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. Mr. Roberts:      I rise today on behalf of the government to recognize the men and women in this territory who spend their work days and nights caring for other Yukoners. I refer, Mr. Speaker, to the Yukon nurses. This week is National Nursing Week, a week dedicated to celebrating nurses and their profession. It gives me an opportunity to publicly, in this House, talk about the significant contributions that nurses make in the territory to health care and the well-being of Yukoners.

The theme of this year is "Nurses: Champions for Health". And who makes a better champion for the patients than those who spend the most time with them. Nurses in the territory are also champions for each other and for the system itself.

The first person to meet the patient in the doctor's office or the hospital is often the nurse. I know that the work they do is not easy and that often they do not feel that they get credit or the respect that is due to them. We need to change this and change attitudes toward nursing and nurses. These people are health care professionals who are given the responsibility for ensuring quality, safe health care for all patients. They are the ones who also hold it all together and make sure that the caregiving system does not fall apart.

In the Yukon, nursing representatives have been working closely with the department to develop recruitment strategies. More importantly, they have also been providing input on retention strategies. We need to value the nurses we do have to make sure that they know they are valued. We need them in place to help us build and maintain our quality health care system in the future.

Thank you.

In recognition of Information Technology Week

Hon. Mr. Jim: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind the House that this is Canada's first annual Information Technology Week and to pay tribute to the many Yukoners who have been instrumental in the development of IT in the territory.

Information technology has developed at a breakneck speed in the Yukon. It is hard to believe that it was only seven years ago that we were faced with the challenges of connecting the Yukon to the Internet.

Now we are one of the most connected regions in Canada.

This week provides an opportunity to showcase community, industry, education and government achievements in the field of information technology.

It gives Yukoners the chance to forge and celebrate partnerships and to highlight the benefits of developing critical skills that people need to succeed in the modern economy.

Information technology has had a growing and positive impact on the quality of life for Yukoners. It has enhanced our connection to the rest of Canada and the world. Commissioner Jack Cable has recognized the importance of information technology by declaring this week as Information Technology Week in the Yukon.

I invite everyone to take part in the events planned over the next several days to mark this occasion. My thanks to all those who have worked so hard over the last several years to bring information technology innovations to the Yukon. I look forward to working with the community and industry groups as we move ahead in the field of IT.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker:      Are there any further tributes?

In recognition of National Nursing Week

Mr. Keenan:      It's my privilege today to rise to pay tribute to Nursing Week. This is a time to acknowledge the people who are on the front lines of caring on the front lines of our medical system.

Here in the Yukon, and especially in the communities, we recognize the tremendous contribution that nurses and nurse practitioners make to the health and well-being of the territory and its people.

Now, we might be a small jurisdiction of just a few people but we are affected by all the same issues as the rest of Canada. We know that all across North America there is a shortage of nurses, and the shortage here in the Yukon is certainly not unique. There are a lot of reasons for this, but it comes down to respect.

We need to demonstrate respect to nurses and nurse practitioners by investing in safe work places, investing in quality health care, investing in training and ongoing learning opportunities. We need to do more to encourage young people in the Yukon to become our nurses and nurse practitioners. When we invest in our health care workers and in our young people, we are investing in the health and future of our communities.

Nurses all over the country are fighting for the rights of the patients, the public, for the protection and enhancement of our public, not-for-profit medicare system. It is the nurses of this country who have mobilized to fight against privatization, from Bill No. 11 in Alberta to the Harris cuts in Ontario. The nurses are there because they see every day that we need to fight against cutbacks; they see why we need to fight against the introduction of two-tier medical care in our country.

Nurses are speaking out for adequate care, which means being able to spend more time with patients than just taking vital signs and administering medications. I know that it is our nurses who have led the fight to preserve medicare. It's all about the five principles of our system: universality, accessibility, portability, comprehensive coverage and public non-profit administration.

So, on behalf of the official opposition, I would like to ask everyone to join me in paying tribute to the tremendous work of nurses and nurse practitioners here in the Yukon and all across Canada.

Thank you.

Mr. Jenkins:      Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Yukon Party, it's my privilege to pay tribute to National Nursing Week, May 7 to May 13.

This year's theme, "Champions for Health", is very fitting. Mr. Speaker, what we're experiencing here in the Yukon is not unique. We have a shortage of health care professionals of all categories, but here we feel the effects almost immediately because of our proximity to the major health care centre in Whitehorse and other centres, Mr. Speaker. Working conditions are another factor. It is only fitting, Mr. Speaker, that the Liberals as a government put in place a specific program to attract, recruit and retrain all categories of health care professionals for specifically nurses and nurse practitioners. The largest component of the Government of the Yukon's budget is in Health and Social Services, and yet we are missing the mark. We are missing the target, and we're losing a lot of health care professionals, specifically these nurses. They are needed, they are on the first line, and it is only fitting that we pay tribute to these individuals at this time.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker:      If there are no further tributes, we'll proceed to introduction of visitors.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      It is my pleasure today to introduce a very special guest who was just handed over from the Government of the Yukon to the City of Whitehorse. My executive assistant, Dan Cable, brought Mr. Patterson and gave him to Jeanette Bringsli from the City of Whitehorse.

Mr. Patterson belongs to eight-year-old Andrew Kemble from Chatham, Ontario, and he is here as part of a school project. Jeanette was instrumental in his coming here. He has been a very busy little bear. I believe he met Prince Charles. He went to the Association of Yukon Communities meeting on the weekend, was kidnapped by the City of Dawson. Mayor Bourassa had to pay, I believe, $100 to get the bear back. So he came into the Government of the Yukon's care. I brought him back under RCMP escort, and he had an exciting weekend and he has many more interesting adventures.

Please join me in welcoming Mr. Patterson.

Applause

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      I would also like to introduce some special guests from the City of Dawson, who had better stay well away from that bear: Glen Everitt, the mayor and, once again, the president of the Association of Yukon Communities, and Councillor Wayne Potoroka and Treasurer Dale Courtice from the City of Dawson.

Applause

Speaker:      If there are no further introductions of visitors, I'll proceed.

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mr. Jim: I have for tabling two legislative returns from the Department of Government Services. One is in response to questions in the House by the MLA for Ross River-Southern Lakes relating to fuel purchases for fleet vehicles and transfer payments for French language services. The other is in response to questions in the House from the MLA for Klondike relating to French language services and the transfer of buildings.

Speaker:      Are there any further returns or documents for tabling?

Are there any reports of committees?

Petitions.

PETITIONS

Mr. Clerk:      Mr. Speaker and hon. Members of the Legislative Assembly, I have had the honour to review a petition, being Petition No. 4 of the Second Session of the Thirtieth Legislative Assembly, as presented by the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes on May 3, 2001. The first page of the petition contains the following prayer:

"Therefore, the undersigned ask the Legislative Assembly to urge the Commissioner in Executive Council to immediately commission a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act into the policies, procedures and practices of Family and Children's Services."

The prayer on the remaining pages of the petition is worded as follows:

"Therefore, the undersigned ask the Legislative Assembly to immediately commission a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act into the policies, procedures and practices of Family and Children's Services."

As the Legislative Assembly is not capable of commissioning a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act, the portion of the petition that contains the prayer asking the Assembly to commission a public inquiry does not conform with the requirements respecting petitions.

However, the first page does contain a proper prayer asking the Legislative Assembly to do something which it is capable of doing. The wording of the petition text in both versions is, in all other regards, identical.

Whenever the Assembly has given consideration in the past to the rules governing petitions, the clear indication received is that, in cases where there is doubt, the Assembly would prefer the benefit of that doubt be provided to the petitioners.

Therefore, it is found that this petition meets the requirements as to form of the Standing Orders of the Yukon Legislative Assembly.

Speaker:      Petition No. 4 is accordingly deemed to be read and received.

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Notices of motion.

NOTICES OF MOTION

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

THAT this House recognizes

(1) that mental health is very important to 91 percent of Canadians, according to a survey released on May 7, 2001; and

(2) that the majority of employees from the Yukon Government's Mental Health Branch, including three psychologists, two mental health nurses and the territory's only psychiatrist are leaving the Yukon; and

THAT this House urges the Minister of Health and Social Services to ensure that all vacant positions are fully staffed by the end of July 2001.

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

THAT this House recognizes

(1) that the last public review of capital projects for electrical infrastructure was held in 1993 under the previous Yukon Party Government; and

(2) that proceeding with the $22 million Mayo-Dawson Transmission Line Project at this time will effectively mortgage Yukon's energy future for the next 40 years and will endanger the continuation of the Rate Stabilization Fund that is due to expire on March 31, 2002, and which, if cancelled, could potentially cause a 40- to 50-percent increase in consumers' electrical bills; and

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the $22 million Mayo-Dawson Transmission Line Project should be submitted to the Yukon Utilities Board for a public review to ensure that the project is economical and in the best interests of Yukon's electrical consumers.

Speaker:      Are there any further notices of motion?

Are there any statements by ministers?

This then brings us to Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Mr. Keenan:      The Yukon's mental health unit is losing all its clinical staff - the psychiatrist, the three clinical psychologists and the two mental health care nurses. That will leave only the supervisor and the receptionist in the office.

Can the minister tell us if there is a particular reason for this mass exodus from the mental health unit?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      It is a problem that many jurisdictions in Canada are experiencing. It is one of those areas that has a high burnout, and it is also an area that people get into and they really want to sort of look at other alternatives after they have spent a long time in there. I think it's more coincidental that we have a larger number leaving at this point, Mr. Speaker.

It is a serious problem. It's something that the department is working very hard on at the current moment. They are soliciting, as far as possible, in order to recruit people to fill these positions.

Mr. Keenan:      I would like to point out that just because it's happening in many jurisdictions, it does not necessarily make it coincidental. I would ask for leadership here again.

Now, the Cabinet spokesperson did try to put a happy face on these changes. He said that the department hopes to have a new staff complement in place by the fall.

So I would like to ask, then, what is the department's plan to provide mental health services for people who need them in the meanwhile?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      I suppose that if I were to micromanage every department as the member opposite would like me to do, yes, I would know every little detail and have every little action followed, but that is an operational program. That is not something that the minister or the government of the day interferes with. We let the departments do their jobs.

Mr. Speaker, we have held competitions. We are continually holding competitions to fill these positions. As the member opposite mentioned, we expect to be up to full capacity in September.

Those people who are leaving are leaving for a variety of reasons, Mr. Speaker. They're leaving for family; they're leaving to go to university; they're leaving to take jobs with other departments within our government; they're also leaving to just have time away. This is a very high-stress job and, obviously, over time, they need those breaks. Mr. Speaker, we have a number of resources in the community, a number of resources here in Whitehorse that are going to be hopefully backstopping some of these major issues over the summer break. It's just one of those issues where we can't fill every position just at the drop of a pin. It takes time. People have to really look at whether they want to come north, and we have to provide them with the incentives to do that.

Mr. Keenan:      Well, Mr. Speaker, every time I ask a question of this particular minister and this particular minister gets up, he carries on with some new buzz words. This time, the new buzz words are "It's just one of those issues," "I don't micromanage," "I don't interfere." I'd like to also add that the minister does not provide the leadership that a Health minister is required to show.

Now, the resident psychiatrist, Dr. Smith, has apparently offered to be able to continue on a consulting basis after he leaves the territory. So far, as with so many issues in this department, there has been no response from the department - none whatsoever.

So I'd like to know two things: what are we doing in the interim, and what is the department doing right now to recruit a full-time resident to ensure that we have continuity of care for Yukoners? Will the minister please answer that question?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Again, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is always talking about leadership. Leadership, I guess, for the member opposite means interfering. I don't interfere in the operation of the department. That is a job that the departments do very well.

Under their government, we had the same department and same people working very hard to ensure that we have services here in the Yukon. It hasn't changed. But now that they're on the other side, these people working in the department are suddenly the bad people. They are not the good people any more. I wonder why.

Mr. Speaker, we have situations in the Yukon that require all our efforts to work together on. The department is working very hard at recruiting. They are working very hard at trying to entice people to come north. If there are people here in Whitehorse or the Yukon who would like to take on these jobs, we are also very open to those types of applications, as well.

Also, we are looking at the whole issue of the long term. There is no easy solution to this. Hopefully, over time and with positive support from the community and positive support from the opposition, people will come here and believe that they can be integral to the delivery of services. Quite often, a lot of people around here don't get that. It seems that it's "pick on me".

Question re:  Mental health unit staffing

Mr. Keenan:      Well, gee whiz, I'm sorry for attempting to get any answers concerning leadership out of the Minister of Health. I'm sorry that the Minister of Health takes it so doggone personally. He shouldn't be taking it so doggone personally.

I would like to reiterate that the official opposition does believe in the good people within the department. But there is something lacking, and that is leadership that is required by the political arm - leadership. I find it ironic that the minister would stand there and use the words "leadership" and "interference" in the same sentence. Certainly that is the minister's mentality at this point in time.

Given the complete turnover in mental health clinical staff, it may be a really good time to evaluate how to meet the mental health needs of rural Yukon. I would like to ask the minister: does the department have any plans to restructure mental health services to ensure that adequate services are available to all Yukoners?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      We're always open to suggestion but at this point, no, I don't think we're re-evaluating.

Mr. Keenan:      Well, Mr. Speaker, this minister goes off on an excuse of having to re-evaluate, having to look into the future, and when there's an opportunity to do the right thing, which would look good on the minister, which would reflect the needs of rural Yukon and indeed the needs of all Yukon, the minister strays away from it.

Now, the minister just returned from a conference in Saskatoon on fetal alcohol syndrome. The minister has made much brouhaha about this being such a good thing, and the Yukon being a leader in this. Well, it was under the New Democrat government that this was required, Mr. Speaker. Yukon has made FAS a reportable condition, yet there is a lack of specialists trained in FAS diagnosis and in treatment.

So, I'd like to ask the minister: is the minister prepared to take the needs of those with FAS into account in restaffing the mental health unit, or would that be interference again?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      I appreciate the opportunity to talk about my visit to Saskatoon. It was a wonderful visit. We invited people to come to the Yukon. People want to come to the Yukon because they know that we are leading in some areas. I know the government of yesterday likes to take credit for their groundbreaking work in FAS. It took the opposition at that time, the Liberals, to beat the government of the day over the head to even recognize that it was a problem. Finally, in their last year, they decided, "Well, we do have a problem; we do have an issue here." Now they're going to take credit for all the things that are taking place.

Mr. Speaker, I think it's very important that this government of one year plus a few days has made initiatives in that one year when it took that government three years to even realize there was a problem.

Mr. Speaker, we are moving very, very well in this area. We have a lot of expertise out there. We have a lot of expertise in the community, and we are going to work with our partners. I know the opposition doesn't like that idea because they are finding out that we honestly do work with our partners. We don't come up with the answers and then tell the community how to do things. We actually listen to the community and they provide answers for us on how we should do things.

Mr. Keenan:      Well, to use the minister's own words, that was a magnificent display of grand staging in the Legislature, Mr. Speaker.

Now, earlier this year, we learned that an overwhelming number of inmates at the Whitehorse Correctional Centre have cognitive impairments. It is important that there be adequate mental health services for inmates and staff, as well. So, again, I'd like to ask the minister: what is the minister doing to ensure the needs of Whitehorse Correctional Centre are addressed in recruiting new professionals for the mental health unit? Again, what is the Minister of Health doing?

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      As the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes well knows, questions about the Whitehorse Correctional Centre are the responsibility of the Department of Justice, not the Department of Health and Social Services. We are confident that, by the time our new Whitehorse Correctional Centre opens, the programming will be second to none in the areas that the inmates require.

Question re:   Income tax cuts

Mr. Jenkins:      I have a question for the Premier. Now, the Premier has made much of her adoption of the NDP personal income tax cuts, claiming that these cuts are helping to turn the economy around. A graph showing these cuts is included on page 9 of the budget address, which I will now table, Mr. Speaker.

Now, this graph, Mr. Speaker, is even worse than the 23 pieces of the Dawson Dome Road that I tabled previously. The graph shows that a single income earner with a family of four earning $30,000 a year will get a tax break over three years of about $250, whereas -

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

Point of order

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

Ms. Tucker:      Under the anticipation rule, that question is anticipating debate on Finance this afternoon.

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

Mr. Jenkins:      There is no point of order, Mr. Speaker. This is a question on economic development.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker:      It's difficult for the Chair to determine whether Economic Development will be debated today or not. If it's a question about economic development, I think in fairness, from what I've heard, I would have to allow the question to proceed.

Mr. Jenkins:      Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, the graph that I just tabled shows that a single income earner with a family of four earning $30,000 a year will get a tax break over the three-year period of some $250, whereas a similar size family receiving a $100,000 annual income - perhaps from sole-source contracts from this Liberal government - will get a tax break of 10 times the amount of the less-affluent Yukon family.

Does the Premier think that this is fair?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Well, there are a number of points that are muddled together in that particular question from the Member for Klondike. First of all with regard to contracts issued by this government, the member should be aware that often contracts are made out to a professional corporation or to a business. Out of that particular business, whether it's a sole proprietorship or something else, those contracts would also be paying things like rent, heat, light, fuel and transportation costs.

So the member is trying to mix in a number of points there.

It is in fact the conservative estimate of the Department of Finance officials and others that the combined tax cuts between those initiated by the federal Liberal government and those initiated by the Yukon territorial Liberal government will put well over millions of dollars into the hands of Yukoners. $10 million was the figure I used in my speech to the Association of Yukon Communities this weekend. And that is money that the member opposite and I well know that Yukoners spend here in the Yukon. People from his own riding spend it shopping here in Whitehorse and elsewhere. People from all walks of life have a tendency to support local business, unlike the members opposite.

Mr. Jenkins:      The point is made. You have to have a job to have income and to have disposable income. That's not the case. Fewer and fewer Yukoners are employed here.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier was so proud of the graph sheet, she published it as an advertisement in the local newspapers. Will the Premier explain why she is trying to rub salt in the wounds of less fortunate Yukoners who aren't on the receiving end of the $100,000 annual income and who are struggling just to make ends meet?

Why do these poor families, who are in the majority, get a paltry $250 tax reduction over three years, while people earning over $100,000 receive $2,500 over the same period of time?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, the fact is that this government did, in action, what others have only talked about. We cut personal income taxes. The fact is that the Yukon Party raised taxes while they were in office. There were a number of other questions with respect to fairness from the member opposite's party.

The fact is that the federal and territorial income tax cuts, announced in budgets, will stimulate the Yukon economy. The fact is that they are cuts to personal income tax. That means that when people fill out their income tax form, as most of us have just completed or completed some time ago in time for the April 30 deadline, people are paying less taxes because of work by this government and because of work by the federal Liberal government.

That money is in people's pockets. They are spending it locally, which stimulates the economy. It helps the retail sector. I could go on and on again about the increase in retail sales, in wholesale sales and in building development permits that the territory is feeling. Certainly, that is jobs in our economy.

I find it absolutely amazing that the member opposite is standing up criticizing personal income tax cuts. The rest of the Yukon thinks it's a good idea.

Mr. Jenkins:      For the record, Mr. Speaker, I believe personal income tax cuts are necessary but this government hasn't gone far enough soon enough, like the Yukon Party proposed. When the NDP government first proposed those tax cuts, the Premier, then the leader of the official opposition, stated that these tax cuts for the average Yukoner didn't really amount to much. She cited a tank of gas, a couple of packages of disposable diapers, or perhaps a little dog food for a dog musher. That was then. That was on February 22 of last year.

Why does the Premier now believe that a tax cut for the average Yukoner of $83 a year is going to turn the economy around?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Because, Mr. Speaker, we didn't just talk about it, like the previous government. Not only did we do it, we did it in a timely manner and we went further. That's what we did.

And the member opposite, since he's so fond of quoting me, might be well advised to remember that, when asked about those tax cuts by the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce, I said we'd look at the books and if it were possible we would do it. Not only did we do it but we did it in a timely manner, so that it wasn't in July so that people had to then go back and start to recognize what an impact it had on their tax tables. We did it in a timely manner so it could be felt starting in January. People could then realize that there was more money on their paycheques. They were able to spend on things that we, as Yukoners, so treasure, like being able to put money aside for a recreational vehicle to take advantage of the free camping season and the earlier-opening campgrounds, to be able to spend that money locally, to be able to afford, as families, that new bike or some of the other items that we struggle and save for as families.

The fact is that, between the federal Liberal government and this Yukon Liberal government, $10 million is in the hands of Yukoners where it belongs, and what's more, Mr. Speaker, they're spending it locally.

Question re:  Faro/Ross River, doctor replacement

Mr. Keenan:      Mr. Speaker, I'd also like to point out that that tax cut was an NDP initiative. It was contained within the NDP blueprint, the budget, which the present Liberal government cherry-picked and did what they wished to do.

Now, I'd like to go back and make a link between the need to recruit staff at the mental health unit and the need to recruit medical staff in general. Last week we heard from the acting minister that there is a process underway now to replace the doctor in Faro. After I raised this issue in the House, a senior health official said last week that letters were going out to local doctors soon. The department has known for two months that Dr. Fast was retiring - two months. Can the minister tell us why it took so long to start the recruitment process?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:     I'm just not sure where the member opposite comes from quite often. When they talk about a tax cut that they had in their blueprint, they didn't do it. You may have had an idea, but the idea was not acted upon. We at least did something, and that's the difference between this side and that side, Mr. Speaker. We do something.

The point of the doctor - and, again, I know the member opposite is not going to be happy with this response, but when has the member opposite been happy about any response I've ever given?

The interesting thing about that coming from the Member for Klondike - here's the Member for Klondike, an expert on all people's stocks in the Yukon. The member opposite from Klondike knows what everybody's thinking. I can tell the member opposite that they're thinking, but it's not the way the member opposite would like them to think. They're saying, "What's this lone member doing there? All he does is criticize everything that's positive that this government does."

Mr. Speaker, we don't move into situations like greased lightning. We look at our situation, we evaluate it, and we assess our needs. Now we're being accused of not moving fast enough. Mr. Speaker, we have moved in a timely fashion, and we're quite happy with the process that's taking place at this time.

Mr. Keenan:      Well, if you quote the minister's own words. I know that the member opposite is not going to like this question. I know that the member opposite never likes any of those questions that we ask. But I would like to point out from the Liberal election platform of just over a year, it's all about the Future. I would also like to quote, Mr. Speaker, about your party here. This is what they are going to do when it comes to protecting social programs: "We are going to work directly with our communities to ensure that each community is staffed with adequate numbers of doctors and nurse practitioners." Let me file this where it belongs.

We need a doctor in central Yukon. While it is good to know that Yukon doctors have been given first chance to fill this position, letters to local doctors mean part-time services for Yukon.

Does this mean that one of the options that the department is looking at is to staff central Yukon with a part-time non-resident doctor? Is that what that means?

I am glad that the Minister of Renewable Resources finds that funny.

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Well, talk about staging. The member opposite is very good at staging for drama. I think that the member opposite is in the wrong profession. He should be down at the Guild somewhere really showing his stuff.

Some Hon. Member:      (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Well, thank God, Mr. Speaker. We are looking at trying to better the situation here in the Yukon. We are trying to work with all our partners.

If the member opposite believes that they have a different plan or a better plan, then I guess the member opposite would still be standing here. Obviously, the public has spoken. And, Mr. Speaker, they like what they hear - the fact that we consult, the fact that we share, the fact that we listen and we don't move quickly.

So, we are damned if we do and we're damned if we don't. The point is that we try to listen to all partners in this process and that takes time. Hopefully, we are going to make the right decision.

Well, we are human and sometimes we do make mistakes. I know the members opposite never made any mistakes, but at least when we make them we admit them.

Speaker's statement

Speaker:      Order please. Just before the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes poses the final question here, I would like to bring to the member's attention that, a few minutes ago, the member mentioned that the government side was "my" side and so on. I don't think it's appropriate that the member should try to politicize the Chair. The Chair does absolutely everything to be fair, honest and non-political. It was not an appropriate comment.

I would ask the member to please proceed with his final supplementary, if he has one at this time.

Mr. Keenan:      Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the Minister of Health's ego is showing. The sensitivity surrounding this issue is something this minister just cannot take. When a minister stands on his feet and says, "Hopefully we'll make the right decision", Mr. Speaker, I and probably 29,898 other Yukoners are questioning the minister's ability.

If a local doctor agrees to travel and provide weekly and monthly visits, it increases the strain on doctors in Whitehorse. Now, the Yukon is already short of doctors. The Liberal platform, as I just pointed out, said that they would ensure an adequate number of doctors and nurses in communities. Well, the Northwest Territories is spending $3 million and has four full-time employees dealing with this problem.

So, when and what is the department doing to aggressively recruit doctors to the Yukon? When is it going to happen?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      I guess I'm wondering what the real question is. On the one hand, we are being condemned for actually going out and recruiting a doctor. Now, the members opposite want to know what we're doing to recruit doctors. We know that this is a very serious problem. We are working very hard to ensure that we work with our partners in trying to build that awareness.

As I shared earlier, we have been meeting with the doctors for the last three months in a very open and transparent approach, trying to work on the future of doctor support in our communities. We are then moving to our next stage, as I mentioned earlier, in trying to develop the next approach that we, as a community, want to move on.

That will be forthcoming to caucus and Cabinet, so we are working very hard. With the nurses, we have worked very hard at trying to build for that future. I have met with the nurses publicly, and I will be doing that again this fall. We are very open to hearing what the issues are so that we can move on, and I would hope the members opposite would join us in trying to be positive and trying to support these very professional people whom we need in our communities.

Hopefully, Mr. Speaker, positive ideas, good ideas - we're always open to them. We believe that we can do it as a team if we have these ideas in trying to develop the proper future for the Yukon.

Question re:   Chronic disease program, breach of confidentiality

Mr. Fentie:      I have a question today for the Minister of Health.

Over the last month, Mr. Speaker, either through correspondence or questioning the minister, I have been trying to assist a constituent of mine who has been seeking, as a Yukon resident, their right to medicare and, secondly, what is possibly a breach of medical confidentiality regarding their case.

To date, I have seen little action out of the minister, but I did receive a letter last week, which basically ignores the issue and states, to me, that no medical confidentiality or breach thereof has taken place.

One of the issues is a department official's phone call from a residence here in Whitehorse to my constituent, with a third person on the phone at the official's residence.

Can the minister tell me if his investigation, if indeed the minister did one, determined that both people from the private residence making this phone call to their client - did both these people have medical knowledge of this situation and were they YTG employees? Yes or no?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Mr. Speaker, there was no breach of confidentiality, despite what the member opposite constantly tries to imply.

The issue of the phone call - yes, it did take place, but it was with the view of trying to find and locate the people they were trying to connect with. Attempts were made throughout the day to try to connect with this client but it wasn't possible, so the attempt was made in the evening.

So, Mr. Speaker, it's an employee trying to do the job and working very responsibly in trying to do that job.

Mr. Fentie:      A very strange answer, Mr. Speaker. This issue was an ongoing issue at the department level for weeks. Secondly, in the letter that I received from the minister last week, there was a new policy: no more phone calls from department official residences. That really says something to me, Mr. Speaker.

Now, the issue here is a Yukon resident's right to medicare, and secondly, the minister's responsibility to ensure that no breach of medical confidentiality has taken place in this matter. I want to ask the minister this: does the minister believe that he has dealt with this situation in a responsible manner?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      As I have said earlier, there has been no breach of confidentiality, despite what the member opposite constantly tries to imply. The member opposite, as the member has just said, has received a letter from the Minister of Health and Social Services outlining the options that the constituent can take. If there are any more concerns raised by the constituent, then it was noted in the letter that the constituent could then raise those again with his or her minister or MLA. We do our best to help the constituent.

Mr. Speaker, again, it's an employee trying to do their job in the best way possible. I don't know how many employees would try to do their work from their homes in trying to be faithful to the services and support of the government, but this was an employee who tried that. There was no breach of confidentiality, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Fentie:      I'm finding it hard to fathom how the minister can stand on the floor of this Legislature and make that claim, because obviously the minister hasn't done any investigation, and if he had, he wouldn't be answering the way he is today on the floor of this Legislature.

Let me point out some facts. First off, we have a doctor in Watson Lake, whose commitment to ensure that delivery of health care take place is making sure that the client is receiving her proper medical treatment - out of his own pocket. Secondly, nobody - nobody - in the minister's department, and more importantly the minister himself, has done anything in regard to the possible breach of medical confidentiality. This minister, when elected, did not get appointed to the Senate. The whole idea is that the minister's supposed to go to work, take charge and lead. The minister's mismanagement of his department is creating these situations.

I want to ask the minister this, Mr. Speaker: will the minister now undertake to do a proper investigation so that full disclosure can take place both at the department level and at the public level and that these things will stop happening, that the right to medicare for a Yukon resident takes place, and that no further possible breaches of medical confidentiality will occur? Will the minister now undertake to do the right thing?

Some Hon. Member:      Point of order.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Just before the minister answers, may I draw members' attention to the gallery to the presence of a former MLA, Norma Kassi.

Applause

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      The emotion runs high with the members opposite when they believe they have something but they don't have anything.

There has not been a breach of confidentiality - there has not. Now, from the members opposite, obviously, they don't believe that. There is always two sides to a story - always.

In my role as a former administrator working in a school for 32 years, there was never just one side of a story. But the members opposite would like us to believe that the only side that ever counts is their side. And the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes is laughing as if this is some joke. It is not a joke when we talk about clients. The member opposite keeps bringing confidential stuff up on the floor here that doesn't belong here.

The letter that was sent to the member opposite very clearly laid out the direction and the process that can be taken, but the member obviously doesn't want to follow that. The member opposite wants to make political brownie points, believing that something has happened here and nothing has happened. We do not discuss confidential matters on the floor of this House, but the members opposite would love to do that for whatever reason.

To also make the insinuation that we are not working in the best interest of Yukoners, that is not even near the truth.

Unparliamentary language

Speaker:      Order please. First of all, I was going to ask the minister to conclude his answer but secondly there was a reference in there to "not even near the truth." Could I ask the minister to please withdraw it and conclude his answer.

Withdrawal of remark

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      I withdraw that.

I think it's very important that we try to work for the best interests of all Yukoners. It is very important that we do that. Mr. Speaker, we are.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

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

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

Motion agreed to

Speaker leaves the Chair

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Chair:  Good afternoon, everyone. I now call Committee of the Whole to order. We will take a 10-minute recess and return at 2:00 p.m.

Recess

Chair:  I now call Committee of the Whole to order.

Bill No. 4 - First Appropriation Act, 2001-02 - continued

Chair:  We will continue with general debate on the Department of Finance under Bill No. 4, First Appropriation Act, 2001-02.

Department of Finance - continued

Chair:  Mr. Fentie, I believe you had the floor.

Mr. Fentie:      As I was saying when we adjourned debate last week, the Department of Finance, and indeed the minister, Mr. Chair, have a very important role to play when it comes to the expenditure of monies in this territory. Over and above the minister ensuring that the government complies or the department complies with the statutes in terms of spending money, it's also very important to note that the Minister of Finance, in her capacity, has a great deal to say about spending priorities of the government and how the money is distributed throughout this territory.

As I was pointing out, it's very clear, at least at this stage of the game with this Liberal government, that very little focus and attention is being paid to rural Yukon in budgeting, and I think the budget itself will clearly show that. We don't have to argue that point. It is all reflected in the amount of money that has been distributed throughout rural Yukon versus the amount of money that has been allocated for expenditure here in Whitehorse.

So I think one of the most important points, Mr. Chair, is that, on behalf of Yukoners, I urge the Minister of Finance to take every initiative possible to see if we can't find ways, vehicles and mechanisms to balance the spending in this territory out a little more.

I think it's fair to say that communities like Watson Lake and Dawson City and, indeed, Teslin and Carcross and other communities throughout the Yukon should get a bigger piece of the action when it comes to budgeting and the expenditure of monies. When it comes to the communities, the cash flow that results from government expenditure is a hugely important element when it comes to the economies of these communities. It's the cash flow that makes them go, and when you choke off that cash flow, the results are very, very negative and the communities are so small in nature that they don't have other avenues open to them, as the City of Whitehorse does, to offset any cash flow reductions that they have experienced over the last 12 months under this Liberal government.

So I have a few questions for the minister in regard to her capacity as Minister of Finance. My number one question, which is a burning issue and has been with us for a little bit of time and is ongoing, is the patriation of the pension fund. I would just like the minister, when she gets on her feet - I will maybe ask a couple questions here and then allow the minister to respond. When she gets on her feet, if she could just give us an update on - I understand the federal government's involvement in this issue. Of course it's a very important part of this equation, but would the minister please explain briefly to this House what the Yukon government's involvement in the patriation of the pension fund is? What is the Liberal government's plan as the federal government and the Public Service Alliance, and of course YTG, proceed down this road of patriation of the pension fund?

The second item is - and this has to do with the federal government also - are there any changes to the formula financing anticipated, given the drop in population of the Yukon? How negative is the impact going to be vis-à-vis the formula financing issue? Are we looking toward any significant reductions in transfer payments from Ottawa because of our drop in population?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      My sympathies, Mr. Chair. It sounds like you have the Yukon cold that has been going around, so I will try not to tax your voice unduly.

There are a couple of points that the member opposite has made. With respect to the myths regarding year-end spending, I would just like to advise the member opposite that there are a couple of points that have to be noted in particular with regard to this year. First of all, there are in excess of 3,000 people who work for the Government of Yukon. They are hard-working, dedicated public servants who certainly endeavour to live up to the goals and objectives of the government and, of course, all of the policies as stated.

Often, in their fiscal and financial management, they will delay the purchase of a particular item, ensuring that there is money for every other program and that every other program comes in on budget before they make the expenditure. This year, expenditures were no greater or less in actual fact than in previous years. They are pretty much in line.

There is one exception to that, in that the Department of Justice had initiated the purchase of some photocopiers in October. Because that would have meant that those photocopiers would have come from outside of the territory, they worked with the private sector locally to ensure that there was a local purchase. It showed up in the year-end, although it was actually initiated in October.

So there are pluses and downsides. There are positive aspects to putting a year-end freeze, and there are also some very real negative ones. Our message to the public service was to be very, very mindful that this is Yukon taxpayers' dollars and that we are trying to ensure we have enough money to do projects like our roads, et cetera, et cetera, so I am confident that there were no anomalies that would give cause for concern to the member opposite.

Now, with regard to the patriation of the pension fund, the member opposite knows that this is an issue that I lobbied hard for as a member of the opposition, and there were two things that needed to take place. One is that any patriation of the pension cannot occur without the full cooperation and support and working with the government Yukon Employees Union, as well as working with the Yukon Teachers Association. The status of those current discussions with those two bodies will be answered by my colleague, the minister responsible for the Public Service Commission in the debate on the Public Service Commission budget.

The role for the Department of Finance is to ensure - and I'm optimistic that we will be successful in the patriation of the pension plan - that we have the dollars, that we get the money that should be coming here, that we get the right amount. I am optimistic about those and am working with the Government of Canada. I have a meeting scheduled with the president of the Treasury Board this month, and I will be reaffirming the Yukon's case. I understand we are very close in our negotiations on that amount, and I will be pushing the Yukon's case again on that one.

That point is subject to discussions that my colleague is going to elaborate on - patriation with the employees.

Secondly, with regard to the formula financing arrangement, the member opposite is aware that one of the key elements of the formula is the population. We have, in our calculations of the formula, provided for an anticipated drop in population. The member opposite has provided me with an ideal opportunity to reaffirm the very key element and urge every single Yukoner to fill out the census form, and I'm very thankful to the Member for Watson Lake for reminding us all that the census day is on May 15. We all have the forms in our mailbox, long and short, and I encourage everyone to fill them out. It's well-known also that the impact on the formula is about $10,000 per person, but I assure the member that we have, in our projections, factored in a population drop.

Also, the member should be aware that our census figures aren't in for about 18 months, so there is quite a time lag between when the figure might come in and when there might be a drop or decrease in our revenues, but we have been very fiscally conservative in our estimates.

Mr. Fentie:      I thank the minister for that, and we will probably bring up patriation of the pension plan with the minister responsible for the Public Service Commission.

I would just add one more thing that the minister responsible for Finance could maybe enlighten us on, and that would be this: what's the potential of exposure financially to the Yukon government in terms of the patriation of the pension fund?

I also want to point out to the minister that I totally agree that our public service is a very hard-working group of individuals, dedicated to delivering services to the people of this territory.

But I would also remind the minister that that group of very hard-working individuals are very much happier in an environment where they're receiving direction from the political level and some leadership. That bodes very well for the public service in terms of productivity. Because when they're not receiving that leadership and that direction at the political level, it is very difficult for them to operate in a comfortable, productive environment. Confusion can reign. It is a situation that none of us want to see being furthered from what we are experiencing today.

I would just urge the minister, because the buck stops at the Minister of Finance's desk, to make every effort in budgeting to ensure that her ministers are providing the political leadership that's conducive to a productive working environment.

The next question concerns the formula financing issue, with the 18-month lag. That follows in the long-term planning area. Obviously, the economic situation that we're facing in the Yukon Territory is being to some degree - let me put it this way, Mr. Chair. Government expenditure, to some degree, is probably intended to offset this economic crisis that the territory finds itself in, because we're not generating that much in terms of economic development at this point in time; therefore, the government expenditure side becomes even more vital as it relates to the day-to-day existence of Yukoners.

When it comes to long-term planning and the formula financing issue - this 18-month lag - has the Minister of Finance already made adjustments, or has the minister already put in place the necessary mechanisms to address the possibility that there will be a sharp drop in transfer payments to this territory at the same time as there is little improvement on the economic front? Has the minister at least provided some thought to that and possibly put in some kind of direction to her other ministers and departments to address that issue?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I have a couple of points. The member started out with discussion around exposure regarding patriation of the pension, and at the risk of sounding like an accountant and getting into a long explanation, the fact is that there are actuarial evaluations of the pension. In other words, the amount of money that will be required for the exposure and the fact is that we and the Government of Canada have to agree on that actuarial evaluation before the patriation. So our exposure should not be there. We've got to be satisfied that we get the amount of money required in this actuarial evaluation before we transfer the pension.

The member is nodding so I take it that he is accepting of that explanation.

With respect to the census, the member is suggesting that there might be some negative impact in the long term. The fact is that we have taken into account, as we have been doing our financial work, that there has been a decrease in the population because we work on figures. Should there be any negative impact - we certainly hope that we are not going to see such a bill, if you will - there are very strong, solid reasons to ensure that of the amount we were working with regarding discussions on our formula with the Government of Canada, that $15 million is put back into the surplus to ensure that we have the funding available to us to continue to provide the programming and services Yukoners need.

So that was solid reasoning for ensuring that the $15 million is put back there as we have drawn down the surpluses - the member opposite knows both in the budget passed last summer and in this budget as well. The fact is that this budget is producing results in terms of the economy, that we have restored funding to highways, which translates into work for Yukoners throughout the Yukon. The minister responsible for Community and Transportation Services has been absolutely diligent about ensuring there is money being put into brushing, money being put into brushing and clearing so there are no more unfortunate encounters with any wildlife. There was money, as well, put into long, outstanding issues and the Alaska Highway upgrades.

The fact is that we said we would deal with substance and drug abuse addictions, and we are dealing with them by putting more money into alcohol and drug services so that we as a community can work together. And the Minister of Health has established a very strong relationship with other governments so that we are able to tackle these issues, and the personal income tax cuts - we are already starting to see the results with the second highest increase in the country in retail sales. And that's locally, that's money spent locally.

So the fact is that we've worked hard to deal with the outstanding formula issues, that we have finally resolved them, and that brought $42 million new federal dollars into the Yukon Territory. And of that $42 million, $15 million has been put back into the surplus to ensure we have the money available for future programming and to account for any decreases in the future.

Mr. Fentie:      I didn't ascertain from the minister's response how the reduction in the transfer payment, because of formula financing and population issues in the equation, are connected to the long-term planning issue, and what I was actually - maybe I'll rephrase that. The minister did state $15 million of $42 million was put back in the surplus; however, that doesn't really connect the long-term planning. That tells me that there's a pool of money sitting there that may be available. However, if the Minister of Finance's view is that the surplus must be kept at level X, and if the negative impacts on formula financing are such that our transfer payment drops over the next two years to where programs and services could be impacted, is the minister then prepared to spend down the surplus? And if so, what's the minister's bottom line in terms of money left in hand after expenditures?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      There are two points I'd like to make for the member. First of all, we cannot by law go into accumulated deficit or debt. We can't do that, nor would we want to. That's the Taxpayer Protection Act. It was passed, that's the law, and we certainly will live up to it.

In terms of capital planning and long-term planning, the member opposite is, of course, aware that we are tabling the capital budget in the fall, so that will also provide an opportunity to discuss long-term capital planning at that point in time. In terms of operation and maintenance or ongoing programming of the government, we are discussing that on a regular basis with Yukoners and with members opposite.

Mr. Fentie:      Does the Minister of Finance have a bottom line that must be maintained, even if we have to dip into the surplus and spend it down? The minister must have some idea that there is a level below which the minister will not go. Could the minister provide the House with that number?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I'm going to reference the member to the 2001-02 budget speech - long-term plans, budget highlights and supplementary information that I tabled. In the section on long-term plans and the Government of Yukon projections, the lowest that the accumulated surplus is drawn down to in this budget is $5 million. I certainly would not want to go below that, and even at that it was cause for a few grey hairs on this side of the House.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, under a heading of fiscal responsibility, I guess that one could determine that maintaining a bank account of $5 million versus a bank account of say, $25 million - there's a pretty big spread there. Defining fiscal responsibility in that environment or that particular area would be quite difficult. It's probably one of those situations where some may take a dim view of only $5 million in the bank and others may take the view that it's a necessity. I guess we'll leave that for Yukoners to judge.

We will stand then on the fact that the minister's bottom line is to go no lower than $5 million in the bank, no matter what. I'll accept that, Mr. Chair.

Can the minister, in her capacity as Minister of Finance, give me just a quick update on the fireweed fund?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, the member opposite has put on the record an interesting choice of words with respect to my commitment. I would just remind the member opposite that there are an awful lot of variables in any discussion about the bottom line. A lot depends on a variety of circumstances as to what the bottom line is.

What I said was that that was what was tabled in the long-term plans. Certainly I would not want it to go below that and even at that was certainly cause for concern.

The member opposite is aware that we are seeking federal dollars and a significant investment by the Government of Canada to kick-start the fireweed fund. They have not, as yet, been successful in seeking that federal funding. I have, as leader of the official opposition, provided them with assistance and, as Premier, I have met with them on several occasions. There has been no change from the report that I provided the member opposite with before.

Mr. Fentie:     Another question I have for the minister concerns a pool of monies that the Yukon government certainly has access to. Connect Yukon is a project that was financed heavily by this fund. The immigrant investor fund, Mr. Chair, still has some monies in it, as the legislative returns have indicated. So I have a two-part question. The first part: does the minister have any plans for the expenditure of the remaining balance of phase 1 in the immigrant investor fund? The second part: what is the ongoing process in regard to phase 2, if I could put it that way, as far as another shot at immigrant investor funds in partnership with the federal government and all the other jurisdictions in Canada? Is the minister aware of this proceeding, and if so, what can the Yukon expect in terms of timelines and a ceiling on how much revenues we can derive from phase 2?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, this has been the subject of discussion in my capacity as Minister of Economic Development, and I could just advise the member opposite that, under the immigrant investor fund, there is a need for an additional project to Connect Yukon, and that Economic Development officials, cognizant of the fact that there has to be a certain amount of money kept in reserve, so to speak, are actively looking at what parameters might be around another project and what sort of initiatives there might be. There is very, very preliminary work done in that regard.

With respect to a secondary call or an additional immigrant investor fund, there have been changes at the federal level and there have been some changes made. We are very aware of those changes, and we are looking at how they might impact on a second Yukon fund. There has been no decision reached at this point in time as to whether or not we might pursue an additional immigrant investor fund. It's a matter that we're gathering information on at this point, but I could provide the member opposite with more details. I didn't bring all my notes from those discussions. I tend to have them more as Minister of Economic Development, and I can answer the member opposite's question in more detail in the Economic Development debate.

Mr. Fentie:      I thank the minister for that and we will then revisit this during debate in the Department of Economic Development.

Another question revolves around formula financing for First Nations. Has the Minister of Finance done any work, given any thought, had any discussions at the federal level and indeed with the First Nations here, on formula financing arrangements when it comes to the First Nations in the Yukon? We don't need a lot of detail here, just if there is any ongoing discussion of what is happening in that regard. It is a big issue for the First Nations, obviously.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      The Department of Finance, at the officials level, have worked with First Nation governments in loaning expertise on their specific formula issues with the federal government. With respect to our formula and our formula financing discussions with the federal government and First Nation involvement, it has been raised with me in conversation once, and that was recently. There have been no formal discussions, no resolution along that regard or no formal exchange of views.

Mr. Fentie:     Well, obviously one of the big issues right now - has been and probably still is and will continue to be - are program service transfer agreements and how that all shakes down. This particular area is obviously a very difficult thing to deal with at the First Nation level, because the whole concept and the spirit of this whole concept was for the First Nations to be able to take down powers that government provides and then administer and manage them themselves. The question is this: how does that all equate when we take the big picture of Yukon in its entirety and our relationship with the federal government in this matter of formula financing? Can the minister maybe touch base on this formula financing issue again with regard to how First Nations want to - the issue here is they want to take down powers. I'll give examples: education is a good example; justice is a good example - how are we going to work that out? Has the minister done anything in that regard, and how does that connect to formula financing?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I would like the opportunity to review my Hansard comments - the member's question and my previous answer. I had understood the member to be asking me about the First Nations and the discussions around our federal formula financing arrangement. On that remark, my comments stand, with specific regard to our formula and the provincial escalator - that sort of thing.

With regard to PSTAs and the specifics around the formula, I understand that what happens is that should a First Nation government choose to draw down a program and we achieve net savings under our formula financing agreement, those net savings are given back to the federal government, who in turn transfers them to the First Nations. So, that's how that works.

With regard to program service transfer agreements, the negotiations and discussions around those are dealt with at the land claims table and also in the devolution discussions. I can elaborate on those for the member opposite if he wishes, either under the Executive Council Office or in a subsequent answer.

The member may also wish me to provide a written response to this question. I am looking for guidance from the member opposite regarding his wishes.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, for the sake of expediting the business, maybe the minister could provide us with an update via legislative return around the issue. I understand the minister's comment regarding the formula financing and how that relates.

Well, this issue is a big issue, obviously. I will accept a legislative return on it and move on for the moment.

Has the minister, in her capacity as Minister of Finance, done any work in regard to public/private partnerships? If so, what can we expect here in the territory over the next three years in terms of public/private partnerships?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I'm very interested in the concept and a lot of the work that I had personally done in terms of researching this concept was done at the tail-end of the spring session two years ago. I have not lost sight of the idea and what I have undertaken as Minister of Finance in working with the pre-budget consultations is that there are members of the private sector who are still interested in pursuing this. I have asked them to come back with an idea and those discussions are underway in that they are searching for an idea that might work, bearing in mind the principles around a P3.

Also, there has been work done by this government in that the electrics package in the Department of Tourism is a private/public partnership. The Member for Riverside has met with the United Kingdom Consulate. The UK has tremendous experience in this, and he is also loaning us expertise in working with the Member for Riverside who is working with the Department of Economic Development and the Department of Tourism in that regard.

There is also a committee of various departments that is working on developing criteria from the government perspective of the P3.

So, it's important to remember that, in a private/public partnership, this isn't about creating a win solely for the private sector or the government sector. It's about creating a win-win-win all the way around, so that the client group, be it the film industry, or be it in Iqaluit where there was a hospital or a nursing station done under a P3 - in that case, it would be the patient, the government and the private sector that won or created a winning environment.

So, we haven't lost sight of these ideas. We're still pursuing them. We have not got a specific project other than what we have already done - as I said, the electrics package, where we have said, "Yes, this is how we will pursue a P3." We're doing our homework in that regard. We haven't lost sight of it and we are still interested in it.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, I'll just ask the minister right out. In her capacity as Minister of Finance, is she prepared to borrow money in regard to a public/private partnership? In other words, would the Yukon government, in its participation in this partnership, go out and borrow money? Because ultimately the partnerships don't work without the cash being injected to get the project, whatever project it may be, up and running and continuing on. It's going to take money. So is the minister prepared, in regard to a partnership, to borrow money?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      The straight-up answer is I'd rather not. If there were some other way to do this, I would rather do that. Although it's not the true P3 model, a good example of where our government is trying to do this is with regard to the work that is being undertaken this summer on the Alaska Highway and at the Dawson City Airport, in that the Minister of Community and Transportation Services and officials met with industry and sat down and said, "How can we do this so that we can achieve the maximum for the dollars that we're able to spend?" We have been trying to work with the private sector on that, and I have received positive comments from them in that regard. That is not the P3 in the sense the member is asking about. The electrics package that the Minister of Tourism has entered into is exactly a P3, and it is an injection of cash, and there was not a requirement for borrowing on the part of government in that particular one. So the straight-up answer is that I'd rather not. I'm not losing sight of the idea, though, of public/private partnerships.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, I thank the minister for that but would put on the record the fact that I think it's fair to say that the Yukon Territory doesn't have any debt.

One of the upsides for us is that, even though we are going through some very difficult times, what probably makes it less difficult to deal with the situation that we're in is the fact that the Yukon as a territory is not in debt.

Believe me, when you get into these economic downturns, if you have a debt-to-equity ratio that is totally out of whack, your problems compound rapidly and in some cases - not all - recovery is virtually impossible. So I would just leave the minister with the point that, at this point in time, the Yukon has no debt and it may be fortunate that that's the case.

Moving on then, Mr. Chair. Does the minister have any indication, a road map if you will, of long-term revenues? Now, we know that in the oil and gas sector, revenues out of the Kotaneelee have dramatically risen over the last two to three quarters. Revenues coming from the federal government obviously play a role here. Is there any road map at all for the minister to look ahead and begin to calculate long-term revenues in regard to fiscal planning for the territory?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I thank the member opposite for the question, and again I would refer the member back to the long-term projections.

The territorial revenue, which is the revenue from all sources, is projected there, and there is a slight decrease in a couple of years with respect to population and so on. The Canada health and social transfer is outlined there as well, and the transfer from Canada reflects the anticipated transfer in light of a number of figures, including a provincial escalator as well as other factors.

With regard specifically to oil and gas, I should emphasize to the member opposite that these estimates are always fiscally conservative, and that's a good reason why the territory has also managed to maintain its healthy financial state. It's thanks to the conservative financial estimating and the work of all the previous governments and previous Finance ministers. Also, I give high kudos to the staff in this regard.

That being said, for oil and gas, next year the projection is back to historical levels. While industry analysts are anticipating that the price is going to stay high for some time, we, in our fiscally conservative manner, have put next year's back to historical levels. We've shown a slight increase for this year, but next year's are back to the historical levels.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, the reason I asked about a road map is that we all know that the special relationship between the Liberals here in the Yukon and the Liberals in Ottawa could spawn an infant here called "devolution".

What's the plan? If we suddenly take down DIAND's powers - let me put it this way - what are we going to do with the royalties from forestry?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, the projections that have been tabled in this Legislature do not include any projections around devolution, neither the transfer of authority in terms of royalty regimes nor the transfer of funding to accommodate devolution. This is for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the devolution transfer agreements aren't concluded. While we are very, very close, to use the words of the Grand Chief from this weekend, they are not "signed on the dotted line", so to speak.

The other point with regard to devolution that must be made in terms of the finances of the territory is that a specific reason for ensuring the April 1 transfer date is because you can't do it mid-year. Sorting out the finances would just be a nightmare. In terms of a road map with regard to forestry and transfer of resources, we are working on those issues, and there is the road map in progress. Until such time as it is formally concluded, it wouldn't be included, certainly, in the financial projections until there was a specific date nailed down for the transfer.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, let me put it to the minister this way. Whether devolution occurs or doesn't occur on the pre-determined date, we still have something here that we should look at. Whether we are dealing with Minister Martin as Minister of Finance under the federal regime or the minister herself should devolution occur, being the Minister of Finance in the territory, a decision has to be made around forestry and the royalties.

Now, let me say this, Mr. Chair. We are very keen - and I'm sure the members opposite are just as keen as everybody else concerned - to develop a vibrant, sustainable forest industry which contributes in a very positive way to the overall Yukon economy into the long term. It's a given that post-harvest, in terms of the forest industry, creates more jobs and benefit to the actual lead-up and harvest and extraction of resources - it's silviculture. A decision should be made here at the Yukon level to lobby the feds to turn every nickel they earn out of forestry back into silviculture in this territory. The money should not be put into general revenue. If we take over these powers, I seek a commitment on the floor here from the Yukon government and the Minister of Finance, Mr. Chair, that every penny we earn out of royalties - be it the straight taxation or reforestation fee or levy - be put back into silviculture. This is for very good reason, and that is to ensure the sustainability of our forests, to help with research and development, which is going to be a very key element in our future in regard to our forests and, of course, to help generate and maximize the returns that Yukon will accrue in jobs and benefit. Can the minister commit to doing that?

The former NDP government had made a solid commitment around that issue, that every penny earned went right back into the forest itself. Can the minister commit to that?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, the commitment I can make to the member opposite is that we are committed to the concept of silviculture in the territory and that we are very keenly interested in it. It is a key priority. I'm not going to word the commitment the way the member opposite has. There are also a number of elements with respect to the forests that have been negotiated in the devolution transfer agreement, and I know that the member opposite's leader has had a briefing on devolution. I'm not sure if the member opposite himself has or not, but there are a number of key elements around forestry that have been negotiated, and I would encourage the member opposite to also examine those.

Mr. Fentie:      I am up to speed, believe me, on the devolution agreement. My view is, though, that whatever that agreement says does not preclude the Yukon government from making this move, and there is good reason to do that. Silviculture, Mr. Chair, is more than just a concept. It's everything. It's the difference between sustainability and not having sustainability. It's what we do, post-harvest, providing that the officials responsible for making the decisions on how much harvest takes place know what they're doing and have the appropriate scientific data to back it up. It's everything beyond that.

All the more reason to make a solid commitment in this regard. As a government, I think Yukoners would be well-served if this Liberal government across the floor were to make that commitment. I think it's vital, and the last thing we need to see is, in the developing phase of this sector, for this money to just get lost in general revenues somewhere. We have an opportunity here to do something very innovative, very positive, and something that will really impact in a positive way in the long term. I just want to say to the minister that, standing on the floor here, making that commitment will probably result in many accolades going the minister's way, with some of those coming from me.

I think it's a safe bet, a great move, and if the minister would make that commitment here, I would back the minister up on that until my nose bled.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I am very committed to the - the member took umbrage at my choice of the words "concept of silviculture". I am very committed to silviculture. I hear the member's point. He has made it very well. I understand it. I am not going to preclude future governments from possibly even spending more on silviculture than the member opposite anticipates. The fact is that we are committed to silviculture, and that is the commitment that the member opposite wants me to make and we are committed to it.

Mr. Fentie:      At the risk of being mischievous, the commitment that I want to hear regards what we are going to do with the money that is coming out of forestry. Because if we are serious about this developing sector, then, in the final analysis, monies are going to be flowing in because it's going to generate revenue and it's going to generate a reforestation levy. Those dollars - although we don't know what that value is as yet, but it can easily be figured out on an average basis - are what I am interested in hearing a commitment on - that we inject everything we make in that sector back into it.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I answered the member's question. At the risk of being mischievous, I have answered the member's question. We are committed to silviculture and we are committed to the forest industry. We are committed to the whole concept of a sustainable forest industry in the Yukon Territory and that it is an economic engine in this territory. We are committed to that. Beyond that, the member is right; it starts to get mischievous. The fact is that we are committed.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, I certainly am very comforted that the minister is committed, but why be so scared of making the commitment on the money? Why not do it? Why not take a bold step? Why not be innovative and a leader in this area? Why not come right out and say to the Yukon public, "We will commit to injecting all revenues from the forest sector back into the forest sector?" You know, Mr. Chair, Yukoners, upon hearing that, would probably boost the popularity of this government, from where it's at on the floor, up a few rungs in the popularity department. That would bode well for the members across the way who have been under siege for the last 12 months, reeling from crisis to crisis, stumbling from issue to issue, fumbling the ball and trying to blame everyone else.

I'm trying to get to a very constructive, cooperative approach with the Minister of Finance. I would ask one more time, in all seriousness and with all sincerity: will the minister commit to those revenues being put back into the sector from whence they came?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, this is not a popularity contest. This is not about - I think the expression from one of Canada's national dailies is "what's hot and what's not". That's not what it's about. This Legislature and the discussions in Committee of the Whole debate are about government policy. In this particular case, it's about the budget and the expenditures of this budget.

I am committed to silviculture. I am committed to a sustainable forest industry in this territory. Our government is committed to the forest industry as an economic engine in this territory - a sustainable forest industry.

No matter how many accolades the member opposite is desperate to give me, I am not going to stand on the floor of this Legislature and write a cheque on a bank account we don't have. That's not the way you work and develop the public policy. The fact is, the overriding principle is what the member wants me to commit to, and that overriding principle is a sustainable forest industry, recognizing the role silviculture has to play in that. That's what I've committed to, and the member - principled member that he is - I'm sure will appreciate the fact that that was a principled commitment.

Thank you.

Mr. Fentie:      I'm going to move on, but I'll leave this issue with this comment: the former NDP government solidly and clearly committed to every nickel being poured back into the sector from reforestation and royalties, and with good reason. So I will leave the minister with that and move on.

Can the minister explain what designates or what triggers in the department the two-percent bad-debt expense? I mean, when you write this off, you've got a little column in your general ledger that says "bad debts" and you lop a bunch of money in there. In the private sector, you're not taxed on that money. I don't know what happens in the government sector. I think we as taxpayers lose. What triggers the decision to put these monies into bad-debt expense?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, it's a calculation based on the age of the accounts receivable, to liken it back to the private sector. So once it has passed a certain date, that's the calculation.

Mr. Fentie:      To the minister's knowledge, then, are there any outstanding loans or liabilities to the Yukon government in the form of loans that have been put into bad debt?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Under the Department of Finance, the specific bad-debt expense is miscellaneous expenses. With regard to loans in the Department of Economic Development, they have also allowed for a bad-debt expense and I can discuss that further with the member opposite in Economic Development. But in terms of the Department of Finance, it's in miscellaneous items, and there it's based upon age, and there are more details around a specific formula that I can provide to the member opposite if he wishes, but largely it's age. I can give the member some examples if he wishes further discussion on this.

Mr. Fentie:      No, I thank the minister for that. That's sufficient.

Mr. Chair, the Liberal government, through the minister, has made the commitment to do a capital budget this fall. Obviously that's a little bit of a change in policy and budgeting in this territory, so, with that in mind, is the minister going to undertake a budget tour - and that means the minister herself, as Minister of Finance, being responsible for the expenditures? No matter what department the expenditures come from, ultimately the minister responsible is the Minister of Finance. Is the minister going to undertake a budget tour, and if so, when and how extensive will it be?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, with regard to the capital planning for this fall's capital budget, there was an extensive budget tour in January and February of this year, and there was a great deal of information contained in that. With regard to specific capital expenditures, a lot of the information was received from communities at that point in time and that planning is underway. We are working with the existing commitments and dollars available.

I personally fully anticipate being most places in the territory as I am travelling constantly throughout the territory, as are all the ministers of the government, and those who do not hold Cabinet portfolios. We are regularly meeting with First Nation governments, municipal governments, as well as ordinary Yukoners. So, a specific capital-only budget tour this summer - no, we have a great deal of the information we need to do that, and communities and members of the public are speaking with us on a regular and continuous basis to ensure that we aren't losing sight of any of the ideas, such as the example given earlier in a discussion around P3s.

Mr. Fentie:      Can the minister give us a date on when - obviously this isn't when the budget is tabled - the budget will be completed, pre-tabling in the fall sitting?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Contrary to popular misconception, we are working on the budget right up to the very end, and we continue our work. Right up until it is tabled in the Legislature, we are working on the budget. So we are dealing with the needs and wishes of Yukoners just as promptly as we possibly can.

Mr. Fentie:      I thank the minister for that, which brings me to one of my final issues in general debate on this department.

The Minister of Finance just stated that the government side is working diligently on issues for Yukoners and as promptly as possible. I want to ask a direct question to the minister. We've got a serious situation, especially in rural Yukon, because of the cash flow situation being choked off. We have a very watered down community development fund, we have a fire smart program now that is a quarter of a million dollars shy, with an uptake that far exceeds the level of funding in it. These are great job-creation tools but, more importantly, they really go a long way - these two initiatives especially - in rural Yukon to help generate the much-needed cash flow.

Now, there is money available. I don't think we have to argue or dispute the fact that there is certainly money sitting in the bank. I want to ask the Minister of Finance, with all due respect: will the minister now undertake to inject more money into Project Yukon and into fire smart so that dozens of people in rural Yukon over the coming months can go to work and get a paycheque, spend some of that money in the communities, generating that much-needed cash flow?

This is not going to adversely affect the long-term planning for the minister. This is going to, however, have a very positive impact on rural Yukon. Will the minister undertake to do those two things - more money into Project Yukon, more money into fire smart? These are two vehicles that are sitting ready and able to put Yukoners to work and create that cash flow that is so much-needed in Yukon.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, first of all, I object to the member opposite's term "watered down." We are focusing our efforts in Project Yukon on people, structure and places where we can then measure the results. We have taken the fund - and Project Yukon is accountable, it is free from any political interference, and it is not watered down. The first round of applications has been received, and the applications are being processed just as rapidly as possible. The funding of $1.5 million has certainly not all been spent. In this first round, there is an effort to get as much of the funding out as possible and as quickly as possible. We have also set aside half a million dollars for fire smart, and the first round of applications are being sent in. In fact, I had the opportunity to speak with Mayor Richard Durocher from Watson Lake - it is a community particularly interested in fire smart - about their application, and the fact is that the Liberal government has recognized fire smart and set aside funding. It should have been a line item in the budget. It shouldn't have been lumped in with other funding programs. It should have been a line item in the budget and, under the Liberal government, it is a line item.

The money will be spent on fire smart. These programs, under the Department of Economic Development, are going to be spent. They are going to achieve results and they are going to be measurable.

Overall, in terms of working with communities and with Yukoners as a whole on issues where there is government help - and it's not just financial. There are occasions where government has provided expertise and the environment where we can facilitate a discussion of economic ideas in communities.

The Department of Economic Development and I, as minister, are working very hard to work with communities, recognizing that there are opportunities to capitalize on opportunities and to seek out new opportunities. We are working in that regard and we are looking forward to results. I can hardly wait to share them with the members opposite when we do an evaluation of the first year of Project Yukon.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, I don't accept the minister's argument that Project Yukon isn't a watered down version of the community development fund. It has $1.5 million less than the former fund. Obviously the uptake on the community development fund with that $1.5 million more in it - there still wasn't enough money to cover all the projects that came forward.

I think that the point that the minister is really missing here is that ultimately the final decision about who gets money is going to be made by politicians. There goes the theory about political interference, because it's this minister and her ministers who are going to ultimately be responsible for that expenditure. Now, the minister is shaking her head. Well, it doesn't work any other way. That's how it is. It's the duty she has been charged with and she will carry out that duty. In the final analysis, it will be the government side, the ministers, who will make the final decision on every dime that's spent in Project Yukon and, indeed, in fire smart.

So, with that, I have nothing further in general debate and will turn this over to my colleague from the Klondike, and I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Jenkins:      Mr. Chair, I listened in deep anticipation and just have a few areas to explore with the Minister of Finance.

Workers compensation, the WCB, is paid for out of Public Service Commission. I can't remember the exact amount but it's about a $2.2 million annual premium. In addition to that, the Department of Finance picks up the supplementary benefits.

I know there's some controversy surrounding the classification and there is an ongoing dispute between Government of Yukon and WCB.

Has that impacted on the additional costs for the supplementary benefits to the Government of the Yukon and has the issue between the Government of the Yukon and WCB been resolved?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, no, that dispute hasn't been resolved. It is still under dispute. However, the line item that the member opposite is referencing is not part of that dispute. These are individuals who are not government employees; they are former employees who were injured when we were not covered and when we insured privately, and we are topping them up to what they would get currently under WCB.

So there are answers to two separate issues that the member raised in that particular question. No, the dispute has not been resolved; it is still under appeal. And the separate item covers other employees.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, given there is considerable cost being incurred with being insured through WCB, has the Department of Finance taken an actuarial review of whether it would be prudent to go back to being self-insured?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      It's a loaded question that the member opposite is asking. It would appear on the surface that it would be less than the amount that we would pay to injured workers but as I said, it's a loaded question.

Mr. Jenkins:      So the Department of Finance has done an actuarial study. Well, where do these figures or this analysis come from? Prudent management would dictate that one would conduct such an overview given that there is an ongoing dispute with WCB and it could be less costly to the taxpayers to be self-insured, which I believe is certainly the case.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      It's actually the Public Service Commission that has done the study and the figures show that it would be cheaper to be self-insured.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, given that it's the taxpayers of the Yukon who are responsible for this, is there any movement to becoming self-insured once again? That is pretty well the way that most governments operate. The Government of Canada is still self-insured in Yukon, through Alberta. They just basically administer the workers' compensation program - WCB. That appears to be very cost-effective.

Now, given that our responsibility is to provide the highest consistent level of service at the lowest and best cost to the taxpayers, why is there not a movement internally to become self-insured once again?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I appreciate what the member has said. The example the member has given is the way it used to be here. The concern is the impact that any change by the Government of Yukon now would have on the private sector and on others. We are a large contributor and that is a very real concern.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, given that the annual premium or the annual assessment for the Yukon is some $2.2 million, I would suggest to the minister that the Government of Yukon is the largest contributor to the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board. Would the minister confirm that?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Yes, I think so, by far.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, I fail to understand why we aren't heading in that direction. What is happening is that we are artificially supporting the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board. The reality of it is that the WCB, in my opinion, is not addressing its responsibilities. All that this is going to serve to do is increase their cash flow and prolong their problems before they are brought to a head and addressed. The Government of Yukon currently can't get a resolution to its dispute with WCB. That should say something to us all.

Given that that problem exists and has existed for quite some time, there's the option there to pursue another course of action. Can the minister provide another good reason why we're not opting out and bringing this to a head?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, first of all, let me agree with the member that he has raised a good question and raised some key points. I think the member opposite, partly now and formerly, as a member of the private sector, can also agree that a very real concern is what impact any withdrawal by the Government of the Yukon would have on the private sector and the premiums that they pay.

Overall, all members of this House share a concern with respect to the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board. We have the chair and the president - I stand to be corrected on the titles - here to address these sorts of questions in the fall sitting of the Legislature. We also have a minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board who is very concerned about these issues, as well. What I can say to the member opposite is that we hear what he has said, we are concerned about this issue, and we are examining the very questions that the member opposite raises. However, there has been no decision made in that regard. We're gathering information and seeking advice on it. I appreciate the point the member has made.

Mr. Jenkins:      I will leave that issue on the table, but it's an area that I will be re-exploring, Mr. Chair, because I believe firmly that we as a government have to do the best for the taxpayers, recognizing everything.

A couple of the other concerns - I'm sure the Department of Finance, comprised of the capable individuals they are, Mr. Chair, have a very good idea as to what the lapses are at March 31. And could the Minister of Finance provide an insight as to what the anticipated surplus at March 31, 2001 was?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, we're still gathering the variance reports and information from departments; however, I can advise the member opposite that, at this point, it would appear that the surplus is pretty much as we had projected it, as we tabled it, with the addition of the letter received April 2 from the Minister of Finance regarding the additional formula adjustments.

Mr. Jenkins:      Will the $42-million formula finance adjustment accrue to the last fiscal period or will it accrue to this fiscal period?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, the way that is "booked", to use the term, is that what is earned up to March 31, 2001, is the $36 million, and that's what will be booked.

Mr. Jenkins:      So, $36 million is booked for the last fiscal period to March 31. Now, in addition to that, there are the lapses and accumulated surplus. What is that figure, exclusive of this $36 million?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      We estimated that there would be about $13 million in revotes and about $15 million in lapses. As I indicated in my first answer, the information we have to date is just about as we projected.

Mr. Jenkins:      So what the minister is indicating, subject to confirmation by the federal Auditor General's office, is that there is currently a $28-million surplus plus $36 million booked from formula finances - $64 million. Could the minister just confirm that?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      No, the anticipated accumulated surplus as of March 31, 2001 will be about $80 million.

Mr. Jenkins:      $80 million - and we are crying poverty.

Mr. Chair, I anticipated it to be in the order of about $60 million, but I praise the Minister of Finance. She has been able to cry poverty for quite a long, long time, and the surplus is $80 million. That is a significant surplus.

I have some other questions dealing with other areas. We will get back to that. I am sure that that surplus figure of approximately $80 million will be the topic of a lot of conversation around the Yukon.

The issues surrounding formula financing and the First Nations - if the minister could also provide me a copy of the legislative return that the official opposition has asked for, I would appreciate it. The minister is nodding accordingly and I would take that as an affirmative response.

One of the other areas that I know the Minister of Finance is monitoring and has a handle on - although they are in other areas, but they do reflect on the total financial indebtedness of Yukon - is the sum of the financial obligations of the Crown corporations, specifically Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Development Corporation. And I am speaking directly to the flex-term note with Canada whereby the Yukon acquired the assets of the Northern Canada Power Commission some years ago, and there is some dispute currently between Canada and the Yukon Development Corporation with respect to the repayment of this flex-term note. The last we heard was that the amount in dispute is being booked and just carried in a suspense account; it's not being forwarded to Canada. I am sure this is an issue that the Minister of Finance has been involved in.

Just where are we at in a resolution of this issue, and what is the total amount in dispute between the parties - between Yukon and Canada - on the repayment of this flex-term note? Just what is our dispute there, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I'm very well aware of this issue. My last briefing on it and discussions on it were as minister responsible for the Yukon Development Corporation, so that was some time ago. I don't have the exact figures the member opposite is requesting or the current status.

I can do one of two things: either have the minister responsible for the Yukon Development Corporation be prepared with those answers when we come to the Yukon Development Corporation debate, and put him on notice, or I can have the minister responsible respond in a legislative return to the member opposite. I don't have the figures he is seeking at my fingertips here. What would the member prefer? The minister able to respond during debate when it comes up, or does he want me to provide a legislative return?

Mr. Jenkins:      If the minister could provide it in general debate on the Development Corporation, that would be fine, Mr. Chair, but the issue is the amount and what the federal government's movement is going to be if it's not quickly resolved. I would have some concerns about that.

Mr. Chair, further to that, it would appear that the Yukon Development Corporation is embarking on another major capital undertaking that exceeds the amount they currently hold in reserves. From where will they obtain those funds? Will they be borrowed internally from the Government of Yukon or will they obtain those funds on the open market? And how? What is their method of borrowing?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, there is still some discussion with the Yukon Development Corporation Board. As I said to the member opposite, I am aware of this particular issue and the points with regard to the transfer of the NCPC assets and so on, but the detailed answers and the detailed answer to his last question will be provided by the minister responsible in general debate.

Mr. Jenkins:      Mr. Chair, is there any internal policy that the Department of Finance has with respect to borrowing by our Crown corporations? We see a line item for capital. For the Liquor Corporation, usually it's $1.00 because they don't have any major undertakings. But it would appear that the Yukon Housing Corporation borrows on the open market more often than they borrow internally. It would appear that Yukon Development Corporation borrows on the open market. What is the internal government policy with respect to borrowing by Crown corporations?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Generally speaking, if we have the financial resources available and have the cash available to the Government of the Yukon, we would prefer to be the lender, and for the Yukon Housing Corporation, for example, there's a vote through the Legislature. There is control in that respect. They also borrow as the member has indicated, but generally speaking, if we have the cash reserves available, we try to be the lending agency.

Mr. Jenkins:      Is there any policy with respect to borrowing by Crown corporations, and if not, why not, Mr. Chair?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      No, there is no policy. Each corporation has some bylaws in that regard. The member opposite raises a good issue. The Yukon Housing Corporation is voted. The vote authority comes through the Legislature. But others do not. The member raises a good issue. I rule that in, mentally, to this whole idea and questions around governance issues, and it's an issue that I take very seriously. The member raises a good issue.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, Mr. Chair, just for the record, could the minister confirm that the Government of the Yukon is the guarantor on all borrowing by all Yukon Crown corporations?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Yes.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, Mr. Chair, I would urge the minister to address this issue - that we have a consistent application of rules across all Crown corporations, specifically the Yukon Development Corporation and Energy Corporation. Furthermore, the same goes for the reporting on these Crown corporations.

If you want to look at contracts and contracts awarded, a policy from the Cabinet or the Management Board in this area is important, seeing that the only Crown corporation that reports accurately and consistently on contracts is the Liquor Corporation. The contract registry for the Yukon Housing Corporation hasn't been updated for years, and I couldn't find any or none exist for the Development Corporation and the Energy Corporation. So it's only reasonable to expect a consistent application of rules with respect to terms and conditions of borrowing, contracts and contract registry, and providing that information in a timely fashion - the same as other government agencies. There has to be a consistent policy in this because, ultimately, it's the Government of the Yukon that's responsible for all the transactions and is basically a co-signer on the loan when these Crown corporations borrow.

The Minister of Finance is shaking her head in agreement. It's an area that has been sadly neglected, and it must be brought to the attention of the officials, and a consistent policy must be put in place, Mr. Chair. When can we expect to see such a policy?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I agree with the member opposite. This is one good example, which the member has raised, of things that need to be done with regard to standardizing and working with Crown corporations or other similar entities that are sometimes at arm's length from government and sometimes not. There are many examples of them and there are many issues. As ministers responsible, we are expected to answer for these corporations on the floor of the House, but we aren't given the control in legislation.

So I agree with the member opposite. This is but one area that has, I feel, been neglected. I will share the member's view on that, and it's not often the Member for Klondike and I agree on something but we do agree on that. It's an area that has been neglected in the past, and so is internal audit. One thing at a time - we're working on this. We're working on it now, and I'm hopeful that the member opposite will see some results and some further discussion of this as the term of this government progresses.

Mr. Jenkins:      There is another area that I do have some concerns with in respect to the Finance department, and it is control over the Crown corporations. Is there any reporting to the Department of Finance by the Crown corporations with respect to their financial undertakings? How are these Crown corporations watched? Now, I know they have a president and a board of directors, but how does the Yukon government oversee it? Because more often than not, the minister of the day - it doesn't matter which party - doesn't really know what is going on. So how is the reporting to the Department of Finance, which I would see as being the major watchdog on these initiatives, undertaken?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      There are a couple of points that I would like to make with regard to the member opposite. We have talked in these discussions about the Yukon Development Corporation, Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board and the Yukon Housing Corporation, but I would also like to remind the member opposite that we have similar types of structures with the hospital and the college.

With the hospital, it is supported through the Department of Health and Social Services, with the college, through the Department of Education, with the Yukon Housing Corporation - there is no difficulty there. They submit their variance reports as do any others. It's the same with the Yukon Liquor Corporation.

With regard to Yukon Development Corporation and Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board, Yukon Development Corporation is audited by the Auditor General. So they don't submit variance reports as does the Housing Corporation to the Department of Finance. They are audited by the Auditor General. So each department submits a variance report, for example, and that tells us, as per an earlier discussion, what money will be required to be revoted, what is being lapsed, any changes in the financial picture. We receive those regularly and the minister signs them off, for example, for the Housing Corporation. We don't have that reporting relationship with either Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board or with the Yukon Development Corporation. They are audited by the Auditor General.

Mr. Jenkins:      Mr. Chair, that begs the question - I can understand WC being out of the loop and being audited separately, but the Yukon Development Corporation? Can the minister substantiate why it is treated like a separate entity and unlike other Crown corporations?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, it is self-funding. It is seen as more independent. Whether or not it should be is another discussion. It is a discussion around governance, but that is why there is a difference. It is seen as self-funding and it was set up that way. It is set up as an energy corporation. That's why.

Mr. Jenkins:      Can the minister confirm that the Yukon Development Corporation is indeed self-funding? I don't believe that that currently is the case. It will require massive infusions. It's only self-funding because of some very, very cushy relationships with the Government of Yukon. One of the initiatives was the Education building over in Riverdale, which was rebuilt by the Yukon Development Corporation and leased back.

In all respects, it is very much dependent on the Government of Yukon's support. To say that it is self-funding and that that's the reason bears much more careful scrutiny than what I'm hearing is currently being done.

What I'm looking for is a consistent set of rules across the board, to bring the Yukon Development Corporation into that fold with respect to reporting and monitoring. Ultimately, the Government of Yukon is responsible for backstopping any indebtedness that exceeds their ability to fund and, for any monies they borrow, the Government of Yukon has to co-sign. We are ultimately responsible, so the responsibility should flow both ways. It doesn't, and I want to know why and what's going to be done about it.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I've already said to the member opposite that I don't disagree with the member. These are issues. These are all part of the whole governance issues with the Yukon Development Corporation. I agree with the member. It has to be looked at. It bears closer scrutiny. I committed months ago, last November, to deal with these governance issues, and that's what we're working on. These are the very sorts of questions - I agree with the member, and I have been asking, as has the minister who is now responsible for the Yukon Development Corporation. I was trying to answer the member previously regarding an explanation for history, which the member opposite and I both know. The member wants to know if we are working on these issues - yes. Are we working toward bringing these governance issues into some kind of format? Yes, we are. We are working on them, and we are looking forward to the member's support for the results.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, Mr. Chair, we've recognized the problem, and we both agree that there is a difference in the treatment of Crown corporations. What I'm looking for from the minister is her assurances that we're going to treat all Crown corporations in the same manner. Is that the goal of this exercise that's being entertained currently by government?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, that may be the outcome, but the point of our work is to make sure that we have the sorts of controls that we should have. As ministers responsible, we stand on the floor of the House, and we answer. Let me use the example of Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board, because it's one we all understand in this Legislature. When the minister stands on the floor of this House and answers why we're having difficulty in paying injured workers or processing payments or dealing with appeal boards or why our premiums are what they are, if we're the ministers responsible, we have to be able to answer those questions.

We can't, in all fairness to the Yukon public, stand and say that it's an arm's-length board and not have the control. We have said we want to deal with these governance issues. We want to answer to the Yukon public. I want to answer the member opposite on all of these governance and financial issues, so our government is tackling the governance issues with Crown corporations.

Now, it may be - to borrow the words often used in this Legislature - that, at the end of the day, the Crown corporations will be similar, but it may be that there are still some differences.

The fact is that the member opposite has been asking about governance with relationship to YDC. The other fact is that I have said we as a government are working on it. If the member opposite wants to ask specific questions about the YDC and the financial relationship, I would encourage him to do so. I am certain that the minister responsible is very well-prepared to answer them.

Overall, from a government perspective, I can advise the member opposite that we are working on governance issues.

Mr. Jenkins:      Mr. Chair, for the record, I believe that all Crown corporations should be treated in a like manner by the Government of the Yukon. The only exception, if you want to look at WCB as being a Crown corporation, is that I believe that should be a stand-alone entity. But given that some of the undertakings of the Crown corporation are very much of a political nature or political direction - and the impact on the ratepayers may be one thing, but the impact on the taxpayers might be something else, because ultimately Government of Yukon is the guarantor on all borrowings. So I believe that it is imperative that we have a consistent set of rules applied to all Crown corporations, and that's what I'm seeking from the minister - her concurrence that that is the direction they're aiming toward. All I hear is that, at the end of the day, it may be like that. But I believe that until such time as we have in place a consistent set of rules for all Crown corporations respecting the treatment of capital with respect to reporting and to their financial ability, we would be remiss as members of this Legislature.

We must ensure that there is a consistent reporting across all Crown corporations that we can all easily understand. That is where I am heading, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I see where the member is coming from. I hope the member opposite can also recognize the point that, while we strive to have a consistent set of rules, it may be that there might need to be a separate wrinkle to take into account some factors around social housing through the Yukon Housing Corporation or something.

I see where the member is coming from. Certainly we are striving to clarify the reporting to deal with these governance issues. But at the end of the day the same cookie cutter might need a new wrinkle to deal with some issues around - I can't think of any other example other than perhaps social housing or some other thing.

So I see the member's point. I hope the member can also see that there may be a requirement for other anomalies within a strict set of rules.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, the other abnormalities are such things as the immigrant investor fund or funds flowing from Kassandra. Where are these going to be contained and how are we going to monitor that we are receiving what we should be receiving from these funds? How are we monitoring payouts? If you want to look at how the immigrant investor fund is structured - Government of Yukon has borrowed from it and it has flowed through to the Department of Economic Development. The funds were originally held by the Department of Finance, and it's debt serviced initially by Government Services and now it has been switched over to Community and Transportation Services. So, to track all these mechanisms, you've got to be somewhat conversant with what is going on in the budget process. There has to be a much simpler way to set these initiatives up, unless, of course, the Minister of Finance wants to hide something, which may be the case, Mr. Chair.

All I'm suggesting is that there be a consistent, fair and reasonable way of tracking these amounts and reporting on them.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, I don't disagree with the member opposite that the immigrant investor fund, as established, is very complex. Tracking it is something that we as a government have inherited and we are dealing with. I don't disagree with the member on that.

With regard to the Kassandra issue, the member wants to get into a discussion on that. On the specific question that the member asked, it is overseen by legal counsel - the funds. And the expenditures are overseen by legal counsel.

Mr. Jenkins:      So let me get this right. The funds, with respect to Kassandra, are being overseen by legal counsel, yet the briefing that I was afforded by the Minister of Finance was provided by the Minister of Finance. So that would suggest to me that the Minister of Finance and her officials are intimately involved with the Kassandra issue. They probably have more to do with the day-to-day monitoring of the money and the flow of that money. Where does it accrue? I don't see it under prior years' recoveries. It is just dumped into general revenues? Where does it go?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, all legal bills associated with this are overseen by legal counsel but, in the end, we are responsible. The member opposite has not seen revenues or funds received to date, as they are held in trust. They have not yet been recorded. They are still being held in trust.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, the last time we examined the Kassandra issue with the Minister of Finance there had been an issue that had been negotiated, and there was a settlement of this issue. Why haven't funds flowed out of the trust account of the legal beagles into the hands of the Government of the Yukon for our due component?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, perhaps the member opposite misunderstood. There has been no settlement. They're working toward settlement and there has been leave to appeal filed with the Supreme Court. So in part this matter is still before the courts.

Mr. Jenkins:      This was an area I had just recently explored, so that may or may not be the case, Mr. Chair. In order to expedite the business of the House, this is a somewhat complex legal matter. Perhaps I could ask the Minister of Finance to provide an overview of this area, save and except for the known directors of this corporation as to where we're at, how much money has flowed, where it's being held in trust and when we can expect resolution and what our exposure is, because virtually all the millions of dollars that have flowed so far have been eaten up by legal fees. There is a considerable sum. It's over $1 million in legal fees to date on this matter, and again it's an issue of reporting and accounting for and where it's done and how it's done. Unless you knew that this matter existed, Mr. Chair, you couldn't, for the life of you, find it anywhere other than in general debate in Hansard.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Chair, the member wouldn't find this anywhere except in general debate of Finance because it has not reached a conclusion. There are still matters that are before the courts. Now, if the member opposite wishes a verbal briefing, I'm happy to provide that to the member opposite, or I can provide a detailed