Whitehorse, Yukon

Speaker: I will now call the House to order.

We will proceed at this time with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

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

Tributes.

TRIBUTES

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the minister responsible for the Women's Directorate to recognize November as Women Abuse Prevention Month, and I'd like at this time to tribute every man, every woman and every child who ever got out of an abusive situation.

I'd also like to say a special word of thanks to the Victoria Faulkner Women's Centre, which heads up a steering committee to coordinate events for Women Abuse Prevention Month. Members of the steering committee include representatives from Kaushee's Place, Les EssentiElles, Yukon Status of Women, the Women's Directorate and the RCMP, among others.

The Women's Centre will be coordinating a healthy relationships workshop on November 9, an introduction to assertiveness workshop on November 21, a presentation of a book, Gift of Fear, on November 15, and a brown-bag lunch with Shirley McLean of the Yukon College social worker program and Leah White, the women's advocate from the Victoria Faulkner Women's Centre, on November 16.

Through the centre's dedication and coordinated efforts, information about domestic violence and how we can all work toward ending it will be shared throughout the month.

For a month, we will come face to face with the facts and figures, images and ideas that show the damage violence against people of the Yukon does on a daily basis. We will be reminded throughout November of the violence and abuse that poison too many Yukoners' lives and too many families. Then, November will end but the violence will not.

But there is good news. For years, the Yukon Women's Directorate, the status of women colleagues and the women's organizations across this country have been working on raising public awareness about this issue, and it's starting to pay off.

Comparisons of statistical data from 1993 and 1999 point to a decline in the rate of spousal violence. In the five years preceding the 1993 survey on violence against women, about 12 percent of women reported being assaulted by their spouse. Data from the 1999 general social survey on victimization reported a decline from 12 percent to eight percent over a similar time period. There was also a slight but statistically significant decline in the severity of assaults between these two time periods.

During November, the Women's Directorate will be replaying the six-part radio drama, Getting Free, on CKRW. This drama examines the insidious effects of spousal abuse. I invite Yukoners to listen on Tuesday and Thursday afternoons, starting on November 7, and I urge the members of this House and all Yukoners to actively participate this month and every month in working toward ending violence and abusive situations.

Mr. Jenkins:On behalf of the Yukon Party, I rise to pay tribute to Women Abuse Prevention Month, as an opportunity to raise awareness about the importance of prevention programs in bringing an end to violence against women.

While strides have been made to reduce physical abuse against women, violence sadly remains a frequent reality for many today. Clearly, ending violence against women through prevention is the key to lasting change and making lives safer. Supporting women who have been abused will always be of critical importance, but we must also look at the root causes of violence and must continue efforts to change attitudes and behaviours that allow violence to happen in the first place.

We are all aware of violence in our society, and while we want the violence stopped, we must all take a share in the responsibility of helping to prevent abuse in women's lives today. As legislators and members of communities, we must all work together to support victims of violence and to develop prevention programs, which will change the beliefs and attitudes that allow violence against women to continue.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Women's Directorate, the numerous women's groups in the territory, and individuals for their work and continuing efforts in helping to bring about such change.

Thank you very much.

Speaker: If there are no further tributes, I will proceed to introduction of visitors.

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Ms. Duncan: I have for tabling the Intergovernmental Relations Accord between the Tr'ondëk Hwëch'in government and the Government of Yukon.

Hon. Ms. Buckway: Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling the letter of intent regarding communities not included in Connect Yukon dated March 31, 2000; the contribution agreement for the Marsh Lake infrastructure build dated April 12, 2000; and the service management agreement for Connect Yukon dated April 1, 2000.

Speaker: Are there any reports of committees?

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Mr. Kent: Mr. Speaker, I have a report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges for presentation.

Speaker: Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

Are there any statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Hon. Ms. Duncan: I rise today to inform the House of this government's plans - a new policy initiative - to review new economic development programs.

As hon. members are aware, the government is committed to spending taxpayers' money wisely. As part of this commitment, we will be reviewing several programs that fund community and economic development projects.

The community development fund has been in place for three years. The fire smart program, which has been administered through the community development fund, has been in place for two years. The time is right to ensure these programs are effectively meeting their objectives and the needs of Yukoners.

To do this, a management improvement program has been instituted in the Executive Council Office. This government will undertake a management audit of the community development fund and the fire smart program this fall. This audit will provide independent information on the operations of both programs. This information will be used to help improve or redesign the programs to better meet their overall goals.

This also meets our platform commitment, Mr. Speaker, to review government funding programs and it addresses our top seven priorities.

I want to assure hon. members that the government has heard the views of community and other organizations about the benefits of these programs.

We, too, believe that aspects of this community development fund and the fire smart program have value.

At the same time, we have also heard concerns about these programs, particularly about the way they were managed by the previous government. We need to ensure that those concerns are addressed.

During the current fiscal year, we have allocated millions of dollars to community development fund programs. We have respected existing funding commitments. Now it is the time to make sure that these funding programs are effective. We will be taking some time to carry out the program audits, design program improvements and talk to Yukoners about their views on redesigned programs.

At the same time, the Department of Tourism is carrying out consultation on possible arts funding. The results of these consultations will also help to inform discussions about the future of the community development fund. We believe that the reviews and consultations are an important part of ensuring that public funds help communities - and are an important part of ensuring that government delivers programs in an effective manner.

As hon. members are also aware, funding has been made available to businesses and other organizations through the trade and investment fund and the tourism marketing fund. We also plan to review these programs later this winter, once the audit of the community development fund and the fire smart program are complete.

Again, these audits will be designed to inform decisions about how funding will be provided to the business sector in the future - whether it is to support tourism activity, the cultural sector or efforts to promote trade and investment.

As with the other funding programs under review, no further allocations will be made under the trade and investment fund and the tourism marketing fund, until the reviews are completed. We expect the assessments of these funds will be concluded in the next fiscal year; decisions will then be made on their futures.

As I have outlined for hon. members today, these reviews are part of our commitment to Yukoners to spend their money wisely, and to get results that they want from government. We look forward to working with members of this House and with Yukoners to ensure that this is the case.

Mr. Fentie: I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to respond to this ministerial statement - which again, is not government policy, but merely an announcement - that this government, true to form, is going to review, postpone and delay.

We, on the official opposition side, pointed out that these particular programs - CDF, fire smart, the tourism marketing fund, the trade and investment fund - were indeed being killed by the Liberal government. And at a time in this territory when these types of programs would go a long way - a long way, Mr. Speaker - to assist and alleviate the hardships that Yukoners, especially in rural Yukon, are facing today, this cold-hearted government, in their pursuit to put their own political, partisan spin on government programming, has turned its back on Yukoners.

One has to ask, Mr. Speaker, why, when this government, in tabling their budget two days ago, informed this House that there was indeed a $64-million surplus. It is completely unacceptable, with that kind of money in the coffers, that they - while we do not dispute that it is entirely their right to review programming - would stop funding to community groups, to organizations, to small business in this territory to help them survive this winter.

One also has to ask, if this was a part of the Liberal plan, why did they not do this review this summer? They have been in power for six months. This review could have been completed. If there were going to be new programs, they could have already been implemented in this budget. It is these members across the floor who said, in this spring's sitting, "Wait until the fall; we will bring forward to this Legislature our priorities, our plan for Yukoners." It is obvious their plan is to punish those who did not support them.

How long will this review take? How much longer are Yukoners going to have to wait before they can make a decision? Should they phone their banker and say, "I can no longer make my payments. Come and get my equipment"? Are parents going to have to wait before they can say to their children, "There will be no Christmas this year"? This government is creating that situation for Yukoners.

They use the excuse that they have heard from some unknown sources that there are concerns with these programs. I would argue that there is a multitude of support out there in this territory for these programs because of the positive results that have been achieved by the community development fund, by the tourism marketing fund, by the fire smart funding and by the trade and investment funding.

Right now, today, communities in this territory have their applications in for fire smart funding and are wondering why it's not forthcoming. So, this government has also turned its back on the safety of communities when we live in the midst of a boreal forest. They have stopped everything, Mr. Speaker, and they will be held accountable.

They also say that, once they have completed this so-called review, they will then provide the results to the business sector. What about the community groups? What about municipalities? What about all the agencies -

Speaker: Order please. The member has one minute to conclude.

Mr. Fentie: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately.

What about all the agencies that are eligible for this type of funding and put it to good use? Mr. Speaker, this is, indeed, a dark day for this territory and its people.

Mr. Jenkins: I rise to respond to this ministerial statement announcing yet another review. It must be pointed out once again, Mr. Speaker, that this is not a ministerial statement that conforms to the terms. It is just the announcement of another review.

Now, Mr. Speaker, this government is big on reviewing but extremely small on taking any action to improve Yukon's devastated economy. I must take immediate issue with the statement that this government is committed to spending taxpayers' money wisely - far from it, Mr. Speaker. If such were the case, this government would not be proceeding with a $23.5-million Connect Yukon project in its present form. It would be renegotiating it. Nor would it be building the $27-million Mayo-Dawson transmission line without going through some business case and present that business case to the House.

That aside, Mr. Speaker, this statement today is going to make a very bleak winter for Yukoners even bleaker. With the failure of the supplementary budget to create a winter works program, the last ray of hope for Yukoners finding some work this winter with programs such as the community development fund, fire smart, the trade and investment fund, and the tourism marketing fund - that light has been switched off. There's not even any light created at the end of the tunnel. We were waiting this fall for the mini-budget. That has failed Yukoners.

They have turned the light off. The Premier's timing couldn't be worse, Mr. Speaker. While these programs could benefit from a management audit, I totally disagree with the Premier stating that the time is right. The time is not right. This is the worst possible time to conduct these audits. I would urge the Premier, on behalf of all unemployed Yukoners and for people in the communities who are looking for some help from these programs this winter - don't kill that hope. Delay the audits until next summer. Help put Yukoners back to work this winter with these programs.

This government has $64 million at its disposal to help create jobs in Yukon this winter, so money isn't the issue. It's management and skill at doing something with the economy. The claims that the Liberal government had only a $14-million surplus were simply not true. The Premier failed Yukoners with a $37-million mini-budget to put Yukoners to work. She has only increased the operation and maintenance costs of this government. That's where the money is going.

So, I would ask her not to fail Yukoners once again. Delay the audits until this summer and help create some winter works jobs right now. Can she do that? I don't believe so. The timelines for completing this management audit aren't even spelled out. Is it six months, 12 months, or a year? No, it could be done next summer. What is the urgency with starting a management audit right now on these programs that could be putting Yukoners to work this winter?

We have got to have some hope. It has all been killed.

Hon. Ms. Duncan: First of all, on the bootlegged point by the members opposite about ministerial statements, I would remind them to examine Hansard. On December 1, 1993, the hon. Mr. Phillips: "I rise today to report to members of the House." On November 22, 1999, the hon. Mr. McDonald: "I want to take this opportunity today to provide an update to members of the House."

The members opposite continually complain that they're not provided with information when, in fact, ministerial statements have been delivered to them on time, unlike past practice. They are entirely consistent.

Some Hon. Member: Point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: The opposition House leader, on a point of order.

Mr. Fentie: I must point out, on a point of order, that the Premier - the Minister of Economic Development - is wrong. This morning, in the House leaders' meeting, we were informed that this ministerial statement was about the pipeline. Now, we face the fact that it wasn't about the pipeline at all; it is about all these programs and funds.

Speaker: Leader of the third party, on the point of order.

Mr. Jenkins: On the point of order, the way the Member for Watson Lake recounted the House leaders' meeting this morning is exactly correct. We were told that this would be a ministerial statement on the pipeline initiative. That is simply not the case.

We also said that, because of the change in hours, Mr. Speaker, that we would be receiving these a half an hour earlier. The House opens a half an hour earlier. Such was not the case. We were told that we would get it at 11:00 a.m. There is such arrogance on the part of the Liberal Party.

Speaker: Government House leader, on the point of order.

Ms. Tucker: On the point of order, I have in my hand a signed copy of receipt of the exact ministerial statement that was read by the Premier, dated 10:59 a.m. The agreement was to provide them by 11:00 a.m., to both the NDP and the Yukon Party. The statement is here and it is signed.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: Order please. Order. I find there is no point of order to rule on. With that, I would ask the Premier to continue.

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to continue in response to the members' statements. I would also point out, Mr. Speaker, in the members' comments in response to the ministerial statement that, while they stood on their feet to pay tribute to ending violence, both of them referred to "killing" the program. If we're truly going to contribute and do this, then we end the violent language in this House.

The members opposite have suggested that the priorities of this government have not been laid out, when in fact seven priorities were laid out in the throne speech, and those are priorities that affect all Yukoners - land claims, devolution, turning the Yukon economy around, dealing with substance abuse and addictions in our communities.

We have heard - as I mentioned in the ministerial statement - support for the community development fund, as well as the fire smart program. We have heard support for this particular project from communities, from individuals and from distinct groups.

We have also heard a number of questions that have been asked. We've heard them when we were in opposition, and we've heard them as government. Municipalities have asked us, "What about dealing with the long-term O&M? What about the fact that the community development fund doesn't allow for things like the purchase of team uniforms, like ongoing funding for specific projects?"

The member opposite has suggested that we have not issued any fire smart funding for this year. That is quite simply, Mr. Speaker, because in the 17 days before we took office, the NDP government spent $2.5 million on CDF. No fire smart applications have been called for this year, because the members opposite spent all the money. It's quite simple.

We said we would spend taxpayers' money wisely, and the member opposite from the Yukon Party suggested that if we were doing that, we would renegotiate Connect Yukon. Well, maybe the member opposite has forgotten, but Yukoners haven't forgotten that it was his party that invoked Taga Ku on Yukoners and the expense to Yukoners of that folly - talking about renegotiating agreements.

The previous government, Mr. Speaker, used these funds as political slush. The frenzy of spending in the run-up to the election was disgusting - $2.5 million in 17 days. When this government took office, the money for the year had largely been spent. Yukoners have demonstrated that their votes can't be bought. People of Haines Junction remember the member opposite walking around town, trying to figure out how to spend the CDF money.

The funds have some good features; we have said that. They need better management, so we are taking the time to get things right. Public servants and the people who administer the funds have come forward with some very good suggestions already. We will improve upon them. The public will be consulted. I look forward to working with the members opposite of this House ...

Speaker: Order please. The Premier has one minute to conclude.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:... to bring forward concrete, well-thought-out proposals to fix these tainted funds. Thank you.

Speaker: This then brings us to Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Mr. Keenan:Mr. Speaker, yesterday the government caucus refused an opportunity to debate a motion on the safety of children in care. They chose, rather, to debate - and this is in the minister's own words - a housekeeping motion to preserve the Liberal caucus and the Liberal staff for quality time at home. They are doing this while children in care suffer.

On Monday, the minister repeatedly answered all questions regarding group homes by saying that the move to take over provision of services at 16 Klondike was an operational decision. The minister insisted that the decision was made by the department officials at Health and Social Services and that the safety of the staff and the children was a primary consideration.

I would like to ask the minister: what instructions has he now given his department to address these unspecified safety problems and how quickly will they be resolved?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Thank you for that question. As I mentioned earlier, the reason for the cancellation of the contract was for the safety of both children and staff. That is always the underlying factor when anything like this is taken into consideration. This is a very, very fragile situation, and it is one that is not taken lightly.

The director of family and children's services, as well as the Assistant Deputy Minister of Social Services, have been revising plans on how the department is dealing with residential services. And the idea, Mr. Speaker, the goals of the revision are to ensure that we follow the process of safety and security for all. The staff has been researching and has found that we must do a better job, Mr. Speaker. And if we cannot, then we must follow those steps.

Mr. Keenan: Well, Mr. Speaker, I've got to thank the member opposite for a non-answer and I've got to also thank him for a lot of political rhetoric. Again the member opposite has not answered the question.

The last time that we raised this issue the minister also said that the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board report was another reason that they should be concerned about the safety of these children and the staff. If there had been another way to address these issues, he said, they would have done it another way. But at the same time he could not explain what this operational decision might again cost Yukon taxpayers. Is the minister now prepared to tell this House how much extra it will cost his department to address the safety issues to which he has referred in this House?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Yes, we know that these costs will be more. When the Gibbs report was completed back in 1998, there were 49 recommendations, and two of them were not addressed by the government of yesterday. That's the members sitting on the other side, Mr. Speaker. And one of them was on salaries for employees. And Mr. Speaker, the problem that we have, of course, is that in order to attract and maintain good staff, you have to pay good money for it. The current costs will be approximately $10,000 more a month in order to maintain the program under our jurisdiction.

Mr. Keenan: Again, Mr. Speaker, I must point out that the question was not answered, that the member again gives political rhetoric, blaming others.

Mr. Speaker, the Yukon deserves leadership and I'd appreciate it if, at some time, that could be provided.

Our first concern - and we certainly hope that the minister shares it - is for all the children who are in government care. We regularly get calls from foster children; we get them from the teachers. They're heart-sick, as we are, because they are doing their very best to deal with very troubled children. But what's happening? They can't even get the information that they need from Social Services. They cannot get the information.

We advised the minister that there are young people in the system who have had as many as 43 separate placements. Forty-three, Mr. Speaker. And with all these concerns, we asked the minister to call for a public inquiry into the Yukon Territory's treatment of children in care.

Will the minister now do the right thing and initiative a comprehensive and independent and very public inquiry into the Yukon's child welfare system? Will the minister do that?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: Thank you once again for the question.

Mr. Speaker, the question is a very serious one and it's one that concerns us as a government. It's unfortunate that the government of yesterday was not as concerned about this same issue when they were in government. They were there for three and a half years, and what we did get was one study, which eventually ended up with the government of today having to cancel a contract. So obviously, their monitoring and their mentoring weren't very secure.

As I mentioned earlier, the staff of family services branch has been researching this area. They have been discussing it extensively with other jurisdictions in Canada, and they are having similar problems, Mr. Speaker, with child welfare. It seems like child welfare has become a destination for many troubled teenagers.

And to cast the blame for these problems solely on the government would be very narrow. We have a responsibility, Mr. Speaker, under the act, but communities have a responsibility, and the members opposite have responsibilities in ensuring that we follow proper procedure.

The problem is a community problem.

Speaker: Order please. Would the minister please conclude his answer.

Hon. Mr. Roberts: The department staff are completely aware of this. We are working and trying to build for the future.

Question re: Aeromax Industries Inc., aircraft manufacturing

Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, recently there has been a great buzz in the Yukon about the possible establishment of an aircraft manufacturing plant by a company from the State of Washington. Apparently, the company goes by the name of Aeromax International and is situated in Bothell, Washington. Now, the Premier has stated in this Legislature that she has spoken with company officials, as well as the company's local representative. Can the minister advise the House about what steps she or her officials have taken to determine the viability of this project or the company behind it?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: I thank the member opposite for the question. Yesterday, I indicated to the member opposite that I would provide copies of correspondence that I had signed with regard to this specific proposal. I can advise the member opposite that this will be provided to him and to the leader of the third party.

Basically, the letter to Mr. Patrick Palmer of Aeromax in Bothell, Washington states that, "We appreciate your expression of interest in the development of a manufacturing plant in Yukon, and we welcome an exploratory visit from Aeromax officials." That occurred in June, as I stated yesterday to the member opposite. The current status is that officials from Aeromax are to provide Economic Development with more information about their proposal and more information about themselves as a company prior to the government evaluating it. We are waiting for information.

Mr. Fentie: Well, Mr. Speaker, we in the opposition have been doing some research ourselves. Aeromax International Limited is not listed in Bothell, Washington's phone book. Its supposed corporate office does not even have a telephone. Aeromax International Limited does not have a City of Bothell business licence. It is also not a member of Bothell's Chamber of Commerce.

We have also contacted a long-established company in California with an almost identical name. That company's CEO has been inundated with calls from Yukoners, including the City of Whitehorse, all of whom are trying to locate this supposed aircraft manufacturing company, Aeromax International.

The Premier has just stated that she has corresponded with Aeromax. Can the Premier enlighten us as to how communities like Watson Lake, Haines Junction and anybody else interested can make contact with this company?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: What the member opposite has done, prior to asking his question, is that he has raised specific questions about a specific company on the floor of this Legislature. I endeavoured to communicate to the member opposite that we, in the Department of Economic Development, and I, as minister, were asking some very clear questions and were waiting for some more information before we went any further. We are waiting for an actual concrete proposal. We are waiting for information about the company. That is information that has not yet been provided. We have had one preliminary meeting with this company. We have said that if they want further interest or support from the Government of Yukon, we need a whole lot of questions answered.

We are waiting for that information. We are doing what government should do, which is their homework, before proceeding any further. That's what we're doing.

Mr. Fentie: Well, I would like to point out that the meeting was back in June, so they're taking a long time to do homework.

I'm sure that the Premier is aware that both the City of Whitehorse and the Faro Sustainable Development Corporation have already signed separate memorandums of understanding with this company - letters of intent, Mr. Speaker.

In the case of the Whitehorse memorandum, the company called itself Aeromax International. In the case of Faro, it called itself Aeromax Yukon Limited. Mr. Speaker, the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce and the Yukon Chamber of Commerce both told us that they have no listing for either Aeromax Yukon or Aeromax International, neither does the Yukon government's own corporate registry.

Yukoners want to know: is the Premier chasing a phantom here, or does she have some concrete information that she can provide about what is starting to seem more and more like another partisan Liberal backroom deal?

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Mr. Speaker, I have told the member opposite on no less than five occasions that the ball was in the company's court. We did as we would do with any person interested in doing business in the Yukon. We sat down and heard from them. Then we said to them, "You come back to us with more information." They have not done that. They haven't done that.

As a result, nothing has happened - N-O-T-H-I-N-G, nothing.

If the City of Whitehorse and Faro -

Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible)

Speaker: Order please. I can't hear the Premier's response.

Hon. Ms. Duncan: Nothing has happened with this company - nothing. If they choose to work with the community of Faro and the City of Whitehorse, and those two legally entitled entities want to enter into this, the Department of Economic Development is working with them and will provide whatever support is required. But no official from our department has recommended the signing of anything. We are waiting for information. This government does its homework.

Question re: Group homes, staffing and quality of care

Mr. Jenkins: Nothing - it sounds like the word to sum up the economic stimulation that this Liberal government is providing to the Yukon these days.

I have a question today for the Minister of Health and Social Services. Yesterday in this House, I presented a motion of urgent and pressing necessity, calling upon the government to create an independent inquiry, pursuant to the Public Inquiries Act, for the purpose of examining the quality of care being provided to high-risk children and youth in government and private sector group homes in Whitehorse.

Unfortunately, the minister and his Liberal colleagues denied me the unanimous consent to proceed with my motion, which demonstrates that this Liberal government is prepared to put partisan politics ahead of the well-being of children in Yukon, which is very unfortunate.

In the mail today, I received a bulletin from the Public Service Commission, advertising 17 positions for residential care workers: 13 part-time positions, and four part-time positions, at a cost of approximately $746,000. It's almost three-quarters of a million dollars.

Would the minister confirm that these positions are for the staffing at 16 Klondike group home?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: These positions are being advertised, as the member opposite has said, for the purpose of staffing group homes, Mr. Speaker - not specifically the one that is being referred to here, but that will be one of them that will be staffed by this call for people to respond for employment.

Mr. Jenkins: It sounds like the government is going to be taking over all the group homes one by one. Now, one of the immediate impacts of the government taking over a service previously provided by the private sector is that the costs go up. I know of situations where children in government care today are costing a half-million dollars for one child.

In view of these costs, can the minister assure this House that children in government care will be receiving, and are receiving, better care than they have been receiving in the private sector group homes? Can the minister provide that assurance?

Hon. Mr. Roberts: On one part, the member opposite talks about spending too much money and then talks about not spending enough. So I guess it's that same thing where, what is right? Do we spend enough? Do we not spend enough? I would hope that we spend what is necessary to ensure the safety and security of all children. That is our approach.

Mr. Jenkins: What I'm saying is we are charged as a government with the responsibility to look after these children. Now, some of it's done in the private sector; some of it's done in the government sector. Now the minister can't give assurances because he doesn't know that the government sector is providing better levels of service than the private sector. And the only way he can find out is to create an independent public inquiry, which I now call upon him to do. Will he call that public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act for the purpose of examining the quality of care being provided to high-risk children and youth in government and private sector group homes in Whitehorse? Will the minister do that? That's the only way to provide some certainty.

Hon. Mr. Roberts: People on this side have some difficulty with the opposition in that it's either too much money, not enough money; too many reviews, now they want some more reviews. I don't think they know where they're at. They sound like they're all good Liberals. They know we should all basically do what we have to do. There we are. I guess my problem would be that we really don't want them anyway, so we'll have to carry on with the team we have.

Children are very important in our lives and in the lives of the community. And remember, the problem that we have is that the members opposite are using children for political gain. That's what they're doing, Mr. Speaker. We are doing what is best for children. We do not take decisions lightly when we have to take over contracts. We do not do it at the drop of a pin. If the members opposite, when they were government, felt that they were responding to all these issues, then they should have been doing what they had to do. They did nothing, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: Order please. Will the minister please conclude his answer.

Hon. Mr. Roberts: The question is, we are working hard at trying to come up with solutions that are going to work for children. And our department is working very hard at doing that.

Question re: Whistle-blower legislation

Mr. Fentie:My question is for the minister responsible for the Public Service Commission. We have heard many, many times in this House, the Liberals stand and say, "We are a government that does what it says it will do." One of the Liberals' biggest commitments in the campaign to Yukoners, especially as it relates to public servants, was that they would bring forward whistle-blower legislation. Can the minister tell us today what instructions he has given the Department of Justice to begin drafting this legislation?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:We are still in discussion with Executive Council Office and the public service in designing that type of legislation. As the member opposite is certainly aware, it certainly is a delicate issue. As politicos, we have to be very cognizant of the fact that the Public Service Commission is at arm's length. So we are working, proceeding toward that, and when I do have some more information, I will be more than willing to share it with the member opposite.

Mr. Fentie: Well, we on this side of the House, the public servants and Yukoners are becoming concerned. There are too many examples of this Liberal government deviating from their commitments, whether it be the Member for Whitehorse Centre's commitment in the campaign of retracting the three-quarters of a million bucks to Argus, whether it be the multi-level care facility in Watson Lake, the bus in Old Crow - there are just too many examples. Will the minister tell this House when he believes he will bring forward whistle-blower legislation?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the member opposite, I would love dearly to provide a definitive date when we would be bringing that forward, but, then again, there is a good possibility it could be in the spring.

I will be providing a ministerial statement in this session toward the whistle-blower legislation; but, again, I remind the members opposite - and they are certainly aware of the difficulties in this whole issue - that it is very, very sensitive. Again, I will let him know that I am working with the Public Service Commissioner, as am I involving the Executive Council Office on this issue.

Mr. Fentie: In the first place, Mr. Speaker, it was the Liberals who committed to this legislation. Now we have the minister saying this is very delicate, a very serious matter. It is sounding more and more like deviation. There are rumblings already, rumblings of political interference and problems in the public service.

I ask the minister: will he commit here today to bring forward whistle-blower legislation so that the public servants in this territory can work in a comfortable environment by the spring sitting? Yes or no?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, there is obviously no adequate answer for those who choose not to hear.

I, as respectfully as I possibly could, indicated to the member opposite that we will be moving on this. I have given him as up-to-date information as I possibly can, but he chooses not to hear that. I did indicate that, in this session, I would be making a ministerial statement on that, that I will be continuing to pursue, with the Public Service Commissioner, moving in that direction. And, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, that's as honest as I can be at this time.

Question re: Beringia Interpretive Centre, operation of gift shop

Mr. McRobb: I have a question for the Minister of Tourism.

As the minister is aware, earlier this year it became necessary for the heritage branch to make some new arrangements for the operation of the gift shop at the Beringia Interpretive Centre.

Can the minister provide us with an update on that matter? Has the new concession operator been identified?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, no.

Mr. McRobb: It's no secret that the previous proprietor of the gift shop has gone on to endeavours as the Member for Whitehorse Centre. In fact, the member's disclosure statement, filed in the Clerk's office, confirms that his spouse, Jeannette McLarnon, became the sole proprietor of his business, Mike's North, on the day after the election in April.

Can the minister tell us if any personnel from the heritage branch were involved in any direct discussions or negotiations with the Member for Whitehorse Centre after April 18?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that I have deliberately tried to distance myself from, because it is an operational discussion. It's not a policy issue. I don't meddle in the day-to-day workings of my department. I know that previous governments have done that; we don't.

What I can say to the member opposite is that, as this is a very important issue to him, I will get him a written response on it as soon as possible, so that we all have up-to-date information for him.

Thank you.

Mr. McRobb: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, it would appear somewhat unusual - possibly even unorthodox - for the member to be holding discussions on the concession contract after divesting himself of the business, as his disclosure statement indicates.

Can the minister tell us who initiated discussions between the member and the heritage branch staff? Was it the member or did it initiate from within the department?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I do not carry out the business of every single person within my department. I do not interfere with the workings of my department on a daily basis. I have never done that. I know that the people who were in government previous to us made a great show of doing that regularly with the public service.

What I have promised the member opposite is that we will provide a written report on this issue. I know it's important to the member opposite, and I will get a written report to the member opposite on that very issue.

Question re: Beringia Interpretive Centre, operation of gift shop

Mr. McRobb: Mr. Speaker, I didn't ask if the minister was meddling, and I wish she would answer the questions because it takes them a long time to respond in writing - sometimes two to three months - and we're not prepared to wait that long. That's why we're asking questions today.

At the time these discussions began, the Member for Whitehorse Centre was going around town, taking every opportunity to tell people - even within the department - that he was going to be the new Minister of Tourism. Now, it's not difficult to imagine that government employees might have reason to feel uncomfortable, or even intimidated, conducting contract negotiations with an elected member, who might soon become their political boss. Does the minister not agree with that?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: No.

Mr. McRobb: I just want to get this point clear, Mr. Speaker. Does the minister think it is appropriate for an elected official, who has convinced himself that he is about to be made a Cabinet minister, to conduct contract negotiations with employees of the department he might be named to head?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: No.

Mr. McRobb: We're only beginning to scratch the surface on this issue, Mr. Speaker. So, I'd like to ask the minister this: when did she become aware of these discussions, and what action did she take to resolve an obviously unacceptable situation?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I will repeat again to the member opposite that I did not interfere with this process. I deliberately did not interfere with this process. I do not interfere with the natural processes that occur within my departments - any one of them. That is not what I do.

And the member opposite wonders what I do do as a minister - what I should be doing - my job, which is to bring forward government policy and to make sure that my departments work well. But I do not interfere with the day-to-day workings within my departments, and I will provide a written response to the member opposite about his original question. And there isn't any more that I can do, Mr. Speaker.

Question re: Grey Mountain Primary School, relocation of French immersion

Mr. Fairclough: There has been a lot of talk in this Legislature about schools. And the NDP government had followed a process that was laid out by the public in having school council chairs meet and put together priority lists. The Old Crow school and Ross River school got built, and the Mayo school was budgeted for. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Education confirm the plans are underway to move the French-immersion programs from the Whitehorse Elementary School to a rebuilt Grey Mountain Primary School?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: There are ongoing discussions within the department on enrolment in the Whitehorse schools The department has been charged with that responsibility. I have not been apprised, nor have I asked for any specific information until that process is complete.

Mr. Fairclough: It appears the government has already made up their mind and they're just talking about it within their department. The MLA for Whitehorse Centre has been heard to say at social functions that the Liberal government's plans to relocate the French programs at Grey Mountain Primary School and establish a downtown campus for Yukon College at Whitehorse Elementary School. Would the minister inform the House what consultation has taken place with parents, with school councils and with schools, and what programs are involved?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: As I had just indicated in the answer previous, this is a process that we're looking at. We're looking at the whole enrolment and capacity in Whitehorse schools.

The member opposite has indicated that it's under review, and he's absolutely right, because we don't bulldoze ahead; we don't make promises that we can't keep; we don't commit to things that are unreasonable without following through on a review, on caucus, until we can make sound, reasonable decisions, Mr. Speaker. That is the Liberal way, and that's how we'll govern the territory.

Mr. Fairclough: Well, the Liberal way, Mr. Speaker, is without consultation.

The MLA riding reports, by both the Members for Riverdale South and Riverdale North, provide an update on the Grey Mountain School, "the little school that could". The update says that the Liberal commitment to build a new school stands.

Mr. Speaker, would the minister now admit that the commitment to Grey Mountain School was part of a political agenda and does not reflect the concerns of parents or the priorities of the department or the chairs of schools councils?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, I'm not quite sure of the source of information provided by the interim leader of the official opposition in that question. I'm sure that parents are very concerned with respect to Grey Mountain School. That was very, very evidence during the election, and he knows that.

The enrolment and capacity in the Whitehorse school, yes, is a review, and the members of the previous government are certainly aware that there are systems and changes that have to be reviewed and looked into. The member opposite is also alluding to the fact that we don't consult, that we don't provide information. That is quite wrong. We will be conducting information sessions and consultation on the enrolment and capacity in Whitehorse schools.

Speaker: The time for Question Period has now elapsed.

Question of privilege

Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege pursuant to Standing Order 7(1).

Mr. Speaker, my question of privilege pertains to comments made in this House yesterday by the Minister of Education, as reported on page 151 on Hansard. The specific comments read, "Chief Hager insisted that the conversation include the interim leader of the official opposition. Immediately upon hearing that request, we sent a request down to find him. He refused to come up." There was a lot of emphasis put on that.

First of all, I give thumbs up to Chief Hager for involving his MLA in important issues pertaining to his community. But, Mr. Speaker, I would like to give my version of the events that took place.

It's true, the minister did send a person down to call me up to a meeting, but, Mr. Speaker, the bells were already going for the Legislature to start. It was only a few minutes, and I did not refuse to come up and meet with the ministers opposite. What I said was that, after the Question Period, I will be available to meet with them.

Mr. Speaker, my duties are to this House, and I felt that his comments were causing embarrassment, and it really questions my credibility. And Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time that minister has made that type of comment to me. I feel the minister is wrong, Mr. Speaker, and I'm asking the Minister of Education to withdraw his remarks and to apologize for them.

Hon. Mr. Eftoda: Mr. Speaker, what I related yesterday in the House was exactly what happened. I do realize that the circumstances that were evolving were rushed and hurried, and we were following a process that we had committed to the members opposite that we would follow, by way of providing information as it occurred.

As we got the information, I was immediately in touch with the folks up in Mayo, which I had, also, followed through with at the suggestion of the interim leader of the official opposition - getting a hold of Chief Hager, not the deputy chief, but Chief Hager. We managed to get hold of Chief Hager. I was on a conference call with two folks up in Mayo, as well as Chief Hager. It was Chief Hager who explicitly said that he wanted his MLA present.

And when we heard that - not a problem. We sent a message down to advise his MLA from Mayo-Tatchun to come up and listen to the message that we were giving to Chief Hagar. At the same time, Chief Hager wanted him to hear the message we were giving. We did realize that the hour was getting late with respect to coming to the House. We still proceeded, because of the urgency of the situation. The members chastised me yesterday for giving a ministerial statement on it, which expressed my concerns and passed information on to the residents of Mayo. Oh, that was not the proper thing to do.

We did get a hold of Chief Hager. His instruction - and I am sure that the Minister of Government Services will verify it, as will others in the room - was that Chief Hager did not want to discuss the issue until his MLA was there. We tried to get him up there so that we could provide the information at the same time. The message came back, "We will wait until after Question Period." Well, we were honouring the request of Chief Hager, and we felt it important enough to do it then, regardless if the bells were ringing. It was at his request, specifically, that we sent the message down.

So that was how it happened. We had to put Chief Hager on hold. He came over here and sat in the gallery. We then followed through. I sent messages across the House and to Chief Hager to meet at the earliest possible time. We did not violate the member opposite's privilege. I provided the facts as I knew them. He refused to come upstairs to talk with the chief, regardless of what was happening in the Chamber here, because we felt the message was important. We wanted to provide information as quickly, as expediently as possible, and it was at Chief Hager's request that we followed through on that.

Speaker's statement

Speaker: Order please. Order.

Given what I have just heard, I'll take the comments under advisement, and I'll provide the House with a written ruling tomorrow.

We will now proceed to Orders of the Day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Clerk: Motion No. 21, standing in the name of Mr. Fentie.

Speaker: It is moved by the Member for Watson Lake

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) Yukon people who want to work and need to work face severe hardships this winter because of the failure of the Liberal government to address the territory's economic situation in a decisive and responsible manner;

(2)the outward migration of Yukoners to other parts of Canada to seek employment has increased dramatically since this Liberal government took office;

(3) the Yukon Liberal government has contributed directly to this situation through such ill-advised decisions as postponing the construction of a new school in Mayo, and failing to take action to solve the crisis in the Yukon forestry sector;

(4) this government has further aggravated the situation by abandoning programs such as the Community Development Fund, Fire Smart, the Tourism Marketing Fund, and the Trade and Investment Fund, which were creating jobs in communities throughout the territory;

(5) the throne speech delivered at the opening of this sitting failed to provide any clear economic leadership or sense of direction to improve the territory's employment and business climate;

(6) the Auditor General's report will confirm that this government entered the current fiscal year with an accumulated surplus of more than $55 million; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon government, as a matter of urgent priority, to convene an all-party committee to examine practical measures it can take to provide jobs for Yukon people this winter.

Mr. Fentie: Let me begin by stating to this House that, if today is going to be wasted, it will be due to the Liberals, the members opposite.

This matter is a crisis matter. It is an emergency situation. Our economy in the territory is in a deplorable state, and it has worsened, to a great degree, under this Liberal government. It has worsened for a number of reasons, many of which I will try to point out today, during this debate.

Mr. Speaker, to be able, as the Liberals have claimed, to rebuild an economy - and really, the commitment should be to continue to diversify the Yukon's economy - one would have to have a plan. If a carpenter is going to build a house, he will have the floor plan, the measurements, the height and thickness of the walls, and the pitch of the roof - all those things before he commences constructing the house. This government, upon taking office April 17, has willy-nilly proceeded headlong into an economic morass in this territory, because they have no plan.

We have waited, through two throne speeches, for the plan and the direction. Where are we going? Where is the blueprint? We have yet to see it. Yet, they make claims that they are creating jobs and rebuilding the economy. It is not so. That is simply not the case. In fact, the reality is that they are dismantling the economy, brick by brick, program by program, and initiative by initiative in sectors where there were jobs and benefits and growth taking place. They ensured that that was stopped.

They are dismantling this economy at their peril, unfortunately, in their zest to put their own partisan, political spin on what they deliver in this territory during their short reign, I'm sure. They are sacrificing Yukoners; they are sacrificing Yukon workers, Yukon families, Yukon children, Yukon companies. They are sacrificing our ability to attract investment in the territory, because they have created such an uncertain climate that people are now seriously opposed to investing in this territory.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier has stood on her feet in this Legislature and made a claim based on statistics that the unemployment rate is lower under the Liberal reign. But to be able to stand in this House and use statistics to argue your case, one must understand how to read statistics, how to compare the data and one must always compare apples to apples, oranges to oranges. The facts and the statistics are, when properly critiqued and compared, that if we took the time frame of September 1999 to September 2000, the unemployment in this territory has increased since September 1999 to September 2000 by 1.5 percent. The workforce has shrunk by 500. Now, Mr. Speaker, we are about to receive new statistics which will now include the fact that a large portion of Yukoners, who were employed in the service sector because of the tourism industry for 90 days of the summer months, are now going to be unemployed.

There are no more tourists, so that figure is sure to increase. The Premier mistakenly has tried to make the case that, under their government, they have lowered unemployment when, in fact, the Liberals have increased unemployment - increased it.

It's also important to note, when we look at the statistics, that when 500 people leave the workforce, that means, in all likelihood, that those 500 people have left the Yukon. Now, I'm sure we can all agree that no matter what economic engine we have in this territory, the fuel that allows that engine to run is cashflow. Without it, the engine stops. With no cashflow, that economic engine ceases to operate and is no longer contributing to our economy.

Let's just do some quick math, Mr. Speaker. If 500 people have left the workforce in this territory, and they averaged $40,000 a year, if they were working in this territory, what does that equate to - $20 million annually in cashflow? This is a serious, serious matter. We in the official opposition bring forward this motion today because it is a crisis situation.

Now, the Liberal government has made much, time and time again, of wanting to work cooperatively, of even asking this side of the House to work cooperatively. I submit, Mr. Speaker, to you and to this Legislature that, if that were the case, one of those members would stand immediately on a point of order and inform this House that they wished to seek unanimous consent to move this motion to a vote and pass it and form a committee immediately so that we, collectively, can address a matter of pressing and urgent need.

Let there be no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that this is going to be one of the toughest winters this territory and its people have faced in a long, long time. All through this sitting, we are witnessing how the Liberals are shutting down economic engines.

We'll begin today, Mr. Speaker, with one of those engines, and it is forestry. Now, no matter what the members opposite may think, the facts are very clear. Forestry was one of the few resource-based industries that, at this time, here in this territory, was an industry that we could definitely - definitely - have running.

The Premier has made excuses about prices. Well, the Premier should know - because it is her job to know as Minister of Economic Development - that lumber prices rise and fall on an annual basis. It is a fact of life.

There was a vibrant, running forest sector in the southeast Yukon. Mr. Speaker, that forest sector tried - through private investment and through some very minimal assistance from the previous government in training dollars - to operate under the existing regulatory regime.

The federal government simply does not respond to Yukon needs, no matter what area, whether it be in mining, whether it be in forestry - and I'm sure we're going to run into a number of road blocks in oil and gas, thanks to our federal government - whether it be in the land claims process, whether it be in devolution, or whether it be in health care. No matter what, the federal government does not respond to the needs and desires of the Yukon Territory.

Therefore, it's important - vital - that a Yukon government, to the best of its mental and physical capacity, represents and protects Yukoners' interests in all matters that have a connection to the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at forestry, there was absolutely no need for that industry to shut down. The simple matter is that access to timber was the key element. Now, the Premier has also used the excuse that, when the corporation came forward - not for taxpayers' dollars, for private sector dollars, the immigrant investor fund. When the corporation comes forward, the Premier also makes the excuse that there was no business case. Well, there are a number of problems with that particular statement by the Premier. In the first case, there is no business case without stable access to timber. Therefore, the company, in trying to help a situation in a rural community in this territory, to keep people at work, to keep providing benefit to the economy in this territory, said, "All right, you, the Liberal government, are now going to delay the process that would result in stable access to timber, therefore provide bridge financing, and we will try and exist and survive under this delay, but you must help. You, the territorial government, the Liberals, must come forward, and you must help."

There were many other options open to the Premier in this regard, but in that cold-hearted manner that this Liberal government is showing time and time again, the Premier and this government turned their backs on not only an industry, a corporation, which had provided millions of private sector investment in this territory; it turned its back on a community and its people and left them out in the cold for no reason, Mr. Speaker - absolutely no reason than that of politics. The community of Watson Lake resoundingly defeated the Liberal candidate, and Watson Lake was immediately punished.

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out the erroneous approach that the Premier has taken to a business case. Firstly, I stated that a business case, in forestry, means that there first must be stable access to timber. But let's look at what was really happening. The forest sector in the southeast Yukon was one step away from either the Yukon government assisting with bridge financing or achieving stable access to timber, to receiving upwards of $16 million more of private sector investment. This would have resulted in cogeneration, kiln-dried lumber, finger-jointing, furniture blanks, greenhousing, the growing of our own seed, silviculture, and jobs in the neighbourhood of 300 to 400. In fact, the business case in the southeast Yukon in the forest sector was so good that a world-renowned cogeneration firm - Seaman's Company - was willing to participate by putting money on the table. Investment firms out of Calgary had money on the table. The Premier did not even bother to review - as this Liberal government seems to always want to do - those facts.

Not only that - we also had the ability to burn domestic garbage. And, with cogeneration being developed from residual wood out of the manufacturing side of this industry, it shut down diesel-produced electricity. Has the Premier not heard of global warming and the commitments of this country to reduce emissions? I find it astounding that with all the information that was available to her and with all that just one step ahead, this Premier turned her back on it and shut it down.

That is simply the sign of a Minister of Economic Development who has no plan, no vision, no view - no nothing.

Now, Mr. Speaker, there's much more. But I want to point out that, no matter what happens in the forest sector, the people of Watson Lake and the southeast Yukon will remember that day, when this Liberal government turned its back on them and walked away. And that is going to result in a very, very depressing and devastating time for that community. Not only are we in a situation where our unemployment rate in the southeast Yukon is skyrocketing and may reach well over 20 percent - thanks to this Liberal government - this community has faced already, and continues to face, an exodus of people, businesses and equipment. They are going elsewhere to work.

As I speak here today, trucks are heading south to Grande Prairie, Alberta to haul logs - leaving home to go to another region in another jurisdiction, so that they can make a living and pay their bills, when we are surrounded by a resource - hundreds and hundreds of square kilometres of that resource. This government, under the leadership of this Premier and this minister, did nothing - did not lift a finger. That in itself is a tragedy. It did not have to take place.

The Premier also didn't recognize the fact that the First Nation, the Kaska, had well in excess of half a million dollars of their hard-earned money invested in this industry. Yet, the Premier wants to develop good, cooperative relationships with the First Nations? She turned her back on the Kaska people also.

Mr. Speaker, there is much more, when we look at the situation that is the direct result of this Premier's and this government's inaction.

Unfortunately, and contrary to the commitment that the Liberals made in an election campaign to bring certainty to this territory, they have done a great deal to add to uncertainty, because now investment dollars, even in the forestry sector, have dried up.

So, let's look at the big picture. Over the years - and the Liberals seem to miss this point - we have had mining. Mining has been shutting down in the Yukon Territory for almost 15 years. Canada as a nation is losing its share of investment dollars in mining exploration, development and production. That is a fact. So, we have lost, because of the uncertain climate in this territory, investment dollars in mining also.

It has got nothing to do with what political power or what political party is in power. It has got to do with two very important facts. First off, there is the federal government's virtually ridiculous approach to allowing industry to permit, to develop and to operate. There seems to be absolutely no consistent basis on how the federal government applies any type of regulation, whether it be land use or any other matter. And it's a constant problem for the mining industry, as it is for the forest industry, and as it is, I'm sure, going to be for the oil and gas industry.

The federal government does not respond to Yukon needs. It never has and it probably never will.

Now we have a government across the floor that has a special relationship - or so they claim. Where were they when the federal government - who is responsible for managing our forests in this territory - shut down the industry, because they couldn't even get the industry access to timber? And I'll point out how ludicrous this is. Three hundred miles from the community of Watson Lake, there's another community in British Columbia that harvests one million cubic metres of wood a year.

Granted, they have a rail head; granted, they have oil and gas; but also, Mr. Speaker, because of the certainty of access and the positive approach to allowing development, there is in excess of $500,000,000 invested in that community of 7,000 people - 300 miles from the Yukon border and the community of Watson Lake.

This year, under this government's watch and the federal government's management, we couldn't even get 60,000 metres of a summer cut happening. What is wrong with this picture? It's ridiculous. That is why this special relationship that the members opposite claim to have seems to not be working. Or is it the fact that the Liberals across the floor are just simply not going to bother to criticize, oppose, fight, or do anything in terms of representing and protecting our interests in this territory when it comes to the federal Liberal government? We would like to know.

We, on the other hand, when in government, did take on the federal government, and we did make things happen. Let's look at some of those facts, Mr. Speaker. While under our watch, forestry in the southeast Yukon, and indeed in the Yukon itself, was the recipient - that sector, that economic engine was the recipient - of millions of dollars of private sector investment. We, under our watch, reduced a cut that many people in this territory thought was too high by close to 100,000 cubic metres. We, under our watch, reduced raw-log export - jobs and benefits streaming out of this territory - to a mere trickle. And we, under our watch, increased the manufacture of a product from our forest sector by some 400 percent. That, Mr. Speaker, is a government that takes action. That, Mr. Speaker, is a government that protects and represents Yukon's interests.

Immediately upon taking office, that situation changed. One can only conclude that there was only one reason why that happened: the members opposite were playing politics - playing politics with the future of the Yukon people. I find that totally disgusting.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier has made much about mining, and she has said, "Look at all we have done. We have, for example, Copper Ridge Exploration Inc. writing this wonderful letter that shows - now that we know where the goalposts are, I emphasize, even though we are still under federal management and have this possible five-year timeline just to get a permit - that we, the Liberal government, are doing great, signed by Mr. Gerald G. Carlson."

Well, here is a letter from Copper Ridge Exploration Inc. It was written to the Yukon Chamber of Mines, signed by Mr. Carlson. In the relevant passage - I want to quote something, and this is under our government's watch and Minister Harding's reign as mines minister in this territory. He writes, "I believe you have one of the better mines ministers in Canada, who is doing a reasonably good job of working for the interests of the exploration and mining communities." He is pushing hard for a Manitoba-style system of land use planning and exploration incentives. The Manitoba program has worked, and exploration in that province is alive and well. The Premier, if she is ever to be successful as a Minister of Economic Development, is going to understand what stock hype in the mining sector is all about.

So, the same company was as supportive of the last government as it is of this government. The fundamental problem here is that there is still no mining, whether it be the largest ore body in the world or not.

The facts are that we have any number of mines in this territory already permitted, with mills in place, infrastructure in place, roads in place, distribution infrastructure and equipment in place. They're all sitting rusting. Why is that? Well, when it comes to mines that are already there, ready to go into production, it's because there's no profit. And when it comes to exploration and the development of new mines, there are two things: no profit and the red tape that the federal government has placed on us in this territory, because they don't care.

Now, we all believe that one of the ways to solve that problem is devolution, but that, too, is now delayed. So it comes back to the point of this motion.

Mr. Speaker, we need to create economic development and jobs and benefit for Yukoners now, not years down the road. Who is going to be left? It has to happen today. I don't dispute focusing on developing oil and gas and focusing on trying to get mining back up and running, and improving the situation or forestry or anything else, but we must recognize that, when it comes to our economy, each one of those things is only an individual economic engine. There's still much more, and we must address that "much more" now, here today.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier, recently on the radio when bringing forward this budget - in which, by the way, the lion's share of expenditures, in my preliminary view, is all operation and maintenance, with very little in job creation - the Premier states, "Are there going to be winter works monies available for Yukoners this winter?" She says no, and then states, "Are there Yukoners working?"

"Yes, there are." Well, we agree - there are Yukoners working, but a great number of those Yukoners are in government jobs, or in businesses that have spinoff benefits because of government jobs. What about the rest of Yukoners who aren't working? It's this government's duty and responsibility to ensure - to ensure - that they can go to work, earn a living and feed their families, especially when this government is sitting with literally millions of dollars in its coffers. I can only wonder what they're going to do with this money. And the signals that are starting to come forward are very concerning.

Mr. Speaker, the hardships to be faced in this territory because of this economic situation and because of the inaction of this government are also going to increase problems socially. The social and economic situation in this territory are entwined. For all those people who can't work, it's despair. Social problems become ever increasing. That translates into ever-increasing costs in health care and other issues, such as justice. The list goes on and on and on. This government is creating a domino effect that is going to make the situation even worse - much worse than they may even be able to handle.

Mr. Speaker, that is why this motion is on this floor today. Unlike the members opposite, who thought that one of the most important and pressing things we should do in this government for the people of this territory is change the sitting hours of this Legislature, I couldn't find a Yukoner, to save my soul, who was even interested in changing the sitting hours.

Because the member asked me why this side of the House went on about it for two days. It is because we pointed out that this government across the floor is wrong in what they're doing. There was a vehicle in place to deal with those matters. There was a vehicle in place to change sitting hours if we so desired. The Liberal government chose to neuter that committee and make it useless. It is no more. And now, as long as this government's in power, anything that we change in this Legislative Assembly, when it comes to the rules, procedures and privileges, is going to have to be done on the floor of this Legislature. That's a ridiculous approach to take when we have all the problems that we are about to face in this territory - socially and economically.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education said that we chose it. Now, I don't know how else we can get this through to them. We did not bring forward the motion. It was the Liberals who brought forward that motion, not us.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Now we've got the Minister of Community and Transportation Services trumpeting away that we wouldn't come to the meetings. The documents speak for themselves. We did come to the meeting; we did agree.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Now the Minister of Education says we're repeating it. Well, we're repeating it because it doesn't get through to that side of the House how serious the situation in this territory really is. I can't figure out where they think they're taking us.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Here we have the prize of the fleet over there, the Minister of Education saying, "dealing with our legacy". I've just pointed out, based on the facts, that unemployment has increased under that government. And in all likelihood, social problems are going to increase. We've got group homes now under siege. We have schools and children in unhealthy, unsafe conditions being completely ignored.

The number of excuses that we've heard from the Liberals when it comes to the Mayo school are too numerous to even remember.

It begins with, "Oh, the bids were overbudget. My goodness, shut her down, the world stops; the bids were over budget."

Well, for as long as this government's in power, you're going to be facing that particular situation on an ongoing basis.

The point is, even if that were the problem, even if -

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: - even - well, now we have the Minister of Education again, going off, telling us all these wonderful things, and showing us all the knowledge he has.

Well, look, the facts are that it was this side of the House - the NDP government - that put $7.5 million into a budget to build the school, and solve the health and safety problems of Yukon children and staff.

It was that government on that side of the House that postponed, delayed, maybe even cancelled that contract - we don't know. There have been so many excuses coming out of there, nobody's sure any more.

Even if the problem in their minds was the fact that it was overbudget, I ask a simple question: why did they not sit down with the contractors and say, "Look, people, we have a problem here. We have a problem here. Let's see if we can't work this out; (a) to ensure that we do the right thing on behalf of the children, the staff, and the people of Mayo; and (b) ensure that those people in Mayo have a job this winter, can feed their families and earn a living." That was an option open to this government.

And I'm sure once that came into their minds, they came up with another excuse. Oh, the technicality in the bids. Ha. Oh, there's another problem they're going to face constantly. Have they looked at a government tender package? You have to be a Philadelphia lawyer to get it right, and we're asking Yukoners out there, struggling away to survive, to be letter perfect.

That's ridiculous.

That's another bum excuse. Mr. Speaker, all these things are pointing to a very serious problem on the Liberal benches. They don't care. They are bent on one thing and one thing only: partisan politics.

Now Mr. Speaker, there's another burr in my bonnet when it comes to Liberals. This economy, as critical as it is - we have a serious situation when it comes to the members opposite and the federal Liberals and anybody else involved. It's a lust for power. And the lust for power is ahead of everything else. The federal Liberals act the very same way that these Yukon Liberals are acting - arrogantly, our way, the Liberal way. We even have today, in this territory, in a situation so critical, a senator - and instead of her, our senator, actively beating the federal government into submission to do something in this territory - what have we got? We have got mother Yukon, wrapped in that Yukon flag, actively campaigning for a Liberal candidate in the federal election while on the public dole.

Speaker: Order. Order please. I would ask the member to be cautious with his words. Please continue.

Mr. Fentie:I'm being very cautious with my words. I believe nothing I have said is unparliamentary.

Why is the senator not actively pursuing, out of the federal government, something to assist this territory now in this winter when we so desperately need it? Oh no. Instead, she's campaigning.

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

Point of order

Speaker: The hon. Minister of Tourism, on a point of order.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has no idea what the senator is doing and what the senator is not doing. Our understanding is that the senator is working very hard for the Yukon.

Speaker: Opposition House leader, on the point of order.

Mr. Fentie: I recognize that. We heard the senator on the radio promoting the fact that Yukoners should vote a Liberal candidate in because that is the only way to improve the situation in this territory. Yes, she is working very hard on the Liberal federal election.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: Order. There is no point of order there, but there certainly is a dispute between members, and I will ask the member to continue.

Mr. Fentie: Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, why do we even have a Senate? Why do we have a Senate? Why don't we take that $40 million to $50 million we blow every year on that Red Chamber - that useless body - and give it to homeless people?

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Well, there is the Minister of Education again, showing us that depth of knowledge. He is saying, "This is the Yukon; that is Ottawa." Well, you had better look at where you get your money from - sorry, Mr. Speaker. I would ask the minister to look at where we get our money. It happens to be Ottawa. It is called transfer payments. The minister must understand this. He is the Minister of Renewable Resources. Ottawa is the manager of our resources, our lands. It is Ottawa, Ottawa - Ottawa in everything that goes on. Of course we should be after Ottawa.

Back to my original point, Mr. Speaker. Why do we even have the Senate? Let's take that 40 to 50 million bucks, give it to homeless people, put it into job creation - anything - and send all those partisan appointments home.

There is another example of how little regard the Liberals in this territory have for the crisis we are in. We now have, running in Faro, while still being paid as an administrator for the community, the Liberal candidate. Have these people no sense of what is right when so many people in this territory are suffering?

Some Hon. Member: A point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: Minister of Tourism, on a point of order.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, the side opposite is enjoying attacking people outside of this House who cannot defend themselves, and the member is hiding behind the privilege that he has in order to do that within the walls of this Legislature. Mr. Speaker, this has to stop.

Mr. Fentie: I'm not attacking anybody outside of this House. I am merely stating the facts. I am merely stating the facts about what's going on. That's what I am saying on the floor of this Legislature. Secondly, as the member would well know, I don't have to hide from anything. There's nothing that I have to hide from. I have a right to stand in this Legislature and say my piece in representing my constituents.

Mr. McLarnon: The member opposite should remember that he is allowed to say falsehoods in this House, but is not allowed to say them outside of the House without being sued.

The ex-mayor of Faro resigned upon nomination. So if the member is going to say that he is still on the public dole of Faro, then he better make sure his facts are correct.

Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, if we check the record, I did not say that the ex-mayor of Faro was on the public dole. I said we have an administrator in Faro now running for federal office.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: In my view, we continue with a dispute between members; however, I caution the members not to make inflammatory remarks so that this debate gets out of control.

Thank you.

Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, there was an express purpose to what I have just stated. We have just witnessed how passionately the members across the floor jump to their feet to protect other Liberals - and that's what they're doing when it comes to the federal government. They jump to their feet, not to protect and represent Yukoners' interests, but to protect and hide the deficiencies that the federal government imposes upon us in this territory.

That is a problem and that's why we have such a critical situation in our economy. That's why we're going backwards, not forwards, Mr. Speaker. In postponing the Mayo school, the members opposite are asking people in Mayo, who can least afford it - who shouldn't even have to - to bear the brunt of that decision. We on this side - and I personally - don't view that as right. It is the government's responsibility to bear the decision. The money was booked; it's in the budget; the contracts were tendered; the foundation is built and people have been trained. Right now, that construction should be ongoing in Mayo. Those people should be working and they should be looking toward a happy Christmas and a much brighter winter than they are now.

We get back to the point of the requirements of our economy now and what government does to assist in that area. The community development fund and the fire smart program were two vehicles that targeted expenditures - albeit government money, but it targeted expenditures in communities for initiatives brought forward by special interests groups, agencies and municipalities to do two things: create jobs and benefits for their people and provide either community assets or good, positive initiatives for each community in this territory. Now the community development fund, the Liberals opposite have made much about it being a political slush fund, and I find that pretty odd, given the fact that the Liberals are notorious for pork-barrelling. If we want to talk about political slush, let's look at what goes on.

Why did our senator get chosen? Liberal. Why did our commissioner get chosen? Liberal.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: I don't dispute that. The Member for Whitehorse Centre, in his in-and-out thoughts when sitting in this Legislature, just said, "Could it be because he's a member of high standing?" I didn't say he wasn't. I say that there are many other members in this territory who are members of high standing; however, they have one fault. They're not Liberals.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk more about pork-barrelling and political slush. One of the most important reviews that has taken place in this territory is our Education Act review. Now, without any consultation, without any discussion, without any proper competition, we have suddenly another Liberal operative pop up as the chair of the Education Act review. The people in the communities who were actively working on this review didn't want that situation to happen. They asked for it not to happen.

Furthermore, again there are a number of very qualified Yukoners who could have also taken on the job - all the more reason to put it out through a proper process where other Yukoners had an opportunity. We had two former ministers of Education. In fact, we had the possibility - should that person have been chosen, maybe, if there was a process to allow them to, we had the person who helped design the existing Education Act. If not the fact that he wasn't Liberal, he may have had a chance. Without any sort of consultation or any sort of process, this government, talking about political slush and pork-barrelling, chose - you know who - a Liberal.

Mr. Speaker, it goes further. Part of our education system that's extremely vital and important is our teachers. And we first heard, during contract negotiations, when problems arose and the negotiations stopped, with no closure, and the teachers would not accept the offer on the table, the Premier said, "It's not about money."

It's not about the money, and yet before the phones were even hooked up upstairs for the new government - the incoming government - we had a partisan, backroom deal on the table of $1 million. This was a signing bonus for the teachers, which the membership, so distraught at how it took place - because of the partisan connection of the president, a.k.a. Liberal sign-hanger in the campaign - resoundingly voted against that million bucks. That's political slush, Mr. Speaker, at its best.

So, the other side of the House - the members opposite - accusing this side of the House of political slush, when it comes to the community development fund, is wrong. The members know full well that every application was screened and reviewed by a technical review committee of members of the public service. Ministers did not review those applications, and the ones that qualified, were eligible and met all the criteria - those were the ones that were brought forward. How can that be political slush? Using that excuse, the Liberals have now cut off another lifeline to Yukoners in this territory to work, to provide a living for their families, to pay their bills, and to have some hope. They have cut off that lifeline.

They call it a review. Well, I can tell you that it's dead, and they're going to come up with something else, because they're moving the money elsewhere.

At the rate they are handing out partisan political goodies, I think we all can understand where the community development fund might wind up. Mr. Speaker, over the course of the three and a half years, and before that, it did much good in communities of this territory. It did much good in creating jobs for people. It was a positive program, a positive element of the Department of Economic Development, and now it is gone.

Mr. Speaker, we also know that approximately $200,000 was placed into the Premier's riding for the ballpark, directed by the now new chair of the community development fund committee, the Member for Porter Creek North. We all remember in this House how the Member for Porter Creek South was demanding that we, when in government on that side of the House, politically interfere with the process so that her ballpark in her riding would get some money. On the one hand, we have accusations that it is a political slush fund; on the other hand, we have the now Premier actively berating the government, when were in government, to interfere with the process and give her riding that money - hypocritical, Mr. Speaker.

Some Hon. Member: Point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: Member for Whitehorse Centre, on a point of order.

Mr. McLarnon: I would like to rise to point out that the member opposite has no evidence and is in fact being quite inflammatory by accusing our Premier of political interference. In fact, I was sitting at the meeting. The Premier was, in fact, in Calgary. There was no way in the world there could have been political interference. The member opposite has stated something that he completely knows about and is misrepresenting any facts that he may know.

Mr. Fentie: The member opposite has made a point of order on something that I'm not even talking about. I'm talking about the Premier, when in opposition, berating the government across the floor to interfere politically to make sure that the ballpark in her riding received money. That was a year ago. The member opposite from Whitehorse Centre is talking about today.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: After listening to the Member for Whitehorse Centre, I find that his remarks do not make a point of order. What this amounts to is a dispute between members on the facts.

However, I might add that I heard the official opposition House leader use the word "hypocritical", which has been found to be unparliamentary in some Houses. With that, I would ask the Member for Watson Lake to continue.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. Fentie: I will retract "hypocritical", and replace it with "the Liberal members opposite seem to be confused with the facts".

Mr. Speaker, our economic situation warrants action now. So far, in the six months that this government has been in office, we have received nothing but platitudes about futuristic possibilities.

Now, I want to go into oil and gas. We all agree that the development of an oil and gas industry in this territory is crucial. It's going to be part of what helps this territory to progress. The construction of an Alaska Highway pipeline will be the biggest event in this territory since the Klondike Gold Rush.

As the Klondike Gold Rush changed the course of this territory, so will the Alaska Highway pipeline. However, why we're here this afternoon debating this motion is now - the need now. The Alaska Highway pipeline is futuristic. At the very best, if all things come together favourably, construction will start no sooner than two years from now. Are the Liberals and the Premier asking Yukoners to wait two years before they can go to work?

And as I stated earlier, there are going to be problems when it comes to our federal colonial masters in Ottawa, who do not respond to Yukon needs. And there's more.

This government, upon making its top priority the settlement of land claims, has also established another position that they must deal with. They are promoting the building of the Alaska Highway pipeline contrary to that very commitment to the First Nations. And I'll tell you why, Mr. Speaker. The First Nations are publicly on record stating, "Land claims first; pipeline second."

Now let's look at what's happening in land claims. First off, it has been 30 years, give or take some time either way, that land claims have been negotiated in this territory. Unfortunately, the members opposite, thanks to the Member for Whitehorse Centre, who made a glaring error in the eyes of the First Nation people in this territory by announcing in this House that 30 years ago it was the Liberals who started land claims in this territory - that's a slap in the face to every First Nation member in the Yukon Territory. Land claims began in this territory thanks to the people like Elijah Smith and many others who came together as a Council for Yukon Indians and the initiative was, Together Today for Our Children Tomorrow. That's what began land claims in this territory, not the Liberal government.

Mr. Speaker, that is a big-time booboo by the Member for Whitehorse Centre. First Nations will not take that kindly, not after all they have been through. When we get back to our colonial masters in Ottawa, it's with good reason they want self-government, to get out from under the ridiculous way Ottawa tries to manage this territory.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Now we have the Minister of Health saying, "Talk about the Yukon." If the minister would have been here for the last hour, he would have heard all -

Speaker's statement

Speaker: Order please. It's not proper to refer to a member's absence.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. Fentie: I'll retract that, Mr. Speaker, gladly, and say that if the minister had been listening, he would realize that his comment is completely out of context with what has been going on in this Legislative Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, the land claim issue is a big one when it comes to the oil and gas pipeline and to the development of oil and gas, the industry itself. The hotbed for an oil and gas industry in this territory is the southeast Yukon, and with good reason. That's where the known resource is; infrastructure is close by; market demand is right there; the Alliance Pipeline is now well under construction; the need to fill that pipeline and get the gas to market in Chicago, Illinois is pressing. So, for development of an oil and gas industry in this territory, it's a natural that it begins in southeast Yukon, even though companies have great foresight in this area and are also bidding on land sales up in Eagle Plains.

But let's point something out. Where's the market from Eagle Plains? Where does it go? That's a very futuristic approach. They want to do it because they want to know what's there, and then they want to be able to plan many years down the road - a minimum of 10. Even though they explore under the conditions of their permit within five, nothing may happen there for many years to come.

So the natural place to go is the southeast corner.

Now we get back to the land claim as it relates to the development of an oil and gas industry. The Kaska people, who are negotiating their land claim as one nation - that means all the Kaska people, whether they be in Yukon or B.C. - are negotiating their land claim as one nation. The Kaska people are willing to do this to expedite the process so that the negotiations would include transboundary.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what is this government across the floor prepared to do in that regard? The B.C. government is ready and willing to go to the table. The federal government is ready and willing to go to the table. The Kaska are prepared and ready to go to the table. Where is the Yukon government? All we hear is, "Our priority is the settlement of land claims." I know, from talking to the Kaska recently, that they're unsure of what it is this government wants to do.

We've stood on the floor and asked the members opposite - the Premier: "What's the mandate for the settlement of land claims in this territory if it's your top priority?" The answer: "We do not negotiate land claims on the floor of this House." Well, how revealing a mandate to this Legislature on what they plan to do about the fact that the Kaska people want to negotiate their claim as one nation - all the Premier would have to do is say, "We concur, and we are going to do that." We didn't even get that answer.

Uncertainty - how is the oil and gas industry going to view this? How is the oil and gas industry, which so badly wants to get into the southeast Yukon, going to view this? I'll tell you how. The Premier is very proud that $6.7 million is being invested in exploratory work - which, by the way, is probably all going to go to seismic - in southeast Yukon.

Across the border - and, in fact, from the Kotaneelee to go across the border into the Northwest Territories is approximately six miles - $1 billion is targeted for exploration and development in the Northwest Territories. Why? Because the First Nations in the Northwest Territories, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the people in the Northwest Territories have shown and proven to the oil and gas industry that there is certainty for their investment.

We still wait for this government, after six months of being in office and making the claim that their highest priority is the settlement of land claims, to show us how. What is the blueprint? Where are we going? Nothing but platitudes from across the floor, Mr. Speaker.

So, the oil and gas industry, whether it be exploration, development or pipeline, is futuristic. That is why this motion is on the floor today. We are talking about the needs of Yukoners here today, now. What is this government going to do?

Now, in the spirit of cooperation, we have put in this motion. Let us put together a group of us - put our heads together, and together address this problem. Nothing came from the Liberal side. The motion has been on the table for three days. If it would have been us, given the situation, no problem. No problem.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Now we have the brain trust from the Liberal benches, the Minister from Whitehorse Centre, saying, "Four years." Well, under our government, I have just proven by the stats that the unemployment factor was lower than it is today under this government when the stats are applied correctly, and apples to apples are the comparison. I have also proven that over 500 people have left this territory. They are out of the workforce, which is approximately $20 million in cash flow lost.

Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible)

Speaker: Order please. I cannot hear the member's words. Please continue.

Mr. Fentie: I will ignore the comment from the Member for Whitehorse Centre, because it is going to be a long, long, three and a half years. Believe me, things have a way of following one golden rule: what goes around comes around.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: So, Mr. Speaker, could I make a suggestion that we find out what it is that the Minister of Tourism is trying to accomplish? It looks like the minister is trying to welcome me with open arms.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we have a serious problem. It's a crisis, it's an emergency, and we don't seem to be able to get from the members opposite, from this Liberal government, anything that would reasonably or remotely address this crisis. Instead, they make it worse. Since taking office, they haven't begun rebuilding the economy; they have been actively dismantling it, destroying what was there. Why? Because it put partisan politics ahead of everything else. The members across the floor seem unable to get beyond their partisan, political views and do the job they were elected to do and represent this territory and its people in a manner that produces positive results.

And I find it a little insulting now to continually hear the members opposite ask for cooperation, because I have yet to see any indication that the members opposite really want to cooperate on anything. There has been no indication that they are even remotely cooperative in any way, shape or form.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Well, now, we have the Minister of Health going on again about SCREP, which we already punted through the goalposts of life. There is no SCREP any more, thanks to this government. And if the Liberals want to sit there and meet themselves, I ask you, "How do they make those changes?" If they think they're going to come in here and make changes without due process, they had better think again.

That's not how things are done in a democracy, and if they want to continue with that route, it's at their peril. The Minister of Health and Social Services says, "All-party committee." How much clearer can we make ourselves? First off, they say they want to be cooperative and create an all-party committee for appointments. But what's the first act? The minute they take office, out come the pork chops. And they start making partisan, political appointments before they get around to even talking about an all-party committee.

Now, the Minister of Health and Social Services is laughing. He's laughing at Yukoners who won't even be able to put Christmas presents under a Christmas tree this winter. He thinks it's funny. I will be sending this clip to everybody I know in this territory. This minister laughs at the plight of Yukoners who cannot make a living, who have no means -

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: Order please. This is getting completely out of control here. I overheard that and it was too loud. Member for Whitehorse Centre, please retract that.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. McLarnon: I retract that.

Some Hon. Member: Point of order.

Point of order

Speaker: Government House Leader, on a point of order.

Ms. Tucker: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the member opposite has made some inflammatory remarks. The Minister of Health and Social Services was not laughing at the plight of Yukoners. The Minister of Health and Social Services was actually laughing at something that he said, and it had nothing to do with the plight of Yukoners.

The members on this side take the plight of Yukoners very seriously. And the points that you are trying to make in sending transcripts of Hansard to the public is exactly why you are making these statements, which we consider to be misspeaking the facts.

Speaker: Member for Kluane, did you want to speak on the point of order?

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

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

Mr. Fentie: No, there is no point of order.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: I find that this is a dispute between members and that there is no point of order. I will ask the Member for Watson Lake to continue.

Mr. Fentie: So, getting back to where we were in this debate, before the Minister of Health began his joyous laughter about the plight of Yukoners, I -

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

Point of order

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

Ms. Tucker: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the member opposite has misspoken himself again. I would like to set the record straight. The Minister of Health and Social Services did not laugh at the plight of Yukoners. The Minister of Health and Social Services was laughing at the antics of the member opposite.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: I find that there is no point of order. Setting the record straight is not a point of order; it is merely a dispute between members.

Mr. Fentie: So far, Mr. Speaker, though the members opposite may think it's funny, all they've been able to bring to this House when it comes to the development of our economy, the future of our economy and where our economy is at today are futuristic possibilities and so on and so forth. There is nothing that pertains to what we're going to do in this emergency, in this crisis situation we find ourselves in today - not one thing.

Worse than that, with literally millions of dollars at their disposal, they choose now, according to this ministerial statement that the Premier brought forward this afternoon, to do a review on one of the few remaining things left in this territory to help out the situation and provide jobs and benefits to Yukoners.

All summer - in fact, let's look at it this way, Mr. Speaker. In opposition, the Liberal government was very vocal about the community development fund and about the fire smart funding. I point out that the Member for Riverdale South is on record publicly saying that the money that this party, when in government, put toward fire smart funding - that member told the Yukon public that it's not enough. It's not enough money, she said. Today, the Liberals even killed that amount, shut it down.

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

Point of order

Speaker: The Minister of Tourism, on a point of order.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out to the Speaker, who of course is listening, that that is violent language, and it's not acceptable within this House - minutes from a SCREP meeting, when we had SCREP meetings, in the past sitting of the Legislature.

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

Mr. Fentie: The word I used does not reference violence to anybody whatsoever. It is a verb that is pointing to the fact that the Liberal government has completely annihilated these programs.

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

Mr. McRobb: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I believe SCREP made no such ruling. I think there was only a suggestion to bring it to a future meeting. We all know what happened to the committee after the government motion this week, so there is no point of order.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: Order please. I have been advised that violent or sexist words - it's true, it was reviewed in SCREP. It was recommended that it not be used in the House, but there were no amendments to the rules. I believe the other part of it was that the Speaker was not to rule on it. Members were to cooperate and not to use such language.

With that, I find there's no point of order, and I ask the member to continue.

Mr. Fentie: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I get back to the fact that the Member for Riverdale South, when it came to the fire smart funding that this government implemented to put people to work in Yukon communities - to lower the risk of loss of limb, life and property during a wildfire, should it occur - stated publicly that it's not enough money. Yet here today, we see that that government has ended even that amount. There is no expenditure until they review, postpone, and delay.

I can't for the life of me figure out, Mr. Speaker, if that was the case, after all the Liberals in opposition said, why they did not undertake a review of these programs immediately upon taking office. It's not rocket science to instruct officials to go and review these programs.

Instead, Mr. Speaker, in a cold-hearted, arrogant approach to how they're dealing with rural Yukon, specifically, they chose to do the review now, right at the start of winter, when Yukoners and Yukon communities - especially in rural Yukon - so desperately need that funding. And then the Premier stands on her feet here today, and says that the former government spent it. So what. Of course we spent it. We put it in the hands of Yukoners. So what, Mr. Speaker? We put it in the hands of Yukoners, where it was doing some good. Unfortunately, this government has yet to bump hip to that fact.

Mr. Speaker, they didn't have to do it this way. They could have put more money into it. They're the government.

It's a matter of choice. Well, I'll tell you what choice is happening on that side of the House. The choice is being made to ensure that they take care of their friends.

If you look at this budget, they are moving money all around.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Point of order

Speaker: Order. Government House leader, on a point of order.

Ms. Tucker: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe the member has misspoken himself. To clarify: the money on the community development fund grants was spent between April 1 and April 17, when the election took place - and Yukoners have spoken about the long-term implications of community development fund grants.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: I do not feel that we have a point of order here. It is merely a dispute between members. I would ask the official opposition House leader to continue.

Mr. Fentie:I find it very, very unfortunate that we had, yesterday, the Minister of Health berating and admonishing this side of the House for wasting time in this Legislature. Well, through my debate on this motion, which I am entitled to debate on the floor of this Legislature, I have now been interrupted countless times with frivolous points of order that are being ruled as not being points of order.

Who is delaying the procedures in this Legislature? Who is really delaying that? Worse than that, who is delaying any benefit that Yukoners will receive from what this government should be doing? It is the Liberals across the floor. There is absolutely no reason why more fire smart funding was not brought forward in this budget to address the crisis we are in today in this territory economically. There is no reason why more money was not put into the community development fund. There are any number of projects out there that this government, if it had any sense of what is going on in this territory, would have put money toward to help the situation this winter and alleviate the hardships that Yukoners are going to face, thanks to this government's actions and decision-making which result in serious, serious problems for the people of this territory.

Mr. Speaker, we heard lots from the members opposite about how they were broke. They were claiming poverty, saying, "There's nothing left. The NDP spent it all." Well, the Auditor General refutes that in a big way - a $64-million accumulated surplus at the end of that fiscal year. The Premier, who is now the Minister of Finance, had best get brushed up on how to read a budget and how fiscal year-ends really operate. They are not in a poverty situation. They are accumulating money to do something that may very well - may very well - put this territory into debt.

Now, we have seen a lot of signals out of that side of the House about the crisis in our highways. Which crisis is this? Have these members driven the Alaska Highway? Have these members no recollection of what has gone on in this territory for decades? What crisis are the members opposite referring to? If it is the Liberals' view that we should pour $50 million, $60 million or $70 million into, for example, the Robert Campbell Highway, how do we pay for that? How are we going to pay for that expenditure? This side of the House and Yukoners should know. Is it going to be a public-private partnership, which would inevitably put this territory into debt, or are you going to raise road taxes on our fuel? For what reason? Mr. Speaker, for what reason?

Under the former government, money was being budgeted for the Robert Campbell Highway. Adverse sections were being done. Is there a reason why this crisis has been developed by the members opposite - the crisis that has forced them to hoard money and force Yukoners to sacrifice and carry the brunt of their decision-making now, this winter?

Do the members not understand that megaprojects of that ilk are probably going to have to go out to broad tender, which could also rule out Yukoners going to work and other companies. Furthermore, road building is seasonal. What about the winter? That's why we talk winter works.

Do the Liberals not have a conscience about what is going on in this territory, given the decisions they've made to date? Can they not see the error in their ways?

Mr. Speaker, these members opposite, in tabling their budget - and I'm not sure who all is responsible for crafting it - have made government bigger. Instead of money flowing in a manner that targets areas of need where it will do the most good for this territory and its people, we have monies flowing to make government bigger. And that's a sad statement, given the situation we're in.

The Premier has been asked in this Legislature, "Where are the jobs? Where are the jobs in the oil and gas sector? Where are the jobs in the mining sector?" Now the Premier said, "Expatriate." Just because the Liberals got voted in, Expatriate decided to go exploring. They are trying to take ownership of what Expatriate was doing at Kudz Ze Kayah this year. Well, I've got to tell you, Mr. Speaker, there is a small company in the Town of Watson Lake that is disgusted at that comment. That company got the contract. The monies were booked before this government even came into power. That company hustled and worked and got itself that contract - not this government.

It was a private sector corporation that put people to work - not this government. And furthermore, it was such a small, small contract that that very company still has to work outside the territory to survive, and that happens to be in British Columbia.

They are not happy with the Premier trying to lay ownership on the fact that their due diligence, their hustle, their hard work got themselves a contract, put a few people to work - not happy at all. And they also pointed out to me that, after the Premier's visit to the mountaintop of Kudz Ze Kayah, the whole operation was shut down four days later because the company concerned was a little worried about where we were going - a little concerned, a little worried about where we were going.

This territory is in trouble; this government across the floor has no plan, no direction, no vision, and we are going backwards, and it is Yukoners who are paying the price. They're either packing up and leaving or, in the short term, trying to find work elsewhere, having to leave their homes and their families just to make a living.

The Liberals are famous for attaching themselves to other people's initiatives. There's good reason why the claim is made that Liberals lead from behind. There's good reason why nothing came from this government when in opposition - this group, these members across the floor when in opposition - on what they would do when it comes to our economy. They said, "You'll have to wait till the election, and you'll find out." They did not have any plan whatsoever. That's a sad statement to make by someone, by a group, by a party that had been duly elected to have that plan, that had been duly elected to put Yukoners to work - not just two years, or five years, or 10 years down the road, but now.

Instead, they choose to go in a totally opposite direction and put Yukoners out of work. Mr. Speaker, another real problem with how the Liberals are approaching things is that they are so lost in what to do, they even have to make claims that "we" cut taxes, referring to the Liberals cut taxes. Well, Mr. Speaker, all they did was adopt initiatives already created by the former NDP government. It is the NDP in this territory that cut taxes for Yukoners to put money back in their pockets, not the Liberals. The Liberals merely adopted something that they knew full well that Yukoners wanted. That is why I say that this government is leading from behind. How can we progress in this territory when we have a government that has no leadership, no direction, no vision, no place to go?

They did not take government in the April 17 election; they fell into it. Unfortunately, they landed on their heads. And now they are spending a lot of Yukoners' time, sacrificing Yukoners, trying to get back on their feet. That is a sad, sad statement for a government. Where is the accountability on that side of the House for what they have done? Instead, we just get more ridiculous, misconceived attempts to read stats, more empty promises, more empty platitudes, no substance, no content.

Mr. Speaker, we urge this Liberal government in this motion today to get together with the opposition parties, sit down, let us go and find any way we possibly can to alleviate the problems that Yukoners are faced with today.

If the Liberal government here in this territory really wanted to, as I pointed out earlier, they would have stood on their feet, immediately upon this motion beginning its debate, on a point of order and asked for unanimous consent to pass this motion and immediately begin the process of convening that committee. This is a matter of urgent and pressing need. This is an emergency. It's a crisis, and they must act.

Now, I'm going to be very interested, though I don't know who may follow my debate today on this motion. I would hope it's the Minister of Economic Development, but one never knows with the Liberals. It might even be the Minister of Health. I would hope that they come forward with something positive, something we can take to Yukoners, something that we can give Yukoners as hope. I would hope that the Liberals finally, here this afternoon, lay out a plan, a vision, a road map for where we're going economically in this territory. It is critical that they do so. People can't wait. Yukoners can't wait. They need to know now. They need to be able to tell their banker, "Yes, I will be going to work within a day or two days or a week, and I will be able to make my payments." Or, if it's not the case, they need to be able to tell their banker that they can't do it, and they must make arrangements then to rid themselves of the debt.

Yukoners need to know what they can tell their children this Christmas, those who don't work. In my community there are already families splitting up because of the pressures brought upon them because they can't make a living, because they can't feed their families, because they can't pay their rent, can't pay their bills.

That's not a situation we, in this territory, should be in, when this government had, at its disposal, a surplus of $64 million, as the Auditor General has pointed out. It's not right, Mr. Speaker, and it is simply not good governance.

Now, maybe there is a possibility here that the Liberals are still trying to learn what it is to govern. But I would argue that that excuse holds no water, because if they needed to learn how to govern, my question to you, Mr. Speaker, and to this House is, "Why did they bother running in the election?" They told Yukoners they had a plan. They told Yukoners they knew where they were going. They said to Yukoners, "Vote for us, and we will make it better." They said to Yukoners, "Vote for us and we will make this Legislature a kinder and gentler place. We will improve how this Legislature operates." What a joke. This has become worse than it has ever been, thanks to the members opposite.

Mr. Speaker, there has to be some way we can get through to the members opposite - punch through that partisan brick wall that they have before them. There must be a way that we can convince the Liberals that this is the most pressing matter in the territory today and that they must act now. When stating that the South Yukon Forest Corporation had no business case, did the Premier factor in that the shutdown removed $55,000 per day of cashflow that was injected into the community of Watson Lake and this territory? Did the Premier factor in that many of those people in Watson Lake travelled to Whitehorse to rent rooms, buy gas, buy groceries, buy clothes and buy supplies? They can't come now. They have no money and no jobs.

Did the Premier forget about $16 million for cogeneration, kiln-dries, finger-joining, pellet plant, greenhousing, silviculture? Did the Premier not factor that in? And with the millions of dollars that the federal government has available for rural Canada, why did the Premier not at least lobby her federal friends in Ottawa for something? She chose to do nothing. Instead, there wasn't a business case. All the options open to the Premier were ignored, and now Yukoners suffer. The people in Watson Lake suffer, and there is no reason for that to be happening. It's solely their responsibility for the plight we are in today - not only in the Yukon as a whole, but in communities like Watson Lake. It is solely the responsibility of this government, this Liberal government across the floor. And they will have to answer for that.

In the next election they will be judged on what they've done so far. Many of the things that they have done to date will simply not go away in time. And in the next election, they will be there. What they've done today will be issues in the next election. We've heard the Liberals say many times now, in a very condescending manner, "That's why we're over here on the government side and you guys are over there." Well, I would give the Liberals some advice: don't get too comfortable over there, because at the rate you're going, it's not going to last long.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Fentie: Well, there we have the Minister of Health with a real boner saying, "Ten years." Why would a minister of the Crown come out with a remark like that? A minister of the Crown should be more astute than that.

That's ridiculous, Mr. Speaker. If it is the Minister of Economic Development who gets on her feet today to respond to this motion, I have some questions: first off, we have asked time and time again how many jobs has this government created since they have taken office April 17. So far, the answer we have got is a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. How many jobs? One, two, three, five? Tell this House; tell Yukoners so they can be assured that the Liberals opposite are doing something. How many?

I want the Premier to stand on her feet and explain to this House how she is going to balance the land claim issues, the environmental issues as they pertain to the Alaska Highway pipeline. Given the positions that the environmental community has taken and that the First Nations have taken, I want this Premier to stand on her feet and tell this House and tell Yukoners why, now, they're reviewing programs that could have really helped people in this territory now and in this winter? Why a review now? Why did they not do it before, or why did they not wait until this spring? The Premier owes that to the Yukon public. The Premier owes that to people in Mayo and Watson Lake and Haines Junction and Pelly Crossing and Stewart Crossing and Dawson City. The Premier owes that to the people in Whitehorse, who, by the way, more and more, are starting to say, "Oh-oh. We made a mistake. We made a mistake. This government has done absolutely nothing."

Mr. Speaker, it is even worse than that. The people i