that you will work with CYFN, and say that you will work with First Nations. You want their support, don't you? When it comes to oil and gas development, you want their support. You're eager to lobby then for their support, but you can't even deal with community issues.

Now, settling the outstanding land claims - the only reason why it was put in here by the Liberals is because it was key to increasing economic activities. It was key to increasing economic activities. It's not that they have been negotiating for so many years and have come across a stumbling block, like some First Nation that maybe would like to see a better agreement than what was offered in the UFA. It's not that at all.

They are senior governments, like the Yukon government is. I don't believe the Liberal government even recognizes that. They control more land quantum than the Yukon government does. Did you know that? They have abilities to pass laws on their lands. The only reason the Liberals put this forward is because it was key to economic development in the Yukon.

I certainly think that would bring a lot of certainty to Yukoners, too. I mean, we have all said that. Every government in the past has said that. They would like the First Nations to grow. Things come up. Court cases dictate a lot of what takes place now. First Nations use them as a tool, as an advantage, to try to get something different out of this government.

There are the self-government agreements, which are really fine-tuned to the First Nation itself. I haven't heard anything come out of the Liberal government about self-government agreements at all. It was just the land claims agreement, the final agreements, not the self-government agreements. Do they even support it? Do they support the First Nations having that type of power within their governments? Not according to the throne speech.

They want to rebuild the Yukon economy. Well, two things were key for the Liberals: mining, and oil and gas. Those are big ones for the Liberal government. Some of these have been talked about for a long time. Oil and gas is nothing new here, and mining is nothing new. What programs and how do we get it up and going? What are firm steps that the Liberal government is going to take to make sure that we have more activity in the mining sector in the Yukon? Well, there's one that was named in here; a couple were named in here. But that's not the only thing that Yukon can grow on.

Oil and gas, a huge pipeline going through, could more than triple the population of the Yukon, depending on how quickly that pipeline goes through. $6 billion - they bumped it down to $2 billion now. I don't know why there's such a big difference in numbers there, but $6 billion is what we got out of the company when they came through and talked to us.

There was no mention in here about diversifying, looking at new ways, being innovative in trying to create jobs - nothing to say that these are going to be creating jobs right now, today, when people are unemployed. There is nothing even about assay rate increases. I guess maybe they're scared of that. That might take away some of their dollars, looking at how the number of unemployed people is growing quicker than any other year. But they are rebuilding the economy through mining and through oil and gas.

I don't see a lot of emphasis put on ecotourism and I know the minister supports that. There's lots of interest out there right now in ecotourism, but in Tourism what was presented was to concentrate on the rubber-tire traffic and closer to home, Alaska and B.C. The first thing the minister does is fly off, because she likes to fly around the country and see places. She didn't even know her portfolio and yet she was giving direction nationally.

They want to achieve devolution. That's a pretty big issue in the Yukon right now. Where do the First Nations fit into this? Work with the First Nations on it. As part of the devolved programs going to them, can you not commit in this throne speech to that, or are you going to do it behind closed doors, not be open to the public at all, like you say you want to be - open and accountable? There are a lot of things hidden in here, and I'm sure that we're going to be pulling them out over the next four years, unless of course the Liberals come back and table, in another throne speech in six months, "This is what we're going to do now." Chapter 3, nine more to go.

There was a lot of talk about developing infrastructure and how our roads are in a crisis situation. Well, Mr. Speaker, all the Liberal MLAs who are in this House today are from Whitehorse. They're just not used to driving the highways, and we have been doing it all our lives - driving the highways in the worst of conditions. Snow storms or the big mud hole between Faro and Carmacks and beyond. Dangerous corners. There has been a lot of work done over the last, I would say, 10 years in improving the roads around the Yukon, and much more can go into it. I agree with the government that we could be putting more money into these roads as long as we don't sacrifice other things that are really crucial to Yukon people, like health and education.

Some roads could use a lot of work, like the Campbell Highway, resurfacing, putting chipseal on it, and getting away from the expensive maintenance that must be done on those roads. This summer was a bad summer for that road. The highways crew couldn't grade it. They couldn't even grade it because of the water that's on it. If they did, they would knock off all the top soil; it just rolls up into a ball and rolls off into the ditch. They couldn't do that, so they had to do some type of control in filling potholes. But imagine if we had ore trucks on the road, and remember how bad the road was when we did have the ore trucks and how dangerous it was to drive. There were potholes all up and down the highway from here to Faro, and it wasn't a good experience to be on the highway behind an ore truck or behind 10 ore trucks.

Right now, I'd say that a lot of our highways are in pretty good shape. There could be a lot of improvements right around Fox Lake, for example, like taking out some of the corners. This has been in the plan for the last 10 years and has been slashed out. There could be improvements to the Marsh Lake area, where there seems to be a roller-coaster ride when you go through there.

They talked about infrastructure, water and sewer, telephones. It has certainly changed from the plans that the NDP had with regard to telephones. All of a sudden, it's years behind; some places may or may not get it.

Back to the roads for a second, though. I think that the government could do a few small things that could really improve the safety of the highways. For one, put a centre line down the road to Tagish, clear out some of the trees that are along the highway, and we asked that. And not just get a big brush-cutter to do that. Get people to work.

And a lot of that had taken place over the last couple of years. A lot of brush had been cleared along the highway. It looks pretty good. Even the Yukon Electrical Company has done a lot where the power lines do follow the road. It has cleared out quite a bit and probably saved dollars for the highways department.

But still, of course, there is always ongoing maintenance, though I must say that there have been some big dollars in the C&TS department and a lot of replacement of old equipment. They've got up-to-date graders, for example, with which they can do a job twice as fast as the year before. Those types of things cut down the maintenance, because the equipment is new. The replacement of a lot of the fleet vehicles that we have makes it so that there was not as much maintenance required in the last year. It has been fairly good.

I am hoping that if the government is serious about developing infrastructure, they look at the communities a lot more carefully than they have been. Water and sewer is a good thing. If they really want to develop the community as a community, there are things that could be done. It takes time, of course. They are not going to throw big money at it all at once and have it all done. An example is moving the highway camp out of the community of Carmacks and on to the highway just outside the community. That's part of building healthier communities, as is water and sewer.

They sure mentioned this a lot in the throne speech, but I hope that they don't ignore First Nations. Even though they are unincorporated communities, they are communities within a community, yet they cannot get the service sometimes. I find it fairly offensive that they are not considered to be within what the territorial government could be doing in helping a community. The Village of Carmacks, the villages of Mayo and Teslin all use the First Nation in a head count in order to be a municipality. They get municipal money for a village, rather than for a hamlet, but they seem to be cut out of the loop when it comes to water and sewer.

As a matter of fact, the First Nations struggle with this whole thing of moving their whole settlement areas up from higher water table levels - lower to the river - to higher elevations, so they can get away from the sewage seepage into wells. I would say they have made vast improvements on their own, without government help. So, I'd like to see the Liberal government pay some attention to that and not have these things as band-aid solutions for the next 10 years. I hope to see systems in place that will last at least 25 years.

Our telephone lines are pretty key right now. It has been mentioned here that we need to keep up with the fast-growing age of computers. We can't even make a telephone call out of the community, never mind getting Internet access. What does that say to government as far as getting communities up to speed? We're all on the highway. We're all close to telephone lines. There is no reason why we can't do it. As a matter of fact, there is a project in place. So, why cancel it? I think this would be a vast improvement to schools, which could use telecommunications and have classes taught from Toronto, Vancouver or Whitehorse in the small communities, such as Pelly Crossing, so that students can take courses that are not offered in the communities.

I thought the Liberal opposition agreed with the NDP at the time on this particular project. But it's changing, and has changed, and people are not happy with the change, because there are delays and more delays. It has gone from one department to another, and somewhere down the road a bunch of information went missing. Now, we're stuck with what we have today. But, hopefully, they can take advantage of some federal government dollars.

"Maintaining quality health care" - doctors and nurses are leaving the Yukon Territory. We would like to know what plans the department has for recruitment, and keeping the doctors in the communities. It's important, of course - people feel a sense of safety when they do have nurses and doctors within their communities.

What happened to the CAT scan? Did that get thrown out? I mean, there is $1 million in the budget for that. Why can't that piece of equipment come to the Yukon Territory? Try to save money, rather than sending people out every time there is a head injury.

Addressing alcohol and drugs: I would like to see a lot of work done in this area. This is not something, of course, that's going to be done in six months or one year. I know that the Liberal government would like to see vast changes right away.

One of their initiatives, I guess, in this throne speech, was to provide information to communities out there, and "go heal yourself" is what they say. It's embarrassing - shameful, actually - because communities have been doing it for a long time. This doesn't happen overnight, by any means. It takes a long, long time - generations - to heal people; and it's done on the community level.

And this one we will really hold, of course, the government to its wording - in thinking that people do not have confidence in government, that they'd be "restoring confidence in government". I think they're working at the complete opposite, right now.

They can't even tell the environment community that they stand for something within the throne speech. YPAS, sure, but the only reason that's in there is because the Liberals wanted to include the Chamber of Mines as part of the process, give them more clout and more say into the development of protected spaces in the Yukon Territory.

Of course, this document now changes that. In their platform document, it's all about the future. Well, that's gone by. I guess the future has gone by, on that one. All of a sudden, the Chamber of Mines is not that important in the process. I would say that was a very good document that was put forward - developed by the people and criticized by the Liberal government, who are now trying to champion this whole thing.

Even with that, they didn't have enough initiative among themselves to put something in the throne speech with regard to protected spaces. What are the numbers? Are you working at getting one protected space in the next year and one the year after? What are you looking at? What are you concentrating on? How are the structures being dealt with?

You talk about a review. Well, how's a review going to take place? Behind closed doors with the Liberals or out in the public, being open and accountable? Are you going to do some extensive consultation to make sure that the protected areas strategy that was developed by the communities and by the people of the Yukon is not changed to suit, I guess, Liberal initiatives and promises to friends?

There's no social agenda here. There's very little vision in here. It's just hollow and empty. And there's very little on the economy and an economic agenda - nothing about trade and investment. The Premier herself was not totally on side with that, but has got a trip booked to China now. It's time for Chinese food, I suppose. If the Prime Minister can fly her up on a jet for dinner down in Ottawa, well, I wouldn't think that she would miss out on this one.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fairclough: I guess, to determine what their policies are, they will bring back a bunch of fortune cookies.

There's nothing about women in this throne speech, and I'm quite surprised - nothing about supporting women's issues at all. I guess that's a pretty clear message to the women of the Yukon that the Liberal government is not going to be doing very much at all when it comes to women's issues. That is the throne speech. That's the message they want to get out to the Yukon people. Where are the youth when it comes to the Liberals? There is nothing in the throne speech here about a youth directorate being set up. It's not a Liberal directive, that's for sure, but hey, pat them on the back. They are going to take credit for that, too.

The Premier has taken on a number of portfolios and is too busy micromanaging the departments. She is not letting the people who have the skills within the department to do their jobs. She is micromanaging the departments. She has little time for Yukoners. She is too busy flying around Canada and the country, but has no time for the people of the Yukon.

I would think that, by the actions of this government now, over the last six months and in the throne speech, it is no different from when they were in opposition. The government wants to talk about the economy and bring in a motion about the economy. What did the Liberals do? They ran out of the House. They didn't want to talk about it when they were in opposition. That's how important it was to the Liberals, and that is reflected in this throne speech today.

There's no trust there with the government. How can they? How can people trust government to carry out what they say they are going to do? They say that they're committed to what they said they were going to do; they would carry them out. They passed their budget here, not long ago. They didn't have enough within them to create their own budget, but they wanted to give Yukon certainty. That's what they said. And the only way they could do it is with the hard work of the NDP, by adopting their budget. That's the way they were going to bring certainty to Yukon people. But that only lasted a month, two months? And then along comes Patty Scissorhands cutting out the -

Some Hon. Member: Point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: Order please. The government House leader on a point of order.

Ms. Tucker: Under the Standing Orders, I would like to talk about the use of abusive or insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder.

Speaker: The Member for Watson Lake on the point of order.

Mr. Fentie: On the point of order, this is merely an interruption. There was no insulting language here at all by the Member for Mayo-Tatchun.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: I'll comment right now on it, as I had called order as the government House Leader stood up. As I said before, I would request and appreciate members to refrain from insulting language.

Thank you. Please continue.

Mr. Fairclough: It appears that the Liberal government is thin-skinned and I can tell you that it is going to be easy to tan this sitting.

The Liberal government adopted the NDP budget and said that they would pass it in its entirety, and what do they do? They come back and cut out what they don't like. And what does that cause in the communities, in Whitehorse with the NGOs? I don't know. I can ask you, Mr. Speaker: what would you call it when you say you're going to do one thing and then immediately do something else? Is that changing your mind or misleading Yukoners? What would you call it?

I think there has been a lot of training that took place by the federal Liberals with the Yukon Liberals. I'll give you an example of one of them, Mr. Speaker, and why I think that Yukon Liberals are so much like the federal Liberals. Remember when Jean Chrétien came out and said he was going to kick out the GST? What happened? They changed their minds. They really said one thing and did the other. It's no different with the Yukon Liberal Party.

Is their training so deep that they would actually take on some of these initiatives that the federal Liberals have been doing to Canadians, to Yukoners, to small groups like this? Bill C-68, the gun law - it didn't matter what we said, did it? We haven't heard a word from this Yukon Liberal Party about Bill C-68.

They just agree with the federal Liberals, whatever they say. If they pull the string, the Yukon Liberals would react. When it came to changing the name of Mount Logan, the Yukon Premier thought it was a great idea. It was a great idea according to the Liberal Party. Then, all of a sudden, they changed their minds. The Member for Kluane was doing all kinds of work, getting e-mail from people across the country, lobbying to make sure that government followed due process. Here we have the Premier agreeing with the Prime Minister on that process - breaching the land claims agreement, right off the bat. She didn't even think about it. That's pretty important to Yukoners, to make sure that the agreements that they spent 30 years negotiating are followed. But the Premier didn't have it within her to support Yukoners on that important issue. She couldn't do that. She agreed with the federal Liberals. Why can't you agree that if there is ever going to be a name change to Mount Logan that a local name be chosen and not somebody else -

Speaker: Order. Order please. I must remind the member to address his comments through the Chair.

Mr. Fairclough: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There's not much at all for job creation here. There's a reliance on oil and gas and the fact that it will be the answer to the job problem in Yukon. They want to bring responsible mining back to the territory and force responsible practices in the territory.

They want to create an industry-driven tourism strategy. Well, there is a tourism strategy already in place.

But they wanted to bring an industry-driven tourism strategy. Now what the NDP did was to bring forward a community-driven tourism strategy that was sponsored by industry, putting the community in charge. It's not the same thing that the Liberals would like to do - change things, they want to keep people here for another day.

I would like to go through the whole document here. I have lots of notes all the way through. I haven't even gone through half of it yet.

It's obvious that the Liberals aren't listening; they are not listening to Yukoners. They're not even listening to their ridings or their constituents.

We had the Member for Whitehorse Centre going off in a - I don't know what route he was taking, but he wasn't taking the left fork or the right fork. He was going straight through. He didn't know where he was going - trying to make a new trail, I suppose. He had to throw his last moose hunting trip into this, trying to talk about taking the bull by the horns or something like that. It's a pretty bad reflection of what a Yukoner is.

So far, the Liberal government has been pushing hard with land sales for oil and gas. It didn't matter whether the First Nation supported it or not. They pushed ahead. I will do this and come back and talk to you later. Isn't that the same thing with the school? We made a decision, we'll come back and talk to you later. That's their way of doing consultation.

It's embarrassing and shameful, and I hope they change their ways. The Liberals don't like that one.

Some Hon. Member: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: On a point of order, the hon. Premier.

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, you ruled earlier today that we are to be careful in our use of language in that we were permitted to say that a statement was contrary to the facts. The member opposite has made a statement that the Minister of Economic Development proceeded with land sales without the support of First Nations, and in fact that is contrary to the facts.

Speaker: The Member for Watson Lake, on the point of order.

Mr. Fentie: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, this constitutes a dispute between members and is simply not a point of order.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: I'm going to have to reflect on this for a minute.

I'm inclined to feel that it's a dispute between members on the facts and not a point of order.

Mr. Fairclough: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to continue after the rude interruption by the Premier.

We're just going through the throne speech. I thought they would be proud of what they presented to the general public - to the constituents out there - but their own constituents are giving feedback to us about what they see the Liberal government standing for over the next four years.

There is so much that is not in this throne speech and so little in there. It is just an empty, hollow vessel, in my opinion. It has no vision whatsoever. It has given no direction to the people of the Yukon. And it's a shame. I don't know if, in another six months, we will get another throne speech so the Liberals can change their minds again. I do hope that, in some of the things I've said in giving some direction when it comes to infrastructure and so on, they take those comments seriously because they do come from the community.

I thank you, and I do hope that we can continue to go through this throne speech quickly because there isn't much there.

Thanks.

Hon. Mr. Roberts: I'm honoured to rise in support of the Yukon Liberal government's health and social services initiatives. I would also like to thank the officials and staff members of the Department of Health and Social Services for their efforts in working with the new team.

I think one of the very important issues here for us is to really look at what this document tells us. It's a document about promoting healthy living. Let me explain what this means. Healthy living gives new energy to people. It gives positive attitudes; quality family time; community enrichment; longer lives; increased opportunities. And the rewards for healthy living - I could stay here all afternoon just listing all of them.

But I do want to correct one point made by the member opposite about the community development fund. I don't know where that fit into the throne speech, but the member opposite suggested that we have cut the CDF. We have not cut the CDF.

But I have to point out, Mr. Speaker, that the government of yesterday spent $2.5 million of the CDF, from April 1 to April 17, when the election was held. They spent $2.5 million, and there was only $3 million in the CDF put into the budget - only $3 million, and the government opposite, before they were actually booted out, spent $2.5 million of that $3 million for the year. So, I just want that to be on the record, because that's never told.

We know many people struggle with their health at one time or another in their lives. The Yukon government is committed to providing a health care system that supports all Yukoners in their efforts to maintain and improve their health. That's why there are many initiatives in the throne speech that we are going to be following.

We have a plan. It's a 10-year plan. And if the members haven't heard that for awhile, I'm back to it again, because that's what it takes in order to make changes to our health care system. What are these initiatives? Some of the examples, in keeping with where we're at now with one tier - I was pleased to see the leader of the Alberta Liberal Party here. I know for a fact that they have a problem there with the possibility of a two-tiered system. We don't want to go that route, because that does discriminate.

What does that mean - one tier? It means that all Yukoners, no matter how much money they have in the bank, are served equally.

Money cannot bump an ill person ahead of another ill person. They have to stand in line. That's what the one-tier system means.

The Department of Health and Social Services makes sure that everyone follows the principle of the one-tier system, and I think it's important that we look at this for the future, and it's important that we say it often, because it's one of those points that sometimes gets lost, Mr. Speaker.

Yukoners also need to know what steps the Yukon government is taking to maintain quality health care, and I think it's very important that we look at how we're going to do this.

The member opposite mentioned the fact of doctors and nurses, and the recruitment of doctors and nurses. That's a very important issue for this government. Time and time again, we have shared with the public, we have shared with the members opposite, we have shared in as many different forums as we can that the strategy that we have in place is working. We are attracting nurses. They are in very - I guess you would call it unique demand across the nation.

Doctors, again, are an area that we have to really put more time on, more energy on, because we know that there's a high demand for doctors as well; and we are. We have a Web site that has had, up to this point, I think, about 700 hits. About 200 of those were actual inquiries as to what we have to offer.

And that's the way we have to go in the future, Mr. Speaker. We have to spend time, we have to spend energy, and we have to spend money on recruitment. In the past, we may not have had to do this because of the surplus that we had at that point, but today we have to, Mr. Speaker.

So our plans are to maintain a quality health care system, and this will require very careful crafting in budgeting. It will require what I call a paradigm change in the attitude of all Yukoners about what health care is. This is being demanded of us by all health care systems in the country.

We have been used to a system that has been what it is, and it is changing all the time. But when it changes, we have to make sure we translate those changes to all Canadians, and that means dialoguing. That means working with Yukoners and with Canadians on what health care means.

This is the model that is called the primary health care model, where you use the nurse practitioner as the first line of support. Mr. Speaker, this is not something new to the Yukon. This has been going on for years, because many of our communities in the Yukon only have nurse practitioners, and they have been everything as far as the health care to that community. So, really, what we have to do is expand that idea and build on it and use that expertise that is there. This is something that is now catching on across the nation and I hope we can continue to promote it. It means a rethinking, because what happens, Mr. Speaker, is that a lot of people feel that the only person they can really identify with or who can address their problem is a doctor. Where we have these partnerships in our communities - and we have two communities that have these nurse-doctor practitioner partnerships - it works very well. I had the opportunity this summer to visit a number of communities, and we have some models that are following these particular ways of the new health care paradigm.

I think a large portion of what I say from here on will describe how we do this. If you look at the recent discussion about doctors and what role they play, we know, if the member opposite is asking me a question, we have Faro, which plays a very strong part in what we call the primary care model. I have spent a number of hours talking to the people there and they believe that that's a system that really works.

The Yukon government is revitalizing preventative health care. We are doing this by increasing public education and by better using our systems. And professionals already are trying to get that message across to the public. We have to change, as I said earlier, the way we deliver health care. And we're acting on it.

Another initiative that this government will be promoting and supporting in the next number of years - and I've said 10 years, and that's only to get it going - is the active living strategy. This is a strategy to prevent what we call our system now. We call it a health care system sometimes. We have to really look at what it means. We have to promote health. What is the active living strategy? It means taking control of your own life and building and maintaining your own health. We have to really look at what we, as individuals, do about our own health.

You would say, that's quite automatic, everybody looks after their health. But that's not necessarily true. We have a lot of literature and a lot of research that is coming out across North America indicating that many of us are not looking after our health. We expect the health system to do it. Really, the health system is there to help those who, for whatever reasons or difficulties, need help. Not for the majority of the population, who can look after themselves. So, that's the kind of thinking that we have to change.

The active living model will see far more emphasis in the future. And we will be talking about this in the next few years. We will be bringing to this House some ideas, some thoughts and some ways of trying to achieve this. It isn't going to be done overnight.

I suppose it's easy for me to stand here and say that prevention is one of the very keys. It's not easy. We can talk about it. But we have to do it. So, that's where the action comes in. We are taking action by resolving to restructure our thinking about the healing process. What really is true healing? It's the motivator to prevent unhealthy living. Healing is what is required with addictions.

I have heard the member opposite talk about there being nothing in the throne speech about addictions. One of our main themes, Mr. Speaker, besides land claims and devolution, is addictions - substance abuse and addictions. It is a major concern of our government. Recently, we have had the AADAC people come to the Yukon to evaluate and give us back some kind of idea about where we're at in our alcohol and drug scene at this point in time. We will be submitting that report to the House in the near future. We will be submitting it to the communities. It will have ideas and thoughts about where we can go with this, because, as I mentioned earlier, we not only have a problem with alcohol and drug abuse; we have a plague, and it's major. In my visits to 11 of the communities in the past couple of months, this was the issue that came up in every community - every community, Mr. Speaker.

The government of yesterday had four years to do something about this particular plague. Mr. Speaker, they chose to sit on it. This government is not going to sit on it. We are a government of action.

We have to maintain our quality health care. Again, we have to look at how we're going to do this. We have to look at all of us being partners in this process.

Our throne speech talked about working with communities, working with Yukoners. When I sat down with the communities, the First Nations, the villages, individuals, nursing stations and doctors - what I received from them was a response of cooperation.

We no longer can continue on our individual paths to resolve some of the major problems we have in our community, Mr. Speaker. We have to work together. We have to be creative, because we have waited too long to build what is necessary to solve some of these major problems that we have in our communities.

If we don't respond to changes, Mr. Speaker, then we're not growing. I think this is one of our problems. I've shared with you earlier that health care is changing. I hear from my fellow Health ministers the same concerns about responsibility. They say that the old days are over; new ideas have to be put forth, and new discussions have to take place.

We learned a great deal from our forefathers, from our elders and from our grandparents. We have to build on that. We must use their rationale, their ideas, and build for the future.

One of the main issues that I've really tried to share with all the communities is that if we want to retain our doctors and nurses, we must respect them. This has been a problem in some of our communities. We expect our nurses to be available 24-hours a day, our doctors to be available 24-hours a day, and they're to think nothing of it. It's almost like they don't have a life.

Today our health care professionals are saying: "We want a life. We want to be part of the community. We don't want to be machines." And I have challenged communities in a positive way to build with their health care people, to invite them to be part of the community, and I have to say that all communities have responded in turn. Maybe not every individual, Mr. Speaker, but I think it's important that we try to get this message across to as many people as we can.

I think the important part in looking at primary health care - because that's a word that's going to come back again and again in this next number of years - is looking at all those resources that we have in our health care system to ensure that we use and rely on all those people who have skills.

If we don't, Mr. Speaker, our system is going to collapse. It cannot maintain and sustain the present direction without a change in attitude, a change in idea, a change in direction. We have to maintain our one-tiered health care system.

Recently, and last year, we have held health summits. I attended the one last year that was here in Whitehorse. It was a very positive initiative. And I'll give credit to the government of yesterday that this was a good move, to have health summits. Mind you, it took them three and a half years to have it, when they said they would do it at the beginning of their mandate. But it was a good move. This year, we had two health summits, and these were rural-based. One was in Haines Junction and one was in Ross River. And from my understanding, the health summits were very successful again in addressing what causes the problems of ill health. In other words, they looked at the active living model as being where they want to go. They want to look at healthy communities. They wanted to look at how we can do that, as a community.

I have to thank Dr. Timmermans for setting this up. As you know, he's leaving, and if he hasn't left already, we thank him for all the work he has done over the last 20 years here in the Yukon. But it was his inspiration that brought this idea to where we have it today. We have to look at the process of building together, Mr. Speaker. Rural Yukon residents from 12 of the Yukon communities really believe that this is where we're at. I'm commenting on the ones I visited. I haven't been to a few communities, which I plan on doing over the next month. And I'm sure I'm going to get the same message from those communities.

We must work together. We can snipe at each other, we can be critical, but let's do it in a positive way, Mr. Speaker, so that we can build for the future.

We have had other health care initiatives. We have had the First Nations home and community care initiative. This is a Health Canada initiative we began planning in January of 2000. Half of the Yukon's communities have hired a home care coordinator to develop and implement the program in their community, and the director of health partnerships from the Yukon government has attended many of these meetings to keep Health and Social Services informed of how the rural communities are addressing this particular role. This is probably the future of the whole idea of home care.

What we have to do is try to look at the one-window approach, and I have discussed with many of the rural communities about delivering services from one window, through a government-to-government approach, and they are positive and open to this, Mr. Speaker. They believe that we're all Yukoners, that we all want to work together for the same reason.

A community health plan is in the initial stages in Ross River, and in the past it has been successful in developing a framework in the community of Teslin through consultation with the Village of Teslin, the Teslin Tlingit Council and Yukon Health and Social Services. So we have some models here, Mr. Speaker, which are demonstrating very positive actions.

A community health planning working group has been formed in Haines Junction for the same purpose, and the idea here, again, Mr. Speaker, is to try to build on consensus in the community.

Health promotion in the community is supported by all three territories in the north and Health Canada. The goal is to improve the total health care, because what's happening now is that the north has the distinction of having probably the worst health care, I guess, problems among many of our residents. So, we have really got to look at how we pull it together and work very hard at building for the future.

Another committee, called the Health Partnership Development Committee, is comprised of Yukon First Nations and represents YTG and the Department of Health - again, looking at how we can develop policy together, joint planning and, as I have shared earlier, the one-window approach.

This fall, the mandate of the Health Partnership Development Committee is undergoing a review. After the review, we will be looking at how we build government-to-government responses. The important part is to look at partnership, Mr. Speaker. If I can underline what this throne speech has really been all about, it's about building partnership. It's not having all of the answers. Unfortunately, as government, we sometimes think - and past governments have done this - that we have all of the answers. We don't. Communities have the answers. They are there on the front line, so we have to utilize those resources.

Recently, we were just awarded another funding program through the diabetes programming. The objective here is to look at how we can identify diabetes, because it is a growing concern in the country, and it's important that we find out what's causing the problem and how we can arrest the problem. So we have to find out what the numbers are. As far as I am concerned, Mr. Speaker, this is working together, all governments working together in order to build that common image.

Also very important, as we have mentioned here over and over, are our seniors and the growing number of seniors we have in the Yukon. Mr. Speaker, I believe this is going to be one of our biggest challenges as a government - ensuring that we look after the wise people who got us here. It is very important that we do it right. So, we must be talking to our elders and to our seniors. We must look at how we work with them, in order to build for the future.

We are dedicated to maintaining seniors health care, Mr. Speaker. We understand that we have a problem with the growing numbers, but we also have to look at how we respond to them.

For me, as I sometimes am in denial that I am a senior, but I am, Mr. Speaker, and I'll gladly admit it - I went to the elders games on the weekend, and a lot of the people there who I knew as parents and as fellow players of various teams I was on, said, "Why weren't you taking part in this, Mr. Roberts? You could have been part of this." I said, "Well, it's like being follicly-challenged. You kind of deny it for awhile, you cover it up, and then you sort of say, 'Get real, you don't have it, so show it.'" It's the same thing, admitting that you are a senior, and I gladly admit that I'm a senior. I'm proud to be a senior, because that's another stage in one's growth, one's development. I'm very pleased to be a grandparent, and I'm very pleased to have four grandchildren living down the street from me. So this is, I think, another reality check for a lot of us who tried to deny that we're seniors.

There are many reasons, Mr. Speaker, why we have to look after, maintain, dialogue and work with our seniors.

Housing, as my fellow Cabinet minister and colleague talked about - this wonderful initiative about seniors housing. It was almost pooh-poohed by the opposition, Mr. Speaker. It's very good to have an idea up there, but if you don't put any money in it, it doesn't go anywhere. We put the money in it, Mr. Speaker, and we're getting somewhere with it. Past governments have just talked about it; they've never done anything with it.

It's much like the Mayo school, Mr. Speaker. They talked about the school being their initiative, and yet nothing was done under their reign after 26 years. The Liberals finally made the footprint. There it is, Mr. Speaker.

It's like housing, Mr. Speaker. We have it there. We are working to build for seniors.

The extended care facility; we won't take complete credit for the extended care facility, but we will take credit for extending it from 74 to 96 beds. And, of course, that will be an argument that members opposite will bring up about spending more money in extended care, because what they were doing was just shelling in the extra bids. We said that we're not going to shell it in; we're going to build it, because we know we need it today. That's our commitment to seniors. If we know we need it, we do it. We don't wait around and pretend that it doesn't exist or it's not there.

This will also bring us up to a level of providing services that has not been seen in the Yukon. We will have another process to try to deliver to Yukoners who need that kind of support. This will free up the Thomson Centre for medium-level care. It will also help the seniors in Macaulay Lodge. They will be able to move to the Thomson Centre. So, it will be a real re-jigging and re-juggling of where our seniors can go and trying to address their needs even more specifically.

I think it's very important to understand that seniors - and I'm spending a bit of time on this, because they are really our knowledge and our mentors for the future. It is with seniors that we are going to build the future. It is with youth that we are going to build the future. I am very much involved in trying to build, as are my fellow colleagues on this side of the House, a youth strategy for the future. The Member for Riverside will be speaking about youth, so we'll wait to see what he has to deliver. There are many initiatives that are going to be taking place.

We, as a caucus, are team players, Mr. Speaker. This is what the throne speech is all about. It talks about a team effort. We are trying to rid ourselves of the stovepipes of government. We are trying to work as team members. What happens in government quite often is that you end up with departments sometimes feeling that they don't work with each other. Stovepipes tend to give that kind of definition to what happens, and we're going to remove stovepipes. We're going to work as a team. We are going to try to build for the future.

In my walk-arounds and my visits to the communities, I was in Mayo at the time of the important meeting and I went to it. I was able to visit the youth centre there and I was very impressed. I was impressed by the organization and I was impressed by the commitment of the people of Mayo to maintain the youth centre.

I played pool with a 12-year-old, Mr. Speaker, and was beaten. She sunk the 8-ball and I didn't have a chance. So, that tells you where our youth are.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Yes, it was a she, as well, so I have to improve on my pool skills.

One of the other points, I think, with the alcohol and drug review - just a couple of things. We're looking at the three questions that have plagued our system in the past. Are we providing the right services? That was a question that we will be responding to. Are the services that we're providing adequately resourced, and what about the organizational structure of our current alcohol and drug support? These are some things that we will be coming back to when we release our report. That report will be released very shortly, Mr. Speaker, and we are hopefully going to have a quick turnaround about getting feedback, because we're not going to be reviewing this forever. I would suggest that, in six months, if we're not doing something - running, heart action - then the report is not worth the paper it's written on.

That is going to be our challenge as a community, as Yukoners, to try to rid ourselves of the plague.

This is going to take every resource that we have in the territory to build. We are going to have to work as real team people.

I think the other point in the throne speech talks about how we, as Yukoners, want to see the future. The economy is definitely one of the very basic issues in improving all social ills. This government has put forth an image that will build for the long term. Short term is what it is, and then when it runs out, you have to start all over again, so we are looking at how to build for the long term.

Mr. Speaker, it's very important that all of us from all parties try to see that working together will take us much further down the road than not working together. I'm not saying that you can't be critical. I think it's important that we have positive, constructive criticism, but let's move ahead. Let's not try to do one-upmanship with each other, saying, "Well, we did this and we did that." Let's work on this initiative in alcohol and drug as true team players right across the territory.

We have in place now what they call the Public Health Act, which was amended to include the reporting of cases of fetal alcohol syndrome. That is now in place, Mr. Speaker, and thanks to all members of the House for supporting this. This can be an initiative that will, in the future, hopefully see us try to attack this very important problem.

I've heard the question of fetal alcohol being mentioned a few times, because it is a very serious problem in the territory. I will be providing more information in the near future about some of the things that we're doing and some of the things that we have to continue to do. We're not there yet, Mr. Speaker. We have not solved all the fetal alcohol or alcohol and drug problems in the territory. We have not. We're just beginning, Mr. Speaker.

We really have to work in order to build a system that is going to try to work with all Yukoners. And Mr. Speaker, I think it's very important to look at how we, as government, can do that. Education and government accountability - it's very important that we be very transparent about what we do.

We're not going to come out with a report that has all of the answers in it. We're going to come out with a report that states some issues, concerns and possible directions, but it's not an imprint. We're hoping that communities, individuals and Yukoners will come back and say, "Okay, I think this will work; this will not work." Hopefully, we can build on that.

In the last month, we have been trying to share with Yukoners what health care costs really are. It's very important, Mr. Speaker, that Yukoners have knowledge of health care costs. It is not free. I believe in the universality of the health care system. I believe that Yukoners want to know what their health care system costs.

If we are going to control costs in the future, there has to be a conscious decision to understand what is driving these costs through the roof. So, we will be issuing a report card to all Yukoners and, hopefully, we will expect to have feedback from Yukoners about what they see in this report card. This will be done during this session, Mr. Speaker. It is an initiative that is going to be taking place across the nation - not the same kind of initiative that we are going to follow, but something similar - where Canadians want to know why, how and what their health care system is and how they can be partners in trying to ensure that we don't abuse the system.

We have already started on this, Mr. Speaker. We have put in place a technical review committee and this technical review committee is a group of professionals and experts who will look at all future purchases of equipment and technical services that our health care system should be a part of. It will be an arm's-length committee that will discuss, assess and report back to caucus and Cabinet about where we should go with the purchase or the acquiring of new equipment. To us, this is an initiative that has been long in waiting. It then doesn't become a political football. We're actually going to be listening to the experts, the people who know about these things. It's not going to be a knee-jerk kind of reaction.

The mandate of the committee will be to look at the number of patients needing a service or support. They'll also look at the health and human resources needed to run or maintain that particular type of equipment. They will also look at spacing. They will look at infrastructure support and they will look at cost effectiveness. We think this is a wonderful initiative, Mr. Speaker. Again, it addresses the very basic line in the throne speech about being open and accountable.

We will be looking at how we deliver programs and how practical the programs are, and we will be looking at what happens in other parts of the country, with populations of similar size.

Decisions, Mr. Speaker, will still be made by caucus and Cabinet, but at least we'll be going with some baseline expertise, which, by the way, has not happened in the past. It's been more of a knee-jerk approach.

We will also, Mr. Speaker, look at how we look at our services. We want partners like doctors, nurses and Yukoners to be part of the solution, and we're going to be asking them for some suggestions as to how we build a better system.

The important part in looking at trying to build for the future - it doesn't happen overnight. The important part, is really trying to build for what we are seeing in the future right across the nation. We will be unable to sustain the cost of health care if we don't change attitudes. And so, Mr. Speaker, you are going to find that there's going to be a lot of support and promotion of healthy types of activities. We will be putting more dollars into prevention versus putting all the dollars into the sickness of our system. We still have to do that; I would not want people to underestimate the fact that we still have that obligation. Right now the technical review committee is looking at the hemodialysis; they are looking at the CAT scan; they are looking at the picture-achieving system for radiology images; they're looking at a new ultrasound machine. They're looking at stress testing. So there are some major issues ahead of us that have big dollars attached to them. And so the important part for us is to make sure we make the right decision with the right information. I am very pleased that this government put in place a technical review committee. I think it's going to -

Speaker: Order please. The minister has two minutes to conclude.

Hon. Mr. Roberts: I am pleased that we as a government have responded to maintaining a one-tiered health system. I am pleased to tell Yukoners that we are going to be open and accountable by reporting to them what our system is doing and having Yukoners report back to us on what the system is doing for them. I think it's important that it's a two-way conversation.

We are promoting healthy lifestyles. We are promoting Yukoners as partners. We are promoting respect, and we are reporting that our health care professionals are very important in our system. We're also challenging all Yukoners to work for solutions, not just problems. We have those automatically.

I challenge all politicians of all stripes who work with government to build for the future. And I'd like to thank the House for listening to how we, in the future, have to move ahead.

Mr. Jenkins: I'm pleased today to rise and respond to the Speech from the Throne.

Mr. Speaker, this Speech from the Throne was intended to provide the new direction that the Liberal government will follow over the course of the next three years.

During the election, the Liberals promised to do what they said they were going to do. Now, rather than take a new direction, however, the Liberals actually promised to do what the NDP were going to do. It is now historic fact that this Liberal government adopted and passed the budget of the previous NDP government, effectively reducing their mandate for change to three years, instead of the four years they were elected for, Mr. Speaker.

They had to borrow a year from the NDP, because they were not prepared to govern on their own.

Now, to go back to the spring, the Liberals told Yukoners to wait for the throne speech, because by the fall, they would finally have their act together, and they would be able to signal a new direction. Some act, Mr. Speaker. Some act.

What a disappointment these last six months have been, Mr. Speaker. Between August of last year and this year, Yukon's labour force dropped by over 500 workers. Yukoners are continuing to leave the territory in droves because there is no economic leadership, and there is little hope that the economic situation here in Yukon will turn around any time soon.

Now, to make matters worse, this Liberal government is not doing what it said it was going to do. While the Liberals promised to implement the NDP budget as is, they are, in fact, very much cherry-picking which projects they intend to carry out. You only have to ask the people of Mayo about the new school, which should be under construction now. It's not. It would have been very simple to commence construction, carry the project over into the next fiscal period and complete it in that next year's budget. Oh, but no, no, no. We'll cancel it. We'll mothball it. We'll deny the students of Mayo adequate facilities in which to gain their education. We'll let them endure continuing hardship. We'll let the students of Mayo continue with inadequate air quality in their building