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:      Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Liberal Party and the government to recognize North American Occupational Safety and Health Week, which started on Sunday and runs until May 12.

North American Occupational Safety and Health Week is only week long, but every week of the year an average of 23 Yukoners are injured on the job. This number is much too high. The consequence of workplace injuries are tragic, expensive and time-consuming. The vast majority are 100-percent preventable. I urge every Yukon business to put a plan in place for preventing workplace injuries and illnesses. As the minister responsible for the Yukon Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board, I'd like to remind Yukon workers and employers that the board offers excellent safety training and consultation services.

These are here to help the everyday workplace and develop a safety net that prevents injuries and illnesses.

In conclusion, I would like to encourage all Yukoners to renew their commitment to safety during the North American Occupational Safety and Health Week and to make every week of the year a week to prevent injuries.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Keenan:      I am pleased to be able to rise today on behalf of the official opposition to pay tribute to North American Occupational Safety and Health Week. Here in the Yukon, as all across Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, this is a time to focus the attention of employees, employers and the general public on the importance of preventing injuries, illness and death in the workplace. I want to salute those men and women who are working to reduce the number of workplace accidents, either through their health and safety committees or by taking the time to inform themselves and the people around them about how to do a job safely.

With occupational health and safety, as with other aspects of health, prevention is more effective than the cure. The more we can raise awareness, the more we can do to prevent accidents on the job. It's important that everyone who works for a living knows their rights, especially if they don't have a health and safety committee where they work.

Workers have the right to know about hazardous materials, dangerous machinery and unsafe working practices. All workers have the right to ask for proper health and safety training and everyone has the right to participate in workplace health and safety, ask questions and get involved.

Finally - and this is very important - Mr. Speaker, everybody who works for a living has the legal right to refuse unsafe work. Don't go back to work until you have been advised that the problem has been fixed, and those are your rights.

So, I urge people in the Yukon to learn more about these issues, to get involved and get informed so that we can prevent injuries, illness, and even death on a job.

Mr. Jenkins:      On behalf of the Yukon Party, I also rise to join with members in paying tribute to North American Occupational Safety and Health Week as an opportunity to reinforce and strengthen commitments to occupational safety and health in the workplace and to increase public safety awareness.

Mr. Speaker, all injuries at work are preventable. Unfortunately, Canadians continue to have too many injuries. Last year alone, two Yukon workers lost their lives, 36 suffered permanent impairment and over 1,000 experienced work-related injury or illness.

In the last decade, there have been over 20 fatalities on the work site and over 12,000 workplace injuries in the Yukon. Extensive costs each year result from lost hours of production due to shutdowns caused by injuries, related damaged materials, machinery and the pain and suffering of the workers and their families.

To this end, I am pleased to recognize efforts such as the North American Occupational Safety and Health Week as an opportunity to join together with our neighbours to the south to focus attention on the importance of preventing injury and illness in the workplace and to raise awareness of the role and contribution of our health and safety professionals.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

In recognition of National Young Women's Day

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      It is with pleasure that I rise today on behalf of the Yukon Legislature to pay tribute to National Young Women's Day, which is May 11.

The date was chosen to fit into Youth Week, which is May 7 to May 14. It was chosen by young women for young women to focus discussion, both locally and nationally, on issues important to young women.

Across the country young women are raising awareness on such topics as freedom from violence, poverty, sexual orientation, race and gender.

Here at home, young women are invited to participate in the events surrounding Youth Week, which was organized by BYTE, or Bringing Youth Toward Equality. One Youth Week event of special interest to young women is an open house at the Entrepreneurship Centre on young women and information technology. The aim of the open house is to help young women learn about IT. Later this week, the new youth centre is hosting "Get Cybersafe," a discussion by the RCMP on how to safely navigate the Web.

The young women in this territory are strong, active members of our society. They advocate politically and socially for equality for all. They volunteer to help wherever help is needed, and they strive to make their voices heard. I honour their work.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker:      Are there any further tributes?

Introduction of visitors.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Keenan:      Today I'd like to introduce to the House if I can a very special friend of mine, a great influence in my life, my mother, Daku Claw, better known as Pearl Keenan.

Applause

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, I would also like to ask members of the Legislature to join me in welcoming the chair of the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment, Mr. Rick Buchan, to the gallery, as well as His Worship Mayor Ernie Bourassa, who is the representative for the Association of Yukon Communities on the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment.

Applause

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Speaker:      Under tabling of returns and documents, I have for tabling the Annual Report of the Auditor General of Canada on Other Matters for the years ending March 31, 1998, and March 31, 1999.

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

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I have for tabling two documents from the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment, and they are the reason that our special guests have joined us today.

The first is the review of the 1999 Yukon state of the environment report by the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment, dated April 1, 2001; the second is the term report of the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment, April 1999 to December 2000.

Hon. Mr. Jim: I have for tabling a legislative return from the Department of Government Services. It is in response to questions in the House from the MLA for Klondike relating to the reporting of government contracts and to Connect Yukon.

Speaker:      Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) the Yukon Liberal government has broken faith with the Yukon people by failing to provide appropriate levels of funding for capital projects in Yukon communities;

(2) in its current budget, the Yukon Liberal Government has reduced funding for popular and effective programs, such as the Community Development Fund, Fire Smart and Rural Roads Upgrading;

(3) the failure of the Yukon Liberal Government to accept its responsibilities has inflicted unnecessary hardships on Yukon people, causing many of them to leave the territory due to the shortage of employment opportunities last winter;

(4) the Yukon Liberal Government has finally acknowledged that it has an accumulated surplus much larger than it had led Yukon people to believe; and

(5) the Premier recently indicated to municipal leaders that her government would be willing to embark on economic development plans with Yukon communities; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Liberal Government to table a supplementary budget before the end of this sitting to allocate a significant portion of its $80-million accumulated surplus toward badly needed job-creating projects in Yukon communities, such as Teslin, Carcross, Old Crow and Watson Lake, whose needs are not adequately addressed in the Main Estimates for 2001-02.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) during the last election campaign, the Yukon Liberal Party made a commitment to ensure that each Yukon community is staffed with adequate numbers of doctors and nurse practitioners;

(2) in spite of that promise, the Yukon now faces a serious and growing shortage of health care professionals that threatens to undermine our ability to meet the health care needs of people throughout the territory;

(3) recruiting the required number of doctors, nurses and other qualified health care personnel is a challenge for all jurisdictions in Canada, and is particularly challenging for remote areas such as the Yukon;

(4) in order to attract qualified medical personnel to the Yukon and to retain those who are already working here, the Yukon Government must be innovative, flexible and aggressive in providing incentives that will make it possible for the Yukon to compete successfully with other jurisdictions; and

(5) the Minister of Health and Social Services has consistently failed to exercise his responsibilities to ensure that his department is equipped to undertake successful recruitment and retention initiatives in a timely manner;

(6) the financial resources of the Yukon Liberal Government are more than sufficient to provide the necessary incentives to attract and retain the qualified health care professionals needed to meet the needs of Yukon people in both urban and rural communities; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Liberal Government to use a significant portion of the $80-million surplus with which it began the current fiscal year to address the recruitment and retention of health care professionals as a matter of urgent and pressing necessity.

Thank you.

Ms. Netro:      I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) the Yukon Liberal Government did a great disservice to the people of Mayo by delaying the construction of a replacement for the J.V. Clark School, for no valid economic reason;

(2) this politically inspired decision not only required students and school staff in Mayo to continue working in unacceptable conditions, it also deprived workers and business people in Mayo of badly needed economic opportunities during the past winter;

(3) the delay in beginning major construction on the Mayo school also resulted in unnecessary delays in school construction projects in Carmacks and Pelly Crossing, which were already scheduled by the previous NDP government; and

(4) the Yukon Liberal Government has more than enough financial resources to fast-track the Carmacks and Pelly Crossing school projects, so that residents of those communities will be able to derive economic benefits this year; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Liberal Government to use part of its current $80-million accumulated surplus to advance the start of construction on the Carmacks and Pelly Crossing projects, so that economic benefits will begin flowing to those communities as soon as possible and so that schoolchildren and staff of those schools do not have to wait longer than necessary for the needed improvements to their school facilities.

Thank you.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) the cultural industries that contribute to the Yukon's economy are worthy of public support, as are the not-for-profit artistic endeavours of Yukon people that contribute equally to the social fabric and quality of life in the territory;

(2) by its politically inspired moves to reduce public funding for individual, group and community artistic activities, the Yukon Liberal Government has created serious uncertainty in the arts community, as well as among organizers of community-based cultural events;

(3) the Yukon Liberal Government has added to this uncertainty by its hasty and ill-considered move to change the status of the Arts Branch, without seeking input from the arts community about the effects of such a move; and

(4) the Yukon Liberal Government has no valid financial reason for reducing its support of the arts; and

(5) THAT this House urges the Yukon Liberal Government to delay its plans to reorganize the Department of Tourism until the arts and cultural industries practitioners have been fully and openly consulted, and to use part of its $80 million accumulated surplus to increase financial support for the arts, including arts-related education at all levels of the Yukon's public school system.

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

THAT this House recognizes that Yukon placer miners are having a difficult time continuing their operations because of low gold prices, high fuel prices and an excessive regulatory burden;

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development are attempting to add to the regulatory burden by imposing an arbitrary policy change that would restrict or prohibit the use of a stream as a conduit which, if implemented, has the potential to shut down 37 percent of existing placer mining operations; and

THAT this House urges the Minister of Economic Development to make a presentation on May 17, 2001 in Dawson City to the Yukon Territory Water Board, arguing against the imposition of this arbitrary policy that would restrict or prohibit the use of in-stream settling and the use of a stream as a conduit.

Speaker:      Are there any further notices of motion?

Are there any statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      I rise to speak about his government's policy to improve Yukon infrastructure.

An important part of this policy is working with other levels of government, and, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House that this policy has resulted in further improvements to be made to the Dawson City Airport.

Last month, along with many other Yukoners, I welcomed Yukon Member of Parliament Larry Bagnell at the Dawson City Airport, where he announced, on behalf of the federal Minister of Transport, Mr. David Collenette, a $3.96-million grant for upgrades to the Dawson Airport.

Today, I'm pleased to announce that we have successfully lobbied the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to relocate its air tanker base at the Dawson City Airport to the south side of the runway.

The relocation of the tanker base will resolve a long-outstanding aircraft parking issue, allow for additional aircraft parking on the main apron area, increase the safety of aircraft and emplaning and deplaning passengers and increase the operating efficiency of air tanker operations at the airport.

The relocation work will be carried out this summer, in conjunction with the Dawson City Airport reconstruction project.

This relocation project cost is estimated at $1.2 million. DIAND will realize significant cost-savings by taking advantage of the presence of heavy equipment contractors who will be at the airport to work on the larger reconstruction project.

Community and Transportation Services will manage site development work for the new tanker base on behalf of the new federal government. The Yukon government's property management agency will manage the construction of a small office facility and cold-storage building.

This is an example of the efficiencies we are achieving through our government's hard work and through our policy of cooperating with other levels of government.

Mr. McRobb:      I am pleased to rise in response to this so-called ministerial statement.

There really are three policy announcements rolled into this ministerial statement, none of which were identified by the minister in her speech.

The first one that I would like to point out is the continuing disrespect for the Legislature shown by this Liberal government, and that is quite evident in the continual breaking of the rules for ministerial statements, which are supposed to be short, factual statements on new government policy. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is only one way this can meet that test, and that is if it's the government's new policy to improve Yukon infrastructure. Now, some could argue that that could be the case because, in the first year under this Liberal government, it is quite evident that they did not have a policy to improve Yukon's infrastructure.

Secondly on that same point, this ministerial statement disrespects the House leaders' agreement to identify ministerial statements at the morning meeting of House leaders. That was not the case, and we received very short notice of this ministerial statement today.

Now the second hidden policy is one that we are becoming familiar with on this side of the House, and that is that this is simply a reannouncement of a press release. We have seen several examples recently, about the extended season of the campgrounds, about the fishing agreement. First off the Liberal government puts out a press release, and then they come in here and waste the time of the Legislature with a ministerial statement that consumes about 10 to 15 minutes of our time.

We know that we have less than two days remaining in this Legislature and several departments yet to debate, yet the Liberals find it necessary to come in here with a ministerial statement that is not necessary, to waste the time of the Legislature.

The third hidden policy in this ministerial statement was the policy that the Liberals are practising to focus attention away from the more serious funding issues that the Yukon Territory has with the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, it likes to ballyhoo its so-called policy of cooperating with other levels of government and to pat on the back the new rookie Member of Parliament, one of its Liberal cohorts, but really where are the Liberals when it comes to responding to the more serious issues in the territory? I'll take a minute to list some of them.

Mr. Speaker, there is the cleanup of abandoned military sites, the cleanup of mines. What we have seen out of the federal Liberal government is trading away the hundreds of millions of dollars required for the cleanup of those sites for a fleet of rusty old tanks. Where are the Liberal stars when it comes to dealing with this issue? What about the contaminated site cleanup? There are hundreds of them in the territory. Our environment is continuing to be threatened and jobs are lost in the meantime. What about the restitution of health cuts? Cuts of more than $20 million were suffered and endured by previous Yukon governments because the federal government cut our health transfer payment. Shame on them. What about the cuts to NavCan or the local weather office?

Where are the Liberals when it comes to reinstituting those services to the Yukon public? What about a better deal on the federal infrastructure program? What we discovered after the Premier ballyhooed this in her budget speech was that the actual amount of dollars obtained in the agreement with the federal government was less than the previous agreement negotiated by the Yukon Party government and the previous NDP government. Where are the Liberal stars when it comes to giving a better deal to Yukoners in regard to -

Speaker:      Order please. The member has 30 seconds to conclude.

Mr. McRobb:      What about debt forgiveness to the Yukon Energy Corporation, Mr. Speaker, to reduce power rates? What about restitution of employment insurance or social programs like child care or early childhood development, cuts to education?

Mr. Speaker, where are these Liberals when it comes to replenishing cuts made by the federal government from which Yukoners are still suffering?

Mr. Jenkins:      Now, this statement on the relocation of the DIAND tanker base at the Dawson City Airport is not a statement about a new government policy. If the minister insists on calling it a policy, let's call it a catch-up policy, because that's all it is. The $1.2 million from DIAND to relocate the tanker base, that should have been done, should have been spent prior to the airport ownership being transferred to the Yukon government. It was only after the transfer that the federal government applied its regulations, claiming the Dawson City Airport was out of compliance and threatening to cancel the airport's operating certificate.

All the work that had been done to date, including this $1.2-million announcement, is the minimum amount of work required to bring the Dawson City Airport into compliance with federal transport regulations. That's all that's being accomplished here, Mr. Speaker. The airport operated for years with the tanker base in its current location. It was all right then because the ownership was with the federal government and they were the regulators. After transfer to the Yukon government, the federal regulatory regime descended upon YTG, requiring these expenditures in order to comply with the federal safety regulations.

Now, having the Yukon's Liberal Member of Parliament and the Minister of Community and Transportation Services claiming to be the white knights coming to Dawson to save the Dawson City Airport, that's simply ludicrous, Mr. Speaker. The federal Liberals created the problem, and they should foot the bill for correcting those deficiencies and then some. The sad thing, Mr. Speaker, is that at the end of the day, all the Yukon government will have after spending this $5.16 million in total for correcting these deficiencies is an unpaved, day, visual-flight-rule airport.

If the minister were to be announcing the estimated $8-million expenditure to pave the airport runway, its aprons and taxiways and provide for an IFR airport, that would be a ministerial statement that would gain widespread support. The airport could then be used as a tool for economic development, not just for Dawson but for the entire Yukon. This Liberal government is crying poverty, yet it is sitting on a nest egg of some $80 million that should, in part, be used for economic development infrastructure.

So much for this Liberal government's commitment to improve Yukon infrastructure.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      Well, the manufactured indignation from the members opposite is certainly very interesting. The diatribe by the Member for Kluane took four times as long as the ministerial statement, so I don't think he should be talking to me about wasting time.

The Member for Kluane obviously hasn't noticed the infrastructure work going on in his riding - the work on the Alaska Highway in the Champagne area and the continuing work on the Shakwak project. That's more than $30 million in the Kluane riding, which he somehow neglected to mention.

The Member for Klondike is secretly pleased that this work is being done on the Dawson City Airport, but he can't say so. His government didn't succeed at making it happen when they were in power and this government did. Our policy of working cooperatively with other governments is obviously bearing fruit.

As I said, the tanker base problem has a long history that no previous government was able to address. When this Liberal government was elected, we said we would do things differently. We have done so.

Transport Canada has stated that the current location of the tankers on the apron of the runway is a safety concern. In her letter to Minister Nault, the Premier stated this government's concern that while the runway was being upgraded, the tanker base safety issue wasn't being addressed. Further lobbying by this government resulted in this important change in policy by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

The plan had been to leave the base up to the devices of the territorial government after devolution. The Premier and I wanted the Government of Canada to correct this problem before devolution. We continued to work cooperatively with the federal government and all other governments for the betterment of Yukoners.

I apologize that the government House leader hadn't notified the members opposite that this ministerial statement was coming. That is my fault, and I do apologize.

Speaker:      Are there any further statements by ministers? This then brings us to Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Mr. Fentie:      My question today is for the Premier. Yesterday the Premier, in her capacity as Minister of Finance, openly admitted what the opposition has known all along - that the Liberal government across the floor is awash in cash. And the minister even went on to state that the surplus effective March 31, 2001 would be in the neighbourhood of $80 million. My question to the Premier is this: why would the Premier and her government plead poverty with the Yukon public knowing full well that they had this cash available to them?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      First of all, the member will recall that on February 22 I tabled a budget that projected a $45-million surplus for March 31, 2001. Since that time I have successfully negotiated a $36-million settlement, an increase in funding from Ottawa.

It's elementary, even for the dear Member for Watson Lake, that 45 plus 36 is 81, and I am really pleased that the members opposite have finally noticed that the work we've been doing has paid off. Yes, we have successfully negotiated this $36 million and we are spending that money wisely - very wisely in fact. And I would like to elaborate for the member opposite just exactly how wisely that money is being spent. I would also like to remind the member opposite that March 31, 2001 has passed and that, were he to engage in further discussion with the Minister of Finance, the question is, what is the projected surplus for March 31, 2002? And that figure is $23 million.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, Mr. Speaker, it wasn't this side of the House that misled the Yukon public on what the surplus was going to be March 31, 2001 -

Point of order

Speaker:      Order please. I note that the Member for Watson Lake is accusing other hon. members of this House of misleading the House.

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

Speaker:      Mr. Fentie, on the point of order.

Mr. Fentie:      I merely said that this side of the House has not misled the Yukon public.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker:      That's just a fancy way of trying to get around an accusation that other hon. members were misleading the Yukon public, and I'm going to rule right now that that is not acceptable in this House, however we manage to twist it around. I'd ask the member to be cautious in his words and to continue, please.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. Fentie:      Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll retract "mislead" and replace it with "It wasn't this side of the House that provided incorrect information to the Yukon public regarding the surplus for the fiscal year-end, March 2001."

The minister just stood on her feet and said that next year's surplus - "Everything's okay with us providing the public that erroneous information because next year the surplus is only going to be $23 million." Nobody believes that any more. This government has a credibility problem when it comes to fiscal management.

With an $80-million surplus, why - when the minister had the opportunity last fall to bring forward a winter works project to put Yukoners, especially in rural Yukon, to work to help alleviate the economic crisis that they found themselves in - did the minister refuse to do so and make the claim that there isn't any money? Why is that?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, the only credibility problem in this Legislature and with the Yukon public is the member opposite's ability to do simple math.

On February 22, I stood in this House and delivered a budget that projected a $45-million surplus for March 31, 2001. Since that time I have successfully negotiated a $36-million increase in funding from Ottawa, and 45 plus 36 is 81. It's that simple in the math.

The members opposite have finally noticed that the work that we've been doing has paid off. Yes, we have achieved more money and we were notified of that additional $36 million from Ottawa on April 2. On April 5, it was published in the Whitehorse Star. That's being open and accountable. We found out on April 2 that we had been successful in our work and that we had negotiated an additional $36 million and I informed the public, and I have informed this House.

The fact is this government - yes, we have obtained more money and yes, we are spending it wisely. Some of the ways we are spending it very wisely on behalf of Yukoners include more than $30 million on infrastructure just as the motion indicated earlier today - more that $30 million on our highways; $19.5 million -

Speaker:      Order please. I have asked the Premier to conclude her answer, please.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      And the list goes on, and I am looking forward to discussing all those initiatives with the member opposite.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, the Premier is really scrambling now. What she wants this side of the House, and indeed the Yukon public, to believe is that when the minister brought forward a budget in February she knew all along that some $42 million was coming from the government. Yet, she did not provide that to the public. In fact, they pleaded poverty to the teachers during negotiations. We all know better than that. We didn't just fall off the turnip truck.

The budget was booked. The lapsed funds and the revotes and the healthy surplus that the former government left this government equate to $80 million. The $42 million that the feds have thankfully sent to this territory in the last week has nothing to do with the surplus for March 2001.

The Premier knows that. Now, why did the Premier plead poverty and force Yukoners through such hardship when they had all this money? Why?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Why is the member opposite making accusations about me and about this government when he knows very well that the indication of the settlement from the Minister of Finance is dated and was received in the government offices on April 2? The Whitehorse Star says April 5. The fact is that we were notified of this money.

Maybe the member opposite, in his private and public life, believes that you should spend money you don't have, but this government doesn't do that. This government was notified on April 2 of a successful conclusion to negotiations - negotiations and work that I had been doing for over a year. I was notified on April 2 of the amount and notified the Yukon public. The proof is in the pudding, in the fact that this government is spending the money wisely.

Let's talk, which the members have refused to do for in excess of 35 days, about more than $7 million on Yukon hospital insurance services. Let's talk about, for the first time in 11 years, a 22-percent increase in foster parents funding. This government listens to the public and we spend their money wisely.

Question re:  Budget surplus

Mr. Fentie:      Mr. Speaker, the Premier should be embarrassed to make the claim that she is the Minister of Finance. She just stood on her feet and said that they were notified April 2 of a $42-million windfall from the federal government. Well, Mr. Speaker, we are talking about fiscal year-end, March 31, prior to any $42 million coming from the federal government.

The Premier knows better - or at least she should - given her position as Minister of Finance. I can only suggest one thing, Mr. Speaker. The members opposite are either entirely incompetent when it comes to fiscal management or they have ulterior motives on why they've been hiding money. Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier this: why did she force Yukoners through such hardship when they were awash in this kind of money? I'll give the Premier one more chance: why is that?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, one more time for the member opposite: on February 22, I tabled a budget that projected a $45-million surplus as of March 31, 2001. On April 2, I was notified by Paul Martin that there had been a successful conclusion, that I had successfully negotiated a $36-million increase in funding. Yesterday the question was asked, "Well, where does that funding go?" It gets booked. That's where the member is utterly confused, Mr. Speaker. The fact is, on February 22, I tabled the budget with a $45-million surplus. On April 2, we received notification of the successful conclusion that we have done. I'm glad the members opposite finally noticed it. And 45 plus 36 is 81. The fact that the members have finally clued into this - what's today, May 8, a month later, they finally managed to do the math - is not my problem. It's elementary for the member from Watson. I wish he'd figure it out.

Mr. Fentie:      Yes, it is elementary, my dear Watson. The Premier's talking about next fiscal year. We're talking about the fiscal year-end March 31, 2001. Now, the Premier knows full well that the money that the federal government sent in April wasn't booked in last year's budget. She knows that full well, and let's stop being silly about this. The facts are that the government across the floor - this Liberal government - had an $80-million surplus, and I can tell you why they're hoarding money, Mr. Speaker: they have a debt to pay when it comes to the election campaign.

They went on a vote-buying spree, and there's no way they can put money out in the communities. They have to pay that debt for the votes they bought.

Will the Premier now come clean and tell this House and the Yukon public what their plans are for the $80 million they have sitting in the bank?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, I'm so glad the member asked that question. Let me explain to the member opposite how this government is spending Yukon taxpayers' money wisely.

In excess of $30 million is going to be spent on restoring funding for highways, funding the member opposite's previous government cut. There is $9 million for completion of the continuing care facility, and $2 million of the $4 million that's going to be required to operate it is booked in this.

And not all the expenditures are large, Mr. Speaker. Let's talk about the fact that there is an additional $62,000 in funding for Help and Hope for Families in Watson Lake and for the Dawson City women's shelter - money that is going to an increase in staff and is helping people in helping their programs. In fact, we received a thank-you letter from the people in Watson Lake just the other day.

There's a 16-percent per diem increase in rates for foster parents - something that the two previous governments, represented by the members opposite, ignored - and a 22-percent increase in the clothing allowance for those foster parents, Mr. Speaker. As you and all of us well know, it costs a lot to clothe children.

And let's talk about $2.36 million for alcohol and drug secretariat - a plague, as the Minister of Health so eloquently puts it, that affects all of the Yukon and that we, as a community, need to deal with. We put the money to deal with it in the budget.

Let's talk about $19.5 million for the Yukon hospital and let's talk about $7.1 million -

Speaker:      Order please. Would the Premier please conclude her answer.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      The fact is that this government is spending Yukon taxpayers' money wisely.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, the Premier doesn't get it. She just stood on her feet and recited to this House what will be reflected in this accumulated surplus for the year ending March 2002. What we're asking is why, when we asked last fall for a winter works project, the Premier knew full well that the accumulated surplus they laid claim to was in fact far, far off what the real surplus was. The Premier admitted it yesterday - probably it was a mistake, but the Premier did admit it in Finance debate that the surplus is $80 million.

Now I want to ask the Premier a serious question: will the Premier now act? There is a need out there in the Yukon, especially in rural Yukon. Bring forward a portion of that $80 million; we will immediately pass it and allocate it toward capital projects for rural Yukon so we can put rural Yukoners to work and help alleviate the terrible situation that they are in. Will the Premier do the right thing and act now?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      I take my responsibilities very, very seriously. The answers I have given the member opposite are very serious. The member is kibitzing across the floor about elementary bookkeeping. Well, let me explain to the member opposite once again that the budget figures tabled on February 22 indicated a $45-million surplus. That is the best information and all the information we had at the time. The fact that we were able to successfully conclude negotiations with the Minister of Finance - we were notified of that on April 2. To have indicated that money on an earlier date would have been not only despicable, it would have been exactly what the member opposite has accused me of doing. We have been open, accountable and upfront with the public all the way along.

The fact is that our budget documents take Yukon taxpayers' money and spend it wisely on the needs of Yukoners, on very real needs like restoring funding to highways, like ensuring the hospital has the money they need to operate, and funding of $7.1 million in the Yukon hospital insurance services and many others, including economic development initiatives as well, like the stay-another-day program, like the Yukon mining incentive program, like the tax credits.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Question re:  Placer mining policies

Mr. Jenkins:      I have a question for the Minister of Economic Development. On May 17 of this year, the Yukon Territory Water Board will convene a hearing into an arbitrary placer mining policy being imposed by DFO or DIAND that would restrict or stop the use of in-stream settling and the use of a stream as a conduit. This arbitrary change in policy has the potential to shut down 37 percent of the existing placer operators, as that is the percentage of operators issued with licences for in-stream settling and the use of a stream as a conduit in both 1999 and 2000.

Mr. Speaker, placer mining has traditionally been the backbone of the Yukon economy, and the prospect of having 37-percent fewer placer mines operating this season is something that the minister should be working to avoid. We need more miners, not fewer.

Is the minister aware of this serious problem, and what does she plan to do about it?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Yes, I am somewhat aware of the specific problem that the member opposite has raised. I would also like to advise the member opposite that I have already had one very frank discussion with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Herb Dhaliwal, regarding the Yukon placer committee and the review of the Yukon placer authorization. That was successfully concluded.

There has not been a decision made as to whether or not the Yukon government should intervene in the specific Water Board hearing. I take the member's representations under advisement and will respond to him accordingly before the end of the week.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, low gold prices and high fuel costs are making it very tough for placer miners to continue their operations. The last thing they need is for the federal Department of Fisheries or DIAND to impose even more restrictive policies on an already over-regulated industry.

Will the minister intervene with her Liberal friends in Ottawa and tell them to rein in their regulatory bulldogs?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, once again for the member opposite, I would remind him that, as I indicated in my previous answer, I have already had one very frank discussion with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, the hon. Herb Dhaliwal, with respect to the Yukon placer committee and the Yukon placer authorization. The chair of the Yukon placer committee is well aware of that, and I have taken the member's representations today under advisement, and I have indicated I will respond to him by the end of the week as to the government's course of action.

I'd also like to remind the member opposite that, for the first time ever in the budget documents that the Member for Watson Lake just criticized me so soundly for, the Klondike Placer Miners Association has been recognized for the contribution they make, and for the first time ever have been funded as a non-government organization - by this government. We do appreciate the contribution and recognize the contribution that the placer mining industry makes to the Yukon.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, the federal regulatory bulldogs are still there, and they're nipping at the heels, they've got the heels, and they're coming up the full torso of the mining industry, Mr. Speaker. It is serious. I would urge the minister to make representation to the Yukon Territory Water Board on May 17 in Dawson City. Make a representation and a positive representation to defer the imposition of this new arbitrary policy. Further, I'd ask the minister to make representation to the federal Minister of DIAND on the issue of his refusal to issue water licences, even after the Yukon Territory Water Board has recommended that water licences be issued. Was the minister going to do something about this issue, or is she going to sit on her hands with it and defer it and get back to us after the Legislature rises?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, I have already indicated to the member opposite that, first and foremost, our government recognizes the contribution of the Yukon placer industry. The member opposite knows very well that, of all the members in the Legislature, I have worked with the placer mining community since long before I was even a member in their various issues with Ottawa.

This government and I, as Minister of Economic Development, have ensured for the first time ever that the Klondike Placer Miners Association is funded and recognized as a non-government organization. I have already indicated to the member opposite that, on behalf of the Yukon placer committee, I have made representations successfully. I know that's tough for the member opposite to admit, but I have already made successful representations to Herb Dhaliwal, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. I have indicated on this specific issue that I will advise the member whether we intend to make representation to the Yukon Territory Water Board. I will advise the member before the end of this week on that.

Mr. Speaker, I know it's difficult for members opposite to recognize our good work, but the facts speak for themselves.

Question re:  Health care professionals, recruitment of

Mr. Keenan:      Well, Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't want the Minister of Health and Social Services to feel that I'm picking on him, but people do require answers for the questions I pose. So, I have a question for the Premier, if I may.

Yesterday, I registered my concern over the complete turnover of clinical staff in the mental health unit. I asked why the minister's department has waited two full months before even starting to look for a new doctor for Ross River, Faro and Carmacks.

So I'd like to ask: what instructions has the Premier given to the minister to make sure that there is no delay in recruiting health care professionals?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Mr. Speaker, there has been no delay at all. We work as quickly as possible. We ensure we work with our partners. We ensure we are partnering with people who are working directly on the front line. There's no delay whatsoever.

Mr. Keenan:      Well, Mr. Speaker, there was an ad in yesterday's paper informing the public that Whitehorse Medical Services Ltd. has been unable to replace two doctors who left the territory a year ago. Again, this suggests that patients have to start looking elsewhere for these services.

More and more professionals are leaving. The minister is neglecting his duties to ensure that the necessary incentives to keep them or replace them are available.

So again, I'd like to ask the Premier this: what is the Premier doing to get her minister to do the job that he is paid to do?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      The member opposite has to realize that the doctors in Whitehorse, Watson Lake and Dawson are fee-for-service. They are private employers. They employ their own doctors. We as a government do not employ doctors except for two positions that we have in the rural areas that are on contract.

So to expect the Health department to go out and hire doctors at this point - we don't have that kind of agreement with the doctors; they do their own hiring.

Mr. Keenan:      I would like to point out that the minister must realize that he is the Health minister and must provide leadership. That is inherent in the position that goes with the fancy gold cards that the minister has.

Now, I heard this morning one of Yukon's most experienced doctors who said that the shortage of medical personnel is nearing a crisis and that the $80,000 that the government has allocated for recruitment "is a joke". That's a direct quote. It's a joke. There's a shortage of doctors, the psychiatrist is leaving, and today I learned that the doctor who works out of the Whitehorse Correctional Centre has resigned.

So the Premier is sitting on a surplus of $80 million. Since her minister will not or cannot do his job, will the Premier allocate the necessary funds so that the department - at least the real people in the department, the people who are making things move in Health and Social Services - can get on with the real and effective recruitment campaign? So when is that going to happen?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Once again, I have informed the House on many occasions that we are working with our partners. As of today, we met with the doctors as a caucus. We met with them last week and the week before - and with the nurses. We are working very hard with our partners.

We will be coming forward with our partners with some results. I know the members opposite are impatient, but again, when one plays politics, one does not want to wait. Obviously we are doing the right thing: we are working with our partners, not against them.

Question re:  Chronic disease program, breach of confidentiality

Mr. Fentie:      I have a question for the Premier, and it's in relation to the Minister of Health and Social Services' inability to act on a very serious matter. That matter is twofold: the right of a constituent of mine and a Yukon resident to receive full medical coverage; and the possibility of a breach of medical confidentiality in this regard.

I have asked the minister through correspondence and questioning to take action on this very serious matter, and he refuses to do so. So I am asking the Premier, in her capacity as the leader of this government, to take action and do something now.

Will she direct the Minister of Health and Social Services to conduct the proper investigation that this matter requires, or will he resign?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Mr. Speaker, there has been no breach of confidentiality. How many times do we have to say that? I am not sure. It wouldn't be enough, I am sure, for the members opposite.

We do not discuss clients' cases in the House. We do not even discuss them on the street, but the member opposite persists in trying to discuss it here in the House. We do not do that.

The member opposite received a letter from me, explaining the procedure. We are asking the member opposite to follow that procedure. Everyone else has to.

Mr. Fentie:     I am asking the minister to follow a procedure. That procedure reflects a social conscience. There's no issue here about us bringing this to the floor of the Legislature and that it is being counterproductive. We are trying to get this minister to act and he refuses to do so. He openly admits that the phone calls by residents to department officials must cease and desist. That tells me that there is a problem.

Will the Premier - and I'm asking the Premier to act on this very serious matter - direct her minister to conduct a proper investigation of this matter and direct her department to act on compassionate grounds, in order to ensure that my constituent receives all the benefits to which they are entitled and to address the possible breach of medical confidentiality? Will the Premier act now?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      The member opposite would like the public to believe that there has been a breach of confidentiality. There has not. The member opposite knows that there has not been a breach of confidentiality but wants to plant that seed, Mr. Speaker. I find this just something I cannot accept, that this is the type of politics that we're in.

The member opposite has received a letter from me explaining the procedure. The member opposite knows what has to be done or what should be done if the member is not satisfied. The member has not followed any of those recommendations in that letter.

We are concerned about constituents, Mr. Speaker. We're concerned about the very serious nature of the health of our constituents and of our people in the Yukon, but there's a procedure for all of us to follow. There are rules for everyone. We know the members opposite quite often, quite obviously, when they did the community development fund stuff, never followed the rules. The audit report tells it very clearly. Once again, they want us to break the rules. Mr. Speaker, we will not break the rules. The rules are for everybody.

Mr. Fentie:      Well, how dare this minister accuse me of playing politics with this issue. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, I know what these people are going through. It is a life-and-death situation, and they've been harassed. Now, the minister can't stand on his feet in this House and make the claim that there was no breach of medical confidentiality because he hasn't done the proper investigation to determine that fact. That's why I'm asking these questions. Will the minister now do the right thing, show some social conscience, conduct the proper investigation so that full disclosure can take place, not only on the clients' behalf, but on the department's officials' behalf? The minister has a responsibility to act. The minister has the ability to make discretionary decisions. The time is now. Will the minister act and act decisively?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite makes an accusation of a breach of confidentiality. There has not been a breach of confidentiality. An investigation was done. Very clearly, there was no breach of confidentiality, despite what the member constantly brings up day after day.

It's unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the member opposite says we do not want to discuss people's personal lives, and yet the member opposite continues to do it, day after day.

Mr. Speaker, we have a process, we follow it, and we do the best we can to ensure that the rules are for everybody.

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

ORDERS OF THE DAY

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

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

Motion agreed to

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

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

Some Hon. Members:      Agreed.

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

Recess

Deputy Chair:      I now call Committee of the Whole to order. Committee is considering Bill No. 4, First Appropriation Act, 2001-02.

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

Deputy Chair:      We are in general debate on the Department of Tourism. Mrs. Edelman, I believe you have the floor.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:  When we left off last night, we were talking about the accommodations act and the timelines that were going to be associated with that. I think that one of the things I didn't mention last night is that the accommodations act is going to be developed with the private sector, with municipalities, with the hotel association, the bed and breakfast association, RV campground owners, as well as public campgrounds.

Now, the accommodations act timeline is the following. In April and May of this year, we are going to be getting together and developing a discussion paper in conjunction with the Tourism Industry Association. In May, later on this month, we will be designing a paper that will hopefully be released to stakeholders by the end of this month. At the same time we are going to appoint a coordinator within the department to work on this issue of the accommodations act.

Then we will be in initial consultations with industry stakeholders, as indicated previously. We will be launching the Web site in May and June. We will be meeting with other government departments in June and July. We will be doing consultations with other governments - First Nations and municipalities - in June to August, ending in September 2001. All of these are, of course, proposed timelines. Things don't always go the way you hope they will go.

Public consultations, which will be set up in all the communities, will start in late August and go to early November. We will be preparing a draft of the legislation by December 2001, and that process will continue to February 2002. Consultation with key stakeholders on the draft legislation will occur from March to May 2002. We will revise the final legislation to reflect those consultations in June 2002. Approvals at Cabinet will occur in August 2002. We are hoping to table the bill in the fall of 2002.

So that is what I said to the member opposite that I would provide to him early today.

The other thing that came up yesterday that wasn't completely dealt with was the issue around the changes to the Department of Tourism and the moving of one position from the arts branch over to the new cultural industries secretariat. Once again, there will be no change to funding programs, services or program delivery within the arts branch, including the craft strategy.

Mr. Chair, there has been a lot of misinformation in the public about what's going to be happening with the craft strategy, as if somehow with the reorganization the craft strategy will no longer take place. Well, I have to tell you, Mr. Chair, that the craft strategy is taking place and it will be implemented this summer. In the summer, we will be starting with an inventory of what's available in the Yukon, and people will be travelling to every community. Then we will be doing training sessions in the fall.

There have been previous craft strategies, and I suppose that is why people are having a problem with this issue. There was a craft strategy in 1994 under the Yukon Party and one in 1997 under the NDP, and neither one of those were followed through on. We are following through with our craft strategy, and the changes in the Department of Tourism will not affect that, as they don't affect funding programs or services.

The member opposite and I had an extended conversation about icon development, and I'm still not clear about what the member opposite is trying to say about what icon development is to him. However, I've gone through and looked at my briefing books and had some discussions with people in the department, and it's quite clear that an icon is a large development of some sort. The large development that we're doing is, of course, the air access study. That will address the issue of cheaper fares, more flights and better connections. That will be released in June, as I mentioned last night.

The other icon that we're working on is, of course, the stay-another-day program and that's through the development of festivals. That's a long-term process. Mark Smith, who has been hired by the department, will be going throughout the Yukon Territory, talking to various groups about what they have available in the way of arts and cultural activities, as part of the stay-another-day program. He'll be leaving probably in the next week to do just that.

The member opposite had some questions about policy beyond that, but I looked through the Blues and couldn't quite get to what the member was trying to say. I wonder if the member could be a little bit clearer about what he was saying about infrastructure. I think that last night, when we talked about infrastructure, I said that we would be working with the heritage community through the museums strategy and that we would be working through the arts community or arts sector, through ongoing discussion about funding issues with the Yukon Arts Advisory Council, which is mandated under the Arts Act to deal with issues around funding. As well, we will have continuing discussions with the arts community.

I meet fairly often with members of the Art Centre and I'm meeting again with the ARTSnet group this week. I imagine I will continue to meet with them over the next few years.

So, if the member opposite can be a little clearer about what he meant by infrastructure - I did look through the Blues and I'm still not clear what the member meant.

Mr. McRobb:      Mr. Chair, we have a limited amount of time here today to discuss the Department of Tourism. We in the opposition would like to clear this department some time in the next hour and a half. The minister indicated to me she would like to be present at a funeral and she would have to leave about an hour and 15 minutes from now, so we must make progress.

I undertook to her to be as succinct as possible in my questioning and I ask her to do the same in her answers. I would like to proceed through some topic areas that I have noted to be of interest to us.

Mr. Chair, I would like the minister to give us an update on the film incentive program. What's happening with the Call of the Wild project? And, just to refresh her memory, that was the one the Acting Tourism minister shooed away. It would have meant 130 year-round jobs, would have brought film crews to two rural regions - the Klondike region and the Kluane region in particular. It could have injected $45 million to $50 million into the Yukon economy over five years. Can the minister give us an update on what's happening with respect to that proposal, and also can she provide figures for uptake of the program in the past year?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, I'll go through an update with the member opposite.

The member opposite has to know that we are going to be in discussions with other television productions. We have met with the Call of the Wild. We last met with them during the week of April 16, and actually we've met with them since. I know that there were meetings with Mark Hill and some of the people from the Call of the Wild just at the very beginning of May.

The Call of the Wild production was eligible for a $1.4-million labour rebate under the film incentive program. However, they require an additional $1.1 million in an unspecified subsidy to relocate the production here. This request for funding support is over and above the standard film incentive program. Earlier discussions between YTG and producers of Call of the Wild did not result in time to meet with the federal funding deadline for 2001. The producer subsequently revised the proposal to reflect a five-year commitment to film in the Yukon. The subsidy in excess of eligibility under the film incentive program was still required in the proposal, so they still needed over a million dollars in excess of what we had to offer them. The Yukon Film Commission is continuing discussions with the producers to see if the deal will be possible for either 2001 or 2001. As I mentioned to the member opposite previously, we are also speaking with other television productions.

Mr. McRobb:      I did ask the minister to provide figures for uptake in the past year. If she would just give me a nod to that effect, we could move on.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      The way the film incentive program works is that the people who do the filming here have to submit invoices or receipts to prove what they spent hiring local Yukoners and buying local goods and services. That process takes quite a long time, so I have to warn the member opposite that there are actually productions that never do submit the amount of money they have spent, and when they do submit it, it is usually months and months and months after the deadline. So I will commit to the member opposite that I will provide that information, but I do have to warn him that it will probably not be complete, it will not be an accurate picture of all the spending that went on in the Yukon under film, and it will also not be available for some time.

Mr. McRobb:      All right. A best efforts response would be satisfactory.

The minister indicated previously a few of her priorities for the department. I would like to review them to see what has been happening and also to discover if there is anything new.

At one point she said that one of her top priorities was data collection - the collection of figures and making them available to the public. She did undertake to do so by the sixth of each month. I would like to know what is happening about that and where people might access that data.

Also, she indicated that air access is the greatest priority. Now, I know there is a study being done. Can she give us an update on that?

Also, the fare structures for conventions were lost by the Air Canada merger. We would like to know what the minister is doing about that. Another casualty was the potential casualty of the loss of the student standby fares. Can the minister give us an update on those areas, please?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      I need to go back to the member opposite first of all. Yes, data collection and research on our numbers is extremely important to this government. You can't make good business decisions if you don't know what the numbers are, neither as a business in the private sector nor as a government. Therefore, we have taken on the responsibility for developing an accommodations act, which will give us a much better figure of who is actually spending the night in the Yukon on any given day.

In addition to that, we have created a research position in the industry services branch and that will help us find ways to come up with better data collection, so that we can provide those good figures to not only the private sector, but also to government, so that we can make good policy decisions about where we want to spend our dollars.

The commitment I made to the member opposite is still the same. We will try to have information available by the sixth day of each month.

As for the air access update, this will be the third time that I've updated the member opposite. I did it first at the beginning of this day's discussions, as well as last night. But I will do it again.

There are three reasons for doing an air access study: the first one is for better fares; the second one is for better connections; the third is so that we can have more flights that come in and out of the Yukon Territory.

Now, as for the convention fares and student standby fares, they are of course an issue. It is one of the many reasons why we're doing the air access study. That has been taken into consideration. The release of the air access study has been put off until June, because we are examining the Air North proposal at some length and in some great detail. The air access study information, combined with the examination of the Air North proposal, will be available in the early part of June.

Mr. McRobb:      The minister indicated that developing departmental policy was another one of her priorities. She also indicated that her caucus would be discussing, in a planning exercise, their policy with respect to the expansion of gambling. Can she give us an update on that, please?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      It was my understanding - and this was the information that came from the Justice minister, and that is where the issue of gambling rests. My understanding from the Justice minister is that this government has taken a position that we will not deal with the issue of expansion of gambling. That issue is an ongoing discussion at the caucus level. However, if the member opposite wants more information on our position on gambling, I think he needs to put that request to the right minister, and that would be the Minister of Justice.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, at times, this minister likes to be minister of everything, and quite often we know she feels ignored by not fielding questions on a regular basis. I would have thought that she would have been more than pleased to respond fully to that question.

The minister said that she would have an industry-driven Tourism department. Can she indicate how that is happening?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Well, the Yukon tourism marketing partnership actually started under the NDP. It was one of the programs that the NDP did right. I know that the YTMP came about mainly as an initiative of the then director of marketing, who is now the Deputy Minister of Tourism. The Yukon tourism marketing partnership is a public/private sector partnership where we talk about issues around marketing the Yukon. The YTMP has representation from municipalities, it has representation from the hotel association, the B&B association, the First Nations Tourism Association, the Tourism Industry Association, the Wilderness Tourism Association, as well as a variety of other groups. It is a true public/private sector partnership. So that is how I see it being an industry-driven department. That's the way it is.

Mr. McRobb:      Mr. Chair, the stay-another day-program information provided by the minister in the way of a letter dated April 24 indicates that the actual funds available to the public are only 25 percent of the total program costs of $785,000. Now, why is this program so top heavy? Is this just another indication of the government spending money on itself? Where is the commitment to the public?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Well, this is a service to the public, Mr. Chair. The whole reason that we're doing the stay-another-day program is so that we can keep people in the Yukon for another day, thereby providing a possible additional $5 million to the Yukon economy.

I'll go through the processes. First of all, there is branding, and that was developing a theme song through a contest. This has nothing to do with growing government. Then we did advertisements in the local media, as well as with our neighbours to the south, to the east, and to the north. That is not growing government. We've been working with the cultural and heritage industries to enhance the integration of their products to increase the benefits for tourism revenue. So we're working with the arts and we're working with the heritage people quite extensively to make sure that their message is getting out in the stay-another-day program so that people know about the festivals that they're putting on and about the heritage events, as well as built heritage that they have to offer to our visitors in order to keep them here for another day. That is not growing government; that's working with already existing services.

Quite frankly, Mr. Chair, sometimes what we have to offer to tourists in the way of festivals or events are some of the best-kept secrets in the Yukon. At the Association of Yukon Communities, I was absolutely amazed at some of the programs that were available in the communities that are not advertised and are not being well-used.

In addition to that, we have a Web site, which will be retooled to showcase the new initiative through the development of an electronic banner program. I have to say, Mr. Chair, that an awful lot of tourism these days is done through the Internet. We have a tremendous number of hits on the Tourism North Web site. It's an effective way to market. It works extremely well. Some organizations, some tour groups, some air tours, some hotels and B&Bs do 90 percent of their bookings right now on the Internet.

Most of those are hot-linked off the Tourism Web site, so developing the Web site again is not growing government. Finally, media relations, which will focus on obtaining the winter-event familiarization tours, and that is working with multi-national media people to develop story banks and local photographers on a regional photo essay, is also not growing government.

It costs money to put on these programs. We are not growing government. We are putting on a good program that I have heard from a number of communities will be well-used and much appreciated by the people of the Yukon. This also includes Yukon ads, and the member opposite may want to see them, on TSN as well as CTV affiliates right across this country. Now, television ads cost a lot of money, but I have to tell you that those ads are absolutely wonderful. If I weren't already in the Yukon, I would want to come here.

Mr. McRobb:      Mr. Chair, I want to appeal to the minister again to try to be as succinct as possible in her responses. I don't expect to have her push the button to engage in all the virtues of a particular program. I expect her to focus on the meat of the question, which was why is it so top heavy, and try to stick to that topic area so we can make progress today.

We have several departments to clear in the remaining day and a half in this Legislature, and these types of delays by the minister will reduce the opportunities we have in the opposition to scrutinize this government's budget. Based on what we have seen so far, Mr. Chair, we deserve all the opportunities we can get to do exactly that.

The minister indicated previously that she wants to re-juggle the budgeting for the department to shift from capital to O&M and vice versa, to be more appropriate.

Can she indicate if she has been successful in doing so in this budget?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Not completely, Mr. Chair. There is a really fine balancing act that you do when you're developing your budget. On the one hand, I gave very clear direction to the department that that's the way I wanted to go. On the other hand, we're already hearing criticisms about growing O&M from the side opposite.

Now, the capital budget will be released in the fall, and that will be a much better indication of where we sit on capital. But you can't win with the members opposite. If you do move the stuff from capital to O&M, then you get accused of growing government. If you move the stuff from O&M to capital, you get accused of cooking the books to make it look like you're doing a lot more than you actually are in capital. It's a lose-lose situation, no matter what we do, and I think that's what the members opposite found out when they were in government last. However, I have tried in some ways to move items over to where I thought they belonged, which was into O&M. And I can give the member opposite some detail on that at some point in the future.

Mr. McRobb:      All right, Mr. Chair. The minister indicated previously that they would be developing a discussion paper regarding the tourism marketing fund. Can she indicate if this was done and if it was presented to the public for feedback or not?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      There was an in-house study of the tourism marketing fund. There will be an audit done of the trade and investment fund. No, it will not be made available to the public. The program doesn't exist any more. At least it won't be made available through me. It may be made available through the Minister of Finance. That's not my decision to make. Also, it hasn't gone to Cabinet.

However, I will say that we made the political decision that we would not continue with the tourism marketing fund. The reason why we wouldn't do that was because we were finding that previous governments were favouring one business over another. There would be two businesses with equally good product: one would get it because they were really good at making applications to the government, and another one wouldn't, with the same good product.

So what we decided to do as a government was instead to fund sectors. So, for example, for the Recording Arts Industry Yukon Association, or RAIYA, which deals with commercial music and recording artists, what we do is give the money to RAIYA and then, through peer review, the decisions are made as to what gets funded and what does not.

It's a much better way of doing business and it's a lot fairer to individuals who look to this government for funding.

Mr. McRobb:      We're getting a rehash of previous responses here, Mr. Chair. I asked her to try to be more succinct.

Also, I'm picking up evidence that these Liberal ministers aren't as pure as they were when they were first elected, when they had good intentions to create a public process to be open and accountable. Now, Mr. Chair, we're seeing a circumvention of those public processes in the back rooms and decisions being made in the back rooms and not in the public, such as the decision to reverse her earlier promise to develop a public discussion paper on the tourism marketing fund.

Mr. Chair, I want to ask her about the vacation guide. I have picked up public concerns about the deteriorating quality of the guide. Can she indicate what is being done to improve the quality of the pictures, to reduce the mistakes, and to try to include new pictures in the guide? From what I understand, many of these pictures are more than 10 years old. What's being done to renew this guide and make a better product?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Let's go back. First of all, the member makes a number of insulting comments. He said that the minister is not "as pure". I venture to say that the member opposite didn't know me when I was pure. It truly is an insulting comment, Mr. Chair.

The other thing is that the member opposite says that decisions are made in the back rooms, and that's plainly not factually correct.

The member opposite takes great glee in repeating the same misinformation over and over and over again, thinking that somehow or other that's going to make it true. Much like his other comments earlier in the debate, just repeating the same factually incorrect information over and over and over and over again does not make it real.

I take both of those comments as quite insulting to me, personally, and the member opposite needs to know that.

The member opposite also said that I made a reversal in my decision about the tourism marketing fund. There was no reversal about the tourism marketing fund. The tourism marketing fund was an NDP program. I have never reversed my decision on that issue. We have said right from the very beginning that as a government we believe in a level playing field. We have said, through the Arts Act and through everything that we've done within the Department of Tourism, that we believe in peer review. Therefore, funding decisions go to the people who know best how to make those decisions.

So, for example, the tourism marketing fund has been replaced by the market expansion program. The market expansion program will be done through the Tourism Industry Association. Applications will be accepted by June and those applications will be vetted through the Yukon tourism marketing partnership. Once again, that is peer review. We believe in a level playing field. Over and over and over again we demonstrate that. Now, the members opposite do not believe in that but this government does.

The member opposite says that the visitor guide has gone downhill, that there are so many mistakes and the quality of the photos are dreadful. I don't know who the member opposite talks to. Every single member of the private sector - who incidentally were full partners in developing this visitor guide - say that it is the best they have ever seen - the best they've ever seen. Certainly, some of the private ads that are put into the visitor guide have old photos and those are provided by the people who take out the ads. The member opposite says that we need to do a photo shoot. Well, a photo shoot was done last year; there will be another one done this year. The member opposite needs to get his facts right for a change. Perhaps he needs to talk to people in the business, because they would be terribly insulted by what the member has said. And believe me, I am going to make sure that they hear what the member said because I am going to make sure that they get the member opposite's comments. They will be terribly insulted because they worked for months developing this visitor guide. It is a totally different format than in the past. In the past, we have had things organized by municipality or by sector. For example, all the B&Bs, all the hotels, et cetera. Now what we've done is divide the Yukon into regions - including Kluane - and we have organized all the services available in those communities under "Region".

That's a better way of doing it. It's a new way of doing it. The photos are new, they're glossy, they're good, and they're certainly better than the Alaskan bears that the members opposite used to put into their visitor guide.

Now, I'm going to say it again: this visitor guide was done in complete partnership with the Yukon tourism marketing partnership. They were the ones who designed the guide. If the member has a problem with them, he should take it up with them, but personally, I find it very insulting that he would say this about the partners we have in the industry.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, if the minister wants to insult herself, I'm reticent to come to her rescue. I would also indicate for her information that among the people who expressed their concerns to me about the visitor guide were employees in her own department. So she can distribute this information to whomever she pleases, but maybe it will come full circle some day, Mr. Chair, and she'll understand what these people are talking about.

Now, I would like to turn to the Beringia Centre. What plans does this minister have for the contract for the concession stand at the Beringia Centre?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Let's go back. The member opposite needs to know that I don't need anyone to come to my rescue. I don't need that; I can do that myself. I don't need to be rescued because there's nothing to be rescued from, and I would certainly not depend on the Member for Kluane for that.

The member opposite needs to know that the visitor guide is not perfect, and it's an ongoing process. I also need the member to know that the people in the industry were extremely proud of that product, and they are going to know what the member opposite thinks of their good work very shortly.

Mr. Chair, the member opposite wants to know about Beringia. At Beringia right now, the staff are dealing with the admissions, and the Friends of Beringia will be dealing with the gift shop at some point in the near future. It's an ongoing process. Friends of Beringia didn't meet until earlier this year. They're developing constitutions, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

That was a process that was started under the previous NDP government and we are continuing with it.

Mr. McRobb:      Mr. Chair, can the minister indicate what model was adopted to manage the Beringia Centre? The previous government was examining the Friends of Beringia model. Can she indicate what her decision has been?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, it would really help to bring debate closer to reality if the member opposite listened to the responses I made. I just told the member opposite that Beringia will be operated by the Friends of Beringia. I told the member opposite that it was the same as the NDP had proposed - the Friends of Beringia.

If the member opposite would listen to the answers to the questions, we could move this debate along in a much better fashion than it's going right now.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, Mr. Chair, if the minister would keep her tone to a reasonable level and try to be as clear as possible and not muddle the answers to these questions, maybe she would be easier to understand.

We have grown accustomed to the Liberal government taking credit for all kinds of decisions for which the work was really done by the previous government. It wasn't long ago this minister tried to claim credit, Mr. Chair, for developing the film incentive program. Now, it's clear that that program was developed by the previous government and it has been a huge success. So the minister should tone down the rhetoric and try to stick to the substance of the questions, and then we can make more progress this afternoon.

I still have more questions for her. The next one would be the highway sign policy. The minister indicated they were developing a Yukon-wide plan. Can she indicate where that is?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, you're right. I should not be emotionally involved in this debate and I'm not. The member opposite elicits no interest from me whatsoever.

The member opposite says that I have taken credit for the film incentive program on a number of occasions. Publicly and on the camera, I have said that one of the good programs that the NDP developed was the film incentive program. What I have said is that this government is funding it properly. We are.

The member opposite is now asking about the sign policy. There are two areas that need to be looked at. I think the member opposite needs to know before we start this discussion that in every community that we have visited, the number one concern they have is signage. They have a lot of good stuff to tell people on the highway as they go by, but there is inadequate or poor signage or the quality is not consistent with other signs. So you are talking about commercial signage but you are also talking about directional signage.

Now, the directional signage in the Yukon is an ongoing process. We are working toward a good commercial highway sign policy with the Department of Community and Transportation Services as well as the Yukon tourism marketing partnership. We are also working with them to look at directional signs. There's nothing more frustrating to someone who has a really good product when they have it out there and nobody knows where it is. So it's an ongoing process and an extremely expensive one, as well.

Now, the Minister of Community and Transportation Services gave the House an update on the commercial highway sign policy. That should be available to the public, hopefully, by later this year. We have budgeted $47,000 in non-salary dollars in the 2001-02 budget toward highway signage, interpretive signs, such as along the Klondike Highway, and heritage signs.

Now, I forgot to mention, as I look over my notes, that Renewable Resources is also part of the signage committee.

Mr. McRobb:      I visited the department's many Web sites recently and was saddened to discover how out of date some of them are. Given that the government has recently hosted a government on-line convention and would like to indicate how much they are with it, regarding information technology, it's quite a disparity to actually visit some of the Web sites - like one in particular, the arts branch Web site - to see how outdated the information is. There is not even any indication about the restructuring announced by the government, for instance.

Can the minister indicate when she is going to update these Web sites and if she can commit to keep them updated on an ongoing basis?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      The Tourism Yukon Web site is updated virtually on a daily basis, especially during the season, so I am not too sure what the member is talking about. If he is saying that there should be some indication on the Web that there has been a reorganization within the arts branch, I have told the member repeatedly the following information: over the course of the next year, we will be going through policy issues and job descriptions to do with the moving of one position from the arts branch to the cultural industries secretariat, and that position is a facilitator for the cultural industries. The member needs to know, once again, that there will be no change to funding, services or programs within the arts branch.

Now, to put up a new organization chart within the arts branch before that was a reality wouldn't make any sense whatsoever.

Mr. McRobb:      Can the minister indicate what is happening with regard to the ice patch work? The previous government started the Thandlat study, and certainly this is of great interest to several First Nations in the territory, especially the Champagne-Aishihik First Nation. I was able to attend part of the weekend meetings regarding the Kwaday Dan Ts'inchi, and, judging by the expression of public interest, it certainly is an issue that is alive in the territory. Can the minister give us an update on that, please?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, Renewable Resources has identified $50,000 for the next five years to assist in the research, and I believe the member is also the critic for Renewable Resources, so I think he already had that information. In the 2001-02 budget - this year's budget - the heritage branch has identified $10,000 for additional ice patch research costs, such as radiocarbon dating and scientific analysis. The First Nation co-managers are applying for additional funding from various federal, territorial and private agencies, and the director of heritage has written a letter of support to accompany one of those requests. In addition, Mr. Chair, I would suspect that this will be one of the issues that I may bring up with Ms. Sheila Copps, who is the federal minister responsible for culture and heritage.

Mr. McRobb:      Mr. Chair, can the minister provide us with a breakdown of ministerial travel for the past year, as well as an indication of what she expects in the coming year? This is travel that was paid for by department for her own travel.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, we already dealt with this issue a number of times. That travel is now accounted for in the Executive Council Office. The member opposite has that information.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, the minister refuses to provide it. I don't have that information, Mr. Chair. Can the minister indicate if she or her government will be looking at the Wilderness Tourism Licensing Act to make any changes to it in the foreseeable future?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, we have ongoing discussions with the Wilderness Tourism Association about a number of issues around regulation, and those discussions happen with the Department of Renewable Resources, which is the department responsible for that act.

Actually, I've heard from the Wilderness Tourism Association on a number of occasions that they are quite pleased with the new relationship between Renewable Resources and Tourism. That is a new thing. The member opposite needs to ask his leader, by the way, for information about ministerial travel, because that information was provided to him.

Mr. McRobb:      Mr. Chair, I have a question regarding departmental funding of admission fees for the minister. This became an issue after I was informed by TIA that I would have to pay about $200 to attend the recent meetings in Haines Junction. I don't have a budget for that, but the minister apparently does. Can the minister confirm that her fees were paid for by the department, and if they were, is she prepared to offer to pay similar fees to members of the opposition if they want to attend such functions?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, I was the keynote speaker at that event and there was no charge for my participation.

Mr. McRobb:      All right, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I just have a couple of constituency questions and that pretty well wraps up my general debate.

One of them is about concerns I'm fielding from businesses in the Kluane region and others who are interested in tourism about the neglect the region is getting in products produced by this government. I believe it's the Guide to the Goldfields that recently had a map of the Yukon that didn't even include the Kluane region, Mr. Chair. Now, I understand there is money from the Yukon government that goes toward this production. Will the minister just simply satisfy this concern by undertaking to resolve this type of concern in the future?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, the Guide to the Goldfields is a private sector initiative. If the member opposite is interested, as the MLA for that area, perhaps he needs to contact the people who put out the Guide to the Goldfields on his own.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, Mr. Chair, I indicated that it was my belief that this production received government money. The minister says, "So what?" Well, that is the connection. If this government is sponsoring advertising by a private company, it is incumbent upon the government to ensure that some objectives of fairness are fulfilled.

Now, I asked the minister for an undertaking on that. She will have to roll her second attempt at an answer into her answer to my last question, which has to do with the VRC in Beaver Creek. We have discussed previously how this is a very nice building. It's a new building. I asked her about the inclusion in the budget of smart displays. Now, I know that the minister knows the virtues of interactive computer displays. Can she indicate if there is anything for the Beaver Creek VRC in this budget? If not, when might they see displays up there?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Okay, let's go back to this. This is not Big Brother. We don't tell the private sector how to do their business. So, if the member opposite has a concern of his constituents, it's his job, as MLA for that region, to contact that private sector business about those concerns.

The member opposite says, "Well, the government gives some funding to this private sector initiative; therefore the government should make all the business decisions on the Guide to the Gold Fields." Wrong - this is not Big Brother.

Mr. Chair, the member opposite is concerned about the smart display at the Beaver Creek VRC. I don't believe that I have the detailed information on that with me right now, but this is an item for discussion at the lines, and I would be happy to provide that to the member opposite at that time.

Mr. Jenkins:      I have a few questions for the minister of fun. The stay-another-day program, Mr. Chair, appears to be working very well in my community at the start of the year. Could the minister advise the House as to how it appears to be working throughout the Yukon?

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, it's quite interesting. We had quite a discussion at the Association of Yukon Communities about the stay-another-day program. The amount of buy-in from people at the local level and at the grassroots level is just astounding. We're having businesses and levels of government that have never been so thrilled to be finally included as communities within a large tourism marketing program that the government has put on.

One of the communities that comes to mind is Mayo, for example. They were thrilled to see, for example, that we have a craft map that will be part of the stay-another-day program and that some of the items that are sold within their community are on the craft map. I have also talked to people from Haines Junction, as a matter of fact, Watson Lake, Pelly Crossing and Dawson City, of course, about some of the initiatives that they have to offer. They were, number one, quite excited by the fact that somebody came out to their communities on not just one occasion but twice so far this year to do an inventory of what they had available for services to tourists and that there would be ongoing work through a RAIYA representative on festivals and events and that the stay-another-day program will be continuing to build over a number of years. They've said over and over and over again that this is the first time that they can remember that communities were included within a large marketing effort by this government.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, I thank the minister for her response. In part the program is working well in my community of Dawson at the beginning of the season because of the inability of the Department of Tourism to coordinate their efforts between the Department of Tourism and the Department of Community and Transportation Services. I refer specifically to quite a number of individuals who arrived in Dawson City in the last few weeks only to find that there isn't a bridge, there isn't a ferry in service, that the Top of the World Highway is closed. When they ask, they say, "Well, we turned off onto the North Klondike Highway, and the biggest sign we see is the sign that says 'Customs Hours of Operations'." There's a sign that is normally placed there that the Top of the World Highway is closed and when it reopens. It hasn't been erected this year under the Liberal watch. Mr. Chair, why is that? I know this is a tourism-related effort, and it's a 700-mile detour currently for a lot of individuals who end up significantly annoyed with this government, and rightly so. But the little business we get is appreciated as a result of the stay-another-day program. I was just wondering if that was part of the stay-another-day program.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      It's not actually the stay-a-week program, although that would be great as well.

As I mentioned earlier in the debate, signs are a huge issue in every community in the Yukon. There is a real concern about commercial highway signs as well as directional signs. I hear the member opposite's concern about that particular sign. I will pass that on to the Department of Community and Transportation Services, and if there is anything I can do to get that sign up, it will be done.

Mr. Jenkins:      While we are on the issue of signage, it would appear that what is lacking is enforcement of existing regulations. That appears to be the main culprit. When a business is closed or when a sign deteriorates to a certain level, it is up to the department of highways, or whichever agency oversees them, to take them down, remove them and bill them back to the respective owner. That is not occurring.

Then there is a whole series of federal signs that have different information with respect to mileage on them than the territorial government signs, and that causes concern. So, until we get a handle on the day-to-day operation and enforce what currently exists, we are not going to go anywhere. One of these areas is with respect to a sign that is clearly in the domain of the Government of the Yukon. It has historically been installed year after year after year but, under the Liberal watch, that has not occurred, with respect to "the Top of the World Highway is closed." There have on occasion been signs posted there that the Dempster Highway is closed or open also, but this is not occurring.

Mr. Chair, I would just like to go on to another area where there seems to be a lack of coordination between government departments. One of the main attractions in the Yukon is fishing. The fishing regulation summary for this current fiscal period is not available. I have it for the last fiscal period. I will send a copy over to the minister, Mr. Chair. It clearly points out that special permits are required for two areas: Wellesley Lake and Tatlmain Lake. None of the others.

Currently we have a whole series of pothole lakes, primarily in the southern part of the Yukon, which are stocked. Access is denied to anyone to go fishing in that area. It's another area that is causing concern. It shows the lack of coordination between the various departments in this novice Liberal Yukon government. It's causing concern.

What is happening is that the decision has been made to put these lakes in private hands with respect to fishing and stocking. That is done. These pothole lakes are stocked privately and paid for by private individuals. It appears to be their exclusive domain. But there isn't anything to that effect indicated anywhere in the regulations that are published for the general use of the public. Also, there is no information at the visitor information centres with respect to access to these pothole lakes. If you contact the visitor information centre, you are referred to the conservation office. You are bounced back and forth and, at the end of the day, you just shake your head and move on. That's what's happening.

So there is a definite lack of coordination in this area between Renewable Resources - but then the Minister of Renewable Resources is constantly making decisions before the total program is analyzed and policies are in place. It doesn't matter if it's in his portfolio of Renewable Resources or Education. The decision is made and then the consultation takes place and then the policy is established.

I do have concerns with that area, and I'd ask the minister to address it and, at least, insist from her colleagues that accurate information flow to the visitor reception centres so that it can be provided to the travelling public.

The other area I have tremendous concerns with is the film industry. We have made a very good start, Mr. Chair, but there should have been no reason whatsoever why we couldn't have made the money available to proceed with the recent incentive that was required to move a major film into the Yukon. With just a cursory examination of the cost benefits, one would have to conclude that the benefits far outweighed the investment. The excuse that the government put up was that it would exhaust their entire film budget in this one area. Well, that might have been the case, but it doesn't preclude the minister responsible for that area going back to her Cabinet colleagues and finding some additional funds, especially in light of the current budget surplus of some $80-million odd.

So the excuse can't be money. There has to be a political will to stimulate the economy and motivate it with money sometimes, but in this case the benefits of this film certainly far outweighed the cost to the government, Mr. Chair, so I'm somewhat dismayed and appalled that the minister didn't go back to her Cabinet colleagues and find the necessary funds. This is just one example of a situation that probably could occur again.

I am not asking the minister to comment on that; I am just getting on the record the areas with which I have concerns.

The other area is with respect to air access, and I look forward to receiving a copy of the government's position with respect to Air North. I believe that it is a very worthwhile and beneficial initiative for Yukon. I am aware that the first review of the Air North proposal by officials in government was not all that positive. I am urging the minister to work with this company. And if the proposal doesn't meet the government's expectations, point the way to how it could be made to meet our expectations. Because our government needs, for economic development purposes, competition in servicing the Yukon route from the Lower Mainland. And one only has to look at the cost per seat mile north-south in Canada vis-à-vis east-west to realize that we are being severely penalized. It is going to be contingent on the government of the day to get involved in this situation and work with the proponent to come up with a position that is acceptable to all, financially viable and that will provide competition on this route. Because if you look at the current competition in Canada, when it comes up against Air Canada, their reaction is to buy them out - just buy them out. It doesn't matter if it's Roots or Atlantic Air. But the only way we are going to keep airfares down is by competition.

One only has to look at the current airfares on Canada 3000 and what Air Canada does on the days that Canada 3000 flies. Yes, there may be three flights on that same day, but the only flight that is reasonably priced with Air Canada is the flight that almost arrives at the same time as the Canada 3000 flight.

Competition is a wonderful thing, but we have to provide the incentive in certain manners and in certain ways so that we can realize the benefits of competition. Currently it's a monopoly, and it's not even a well-regulated monopoly, Mr. Chair, and we're paying the price.

Mr. Chair, the other area where we can do a lot more in the visitor industry, and I would urge the minister to address them is access into our parks. Currently it is really only by foot if you want to look at Kluane, or by air if you want to look at our national parks in the northern part of the Yukon, which virtually few, if any, visitors visit. There are a small number of visitors who visit the territorial park on Herschel, but it is a small number each year. Access is going to be the way to promote these areas. Kluane - we have a wonderful opportunity. We only have to look at the controlled access that is being provided at Denali Park in Alaska, Mr. Chair, to see what we can do here with controlled access into Kluane National Park. It's going to take a committed effort on the part of this Liberal government to realize the benefits that could accrue to Yukon as a consequence.

Now, Mr. Chair, we're told that we have this wonderful relationship currently; we've got the sun, the moon, and the stars all lined up, and all with Liberals in place. So we expect to see something happening, and we expect to see some results produced in this area.

If our visitor industry is going to grow, Mr. Chair, we need more attractions. I guess we missed the boat with respect to the White Pass rail, which would probably have been a very significant asset to be acquired by a Yukon-based company. It's spinning off about $10 million a year in net profits currently, Mr. Chair, and that is in real dollars - U.S. dollars, not Canadian dollars, Mr. Chair.

So it has been a very worthwhile and beneficial undertaking, and I guess we have missed the train on that one.

The other area that we could probably be exploring is Nolan's game farm, which is up for sale. It's not advertised locally, but it's being advertised on the national and international scene, and that, in itself, could be an asset for the Yukon. We have to concentrate more on attractions, more on access to the parks. We are making some headway with respect to the visitor guide. There has been considerable improvement as of late. So some of these areas are being addressed, improvements are being made, but I think the state of our visitor industry today, Mr. Chair, speaks well to the fact that we're not doing the job well enough. And that means all of us, because we're going backward in the visitor industry with respect to the number of individuals we are attracting into the Yukon, and that's in spite of tremendous expenditures on the part of government and on the part of the private sector industry.

The one light on the horizon that appears to be growing is ecotourism, but it is not replacing the significant number of people we are losing who have been the bread and butter of the industry for years and years and years.

So there is going to have to be more of a concerted effort between the Minister of Renewable Resources and the Department of Tourism to put in place programs that complement each other, and between the Minister of Community and Transportation Services and the Minister of Tourism to implement changes or just enforce the existing regulations with respect to highway signage. I think that's a fair request from the industry and from the opposition, Mr. Chair, to do something in that area. We can certainly put a lot more effort into enhancing our tourist pullouts, the signage at the tourist pullouts. There's a wonderful position that could be placed at Five Finger Rapids. When is something going to happen in that regard?

So I've left the minister with a lot of suggestions, Mr. Chair, in general debate. I don't believe that I want to belabour the point, and I am prepared to move on.

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Chair, let's go back. I did commit to the member opposite that I would be following through on the issue of signage at the Top of the World Highway.

Some Hon. Member:      (Inaudible)

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      At the Klondike turnoff, then. I will follow through with that. Rest assured that that will happen.

The member opposite says that we need to have more enforcement of the highway signage. Mr. Chair, I need to relate to the member opposite a story from when I was at the TIA AGM in Haines Junction almost three weeks ago.

There was some discussion at the actual AGM about highway signage. We said to the people at the meeting, "What are we going to do about that? Where do you see us going with this?" There was a very clear message that what we don't need to do is go through a third public consultation on this issue. There are problems with the signs. It's really obvious to anyone who drives the highway. I know that the members opposite who spend a lot of time on the road can see it. It's obvious. There are real problems. There are signs for businesses that haven't existed for years, signs that are not kept up, signs that are not in the right place, directional signs that lead you off into nowhere, and then no signs to the places that do exist. It's an issue that goes on and on and on.

As far as enforcement of the existing policy goes, it has been very difficult. In many ways it is not enforceable. So what we're doing is working on a new policy. That's being done through Community and Transportation Services. It should be available in the fall.

The member opposite should also know that, during the discussions at TIA, I made the members opposite - the members, I mean. I keep saying that because I am so used to talking to the members opposite through the Chair, as if somehow they aren't just a couple of feet away from me.

The members of TIA also said that probably one of the biggest issues that we are going to have to deal with on First Nation land is that the new highway signage policy doesn't apply. We have to get together with First Nations to make sure that we have some really good signage available throughout the Yukon Territory. That is going to be a true test of our negotiating skills because there are 14 First Nations and that is something that we are going to have to work on.

The member opposite and I agree; there needs to be something done about highway commercial signs. There also needs to be something done about directional signs, and we are working very well with our industry partners on that issue.

The next thing that the member opposite talked about was the fishing regulations not being available, and I have in my hands - hot off the press, apparently, although it has been out for awhile - the regulation summary for the year 2001-02 for fishing in the Yukon. This is put out by Renewable Resources Fisheries and Oceans, which is federal.

The member opposite brought up the concern that apparently fishing information is not available at VRCs and that people are sent on to Renewable Resources and back and forth and back and forth and back forth. I hear that concern and that will be something that we will be dealing with this year, if not immediately. We are going through a training session right now with our VRC staff here in Whitehorse and that will be one of the issues that we talk to them about.

In addition to that I think the member opposite needs to know that fishing information is part of the stay-another-day program. That is what people like to do when they come to the Yukon - they like to go fishing. So that information is being updated in our VRCs and in the visitor guide for next year. As well, there will be separate handouts on fishing spots.

Also, the member needs to be aware that there were a number of communities that we went to that said, "There are some places that we want to keep to ourselves." Special fishing spots, the preferred spots that they wanted to keep to themselves, that they didn't want anyone else to come anywhere near their special spots. We are very aware of that and those spots are not going to be in the fishing guide.

I have to tell the member opposite that I don't think these spots are quite as good as some of the people have purported them to be, having fished in some of those areas and not having caught a thing.

The next point that the member opposite tries to make is about the film industry. Now, I have to tell the member opposite that I did make a Management Board submission on this issue and was turned down. At the time, there was no money available for this or anything else. Actually, there were members on this side of the House who were quite concerned at the time, and that was much earlier in the calendar year, in January and December of last year. There really wasn't the money available. The Call of the Wild production wanted considerably more money than we had available at the time and have available now.

We are, however, still speaking to the Call of the Wild production, and we are also in the process of talking to other television productions, but we have limited money available in the film incentive program. I agree with the member opposite that it's a tremendous return on investment. For every dollar that we spend as a government, we get $8 to $10 back in our economy. It's a great investment.

But we also have to be careful that what we do here we do well. I was talking to a representative of the Northern Film and Video Industry Association, and he said to me quite clearly that there was a time in the last three months when there were two to three productions happening all at the same time, and people from Hollywood, I guess, were concerned that there weren't enough people, resources and infrastructure available to service all three productions at the same time. So if we're going to be doing this, we have to do it right, because nothing spreads faster than bad news. We have to be really, really careful that we don't overextend the resources that we have available. We have many good resources in the people who are trained here to work on film as well as infrastructure, but we can't overextend them and we can't deliver a less-than-stellar product or we will pay for that in the long run with a bad reputation.

The next issue that the member opposite brought up was air access. I have spoken to the Member for Kluane about this at some length. The reason that we're doing a study is so that we will have cheaper fares, more flights and better connections.

The Air North proposal has been dealt with during the air access study. As a matter of fact, we had to delay the release of the air access study so that we could work with Air North. We have been working with them at the department level, the official level, for some time and at some length, bearing in mind that we don't interfere with the private sector and that we want to make sure that Yukoners have the best fares available to them. Our ultimate goal here is to make sure that those are the best fares available to Yukoners. We know there are other airlines that can deliver the same services with better connections for far less than Air Canada does right now. What we're doing is seeing if those airlines can also deliver the same services, connections and airfares cheaper than or equal to the Air North proposal. That's why we're carefully looking at that proposal in the air access study.

I have to also say that the one thing that will come out of the air access study, and I have had sort of preliminary results given to me, is the fact that we need a connection out of Edmonton and out of Calgary. We have missed that for years and that's something that we're going to be going after.

I also have to tell the member opposite, and he knows this, that the private sector is working with us on this project. It's a committee of the Yukon tourism marketing partnership. The private sector is working with us quite closely on this issue, and we're working the best we can for Yukoners.

I agree with the member opposite that Air Canada does not give us good fares, good connections or good service in some ways, and that's why we're doing the study.

The other issue that the member opposite talked about was access into the parks. I have to tell the member opposite that the Premier has spoken to Sheila Copps about this very issue. We had problems with the film commission getting access into Kluane and that has been resolved on a temporary basis. We're looking at a long-term solution, and I will be speaking to Minister Copps when I go down there next week about this very issue.

The other issue and the last issue the member talked about was the development of more attractions. We are working with industry and with heritage and arts on developing more attractions. Absolutely. We need to work on that. The top two reasons people come is to enjoy the pristine wilderness and the next is to enjoy the attractions and events. It's important to us. I wish, like the member opposite, that the White Pass had been able to come all the way into Carcross this year. They couldn't make the business case and we can't do anything about that. We don't interfere with the private sector.

I also need to remind the member opposite that we have recently made an investment, through the Heritage Resources Board, into a museums strategy that will look at what attractions we have in heritage. We have also made an investment into the heritage resources trust fund. The money from that - the interest earned on the $1 million that rests in the fund, will help us look at some of those issues and perhaps provide O&M dollars, which seems to be the real concern for, perhaps, cultural centres or heritage facilities. That, to me, has clearly been identified as a problem.

Now, the Heritage Resources Board will come up with the funding criteria, but I would suggest to the member opposite that that is a concern that I've heard loud and clear. The dollars may go toward that.

The member opposite says that apparently we have gone backwards in the visitor industry. There are a lot of people in the tourism marketing partnership that would have a great deal of trouble with that comment. I'm speaking to the member opposite about, for example, the visitor guide. There are many people within the industry who are quite proud of that. It has been reorganized. It's completely different. The member opposite, I know, doesn't have a problem with it. It's only the other critic that seems to have a problem with it.

People are trying very hard, but the reality is that gas prices are very high and it's going to be difficult this year. I'm not expecting stellar numbers. If I'm pleasantly surprised, I will be thrilled.

There are areas where we are gaining some success. First of all, winter tourism and wilderness operators - the member opposite brought up that point. I also have to talk about the Japanese visitors. We went, in one year, from 100 Japanese visitors to look at the northern lights, to 1,000 visitors. We are expecting next year up to 3,000 visitors. That is a huge increase in one small sector.

The member opposite knows what it is like in the middle of winter when you are operating, for example, a retail business, and if only three people come in whom you wouldn't normally have, then that's the difference between breaking even that day and losing money. It has a tremendous impact on our economy. We are so small that those small numbers make a tremendous difference to us, and therefore we spend money on some of our emerging markets. That is why we did the sales mission to Europe. We went to Italy, England and Holland because we found that there was the greatest growth in those areas, and we wanted to encourage that. That makes sense - to look at the new markets and the new possibilities so that we can grow the industry.

The industry has changed. We don't have bus tours like we used to. And to think that we ever would again, I think, is not realistic. People don't want to get on a bus and travel for hours any more. They don't mind getting into an RV and travelling for hours and stopping where they want to and doing what they want to. And that's a change. And they enjoy wilderness experiences and wilderness lodges. That is something that they do like to do, and the member opposite has pointed that out.

As for the work on the Five Finger pullout, I believe that work was done in the capital project last year, and I would imagine that continuing work will be done on the Five Finger pullout.

Mr. Jenkins:      There are a number of things that the visitor industry can do and can do right away. I would urge the Minister of Tourism to sit down with her colleague, the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, and come to an understanding that all of the commercial highway signs in the highway right-of-way that are obviously from businesses that have closed down, and have been closed for a number of years, are removed.

That's the first step, and the second step is any of the signs that have deteriorated to a point that they're not acceptable that a letter be written to the owner and they be given a certain amount of time to upgrade that sign and keep it in good standing. There is a renewal period, Mr. Chair, for these highway signs, and part of the terms and conditions when you erect a sign, if you're with the private sector, is that you maintain it in good standing. So I don't believe what we need is a complete review of this area again. All we need is for the government and the various agencies of this government to enforce the existing regulations. It's a simple exercise, because currently they're not being enforced. That's creating a problem. With respect to the signage on First Nation lands, that's another area altogether and I urge the minister just to leave that on its own, because the First Nations are autonomous bodies. All we are concerned with is the highway signage in the highway right-of-way. That's it.

Mr. Chair, I draw attention to the fact that the minister indicated she had gone forward with a Cabinet submission with respect to the film industry. I applaud that. I chastise her Cabinet colleagues for not recognizing the economic opportunity and potential in not going along with the submission. But I'll leave that to another day.

Mr. Chair, I'm concerned with the window of opportunity that most of our visitors arrive here during, and that's May to September. We're losing ground and shrinking in that area. We have a problem that must be addressed.

Infrastructure is part of that problem, and the minister is absolutely correct when she says that there's a downturn in the number of individuals who want to travel on a motorcoach. That's absolutely correct. They want to come in, spend a few days, and get out.

That means we have to have airports that are to an acceptable standard. If you look at the airport in my community, we're going to spend $5 million of federal money on it to just bring it into compliance with federal regulations. Hallelujah. It still won't be paved, it will still be a day-VFR airport, and it still can't be used as a tool of economic development to attract other carriers whose insurance, by and large, requires that they land on a paved strip. There's a significant problem there. There's a heck of a good market there, but until we have the adequate infrastructure in place, we're going to remain static and we're going to lose ground, and we're losing ground currently, Mr. Chair. There's an opportunity there to address the shortcomings in our transportation system.

Mr. Chair, I guess we can take the stand that this Liberal government has taken previously with respect to highway signage, if I could digress somewhat. If we just don't cut the bush down on the side of the highway and the highway right-of-way, we'll hide all those signs. That was the policy that we had in place last year by this Liberal government, and I guess if we continue with that, we won't need to do anything with highway signage. We can't see them through the trees.

Mr. Chair, there are opportunities, but it's going to take a long-range plan and a short-range plan by this government, and I'd urge them to proceed with as much haste as possible because the visitor industry is losing ground in our prime season, May to September.

We're all hurting. We're hurting significantly. When you have major carriers, like Princess, that used to supply the Yukon with some 3,000-