Whitehorse, Yukon

Speaker:      I will now call the House to order. We will proceed at this time with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

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

Tributes.

TRIBUTES

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      I rise today to recognize October as Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the Yukon and throughout North America.

Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer found in women today. Everyone in this House knows someone who has been affected.

In Canada, one in nine women suffer from breast cancer. This year, more than 5,500 will die from the disease. Survivors remember the pain, and families remember the losses.

It is with deep emotion that I, as Health minister, am encouraged to know that people who are personally affected by this disease carry their message to our future generations. They invest their energy into educating their family and community members and in educating those close to them. Their energy and concern is so very much appreciated by the entire wellness of the community.

Please do not stop talking about the disease.

I encourage all Yukon women to take the time this month and every month to visit their local health centre to take steps to ensure early detection of breast cancer.

This message needs to go out to all women in the territory, because breast cancer does not just affect women of a certain age. All adult women of any age are at risk.

Mr. Speaker, today I proudly wear a pink ribbon to recognize and honour our wives, our mothers, our sisters, our daughters and our friends. I honour the victims, the fighters and the survivors. Theirs is a battle we must continue to fight.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In recognition of United Nations Peacekeeper Day

Mr. McLarnon:      Mr. Speaker, today I rise to commemorate United Nations Peacekeeper Day. When I was a little lad, I was sitting on my grandfather's knee going through his military medals, and the medal he was most proud of was his peacekeeping medal from Korea. The reason he said he was proud of it is because he said as a man who knows war, he would willingly give up his life to bring us peace.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the eight Yukon UN peacekeeping veterans who will be receiving special recognition this Saturday for their contributions to world peace. Mr. Jack Cable will present medals to these veterans as part of the ceremony commemorating United Nations Peacekeeping Day, which is officially today.

The eight Yukoners to be honoured have served all over the world, including Egypt, Bosnia, Cyprus, Israel, Kosovo, Croatia and Iraq.

On behalf of all Yukoners, I want to give my heartfelt thanks to the following people for their contributions to world peace: David Laxton, Red Grossinger, John Nystad, Tom Paterson, Fred Koschzeck, Brendan Galenzoski, Pat Copeland and Ken Mercs. I thank them and I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for giving this chance to honour them.

Applause

Speaker:      Are there any further tributes?

Introduction of visitors.

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mrs. Edelman:      Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling the Yukon Geographical Place Names Board annual report 1999-2000.

Speaker:      Are there any reports of committees?

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

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

Speaker:      Are there any further reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

NOTICES OF MOTION

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

THAT the second report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges, presented to the House on October 23, 2001, be concurred with; and

THAT the amendments recommended by the committee to Standing Orders 2, 11, 19, 42, 52 and 67 be adopted.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) the Yukon Business Summit 2001 brought together many diverse members of the business community to collectively produce a number of possible actions to help strengthen our economy;

(2) one of the possible actions brought forward was for the government to create an advisory committee with representation from government and various community sectors to develop a strategic economic development plan; and

THAT this House recognizes that the private sector must decrease its dependence on government, and only by unifying, taking ownership and refocusing on future goals with a healthy, positive attitude can the current economic barriers be overcome; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon government to support the business community recommendation to create an economic advisory committee to help develop both short- and long-term goals to stimulate the Yukon economy.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that:

(1) one of the top priorities of the Yukon Liberal government is to restore confidence in government;

(2) the Yukon Liberal government will accomplish this through the recently announced renewal of government initiative;

(3) the purpose of this initiative is to prepare for devolution while at the same time creating new and innovative ways to provide more responsive and accountable services to our citizens;

(4) the renewal of government initiative is an opportunity for all Yukoners to evaluate and contribute input into our current structure and services; and

THAT this House applauds the Yukon Liberal government for having the courage to tackle this issue and urges all elected members in this House to temporarily set aside political affiliations and support this initiative by unanimously agreeing that the renewal of government is both necessary and long overdue.

Speaker:      Are there any further notices of motion?

Are there any statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Mr. Kent:      I rise today to inform members of this Legislature of our ongoing efforts to fulfill our commitment to rebuild the Yukon economy and to demonstrate our continued support for the mining industry in the Yukon.

As members are aware, we have allocated $850,000 for the Yukon mining incentives program, or YMIP, in our 2002-03 capital budget - an increase of almost $100,000 over last year. This amount is almost double what it was in the 1998-99 fiscal year. This increase will help support mineral prospecting, exploration and development in the territory. And this is the second time that our government has increased the money for YMIP since we took office.

The Yukon mining incentive program's function is to provide a portion of the risk capital required to locate and explore mineral deposits in the Yukon - one that I am sure all must agree continues to help encourage interest in Yukon's mineral potential; an investment that encourages the grassroots exploration necessary for maintaining a healthy mining industry. YMIP is well-received by the mining community, who indicate that it makes a difference for some companies when they are deciding on whether to spend exploration dollars in the Yukon.

This year, 77 applications were received by the program's March 1 deadline. Of those, 59 projects were approved. YMIP covered the basic operating expenses of 17 grassroots prospecting projects that searched for new mineral occurrences in the Yukon.

Three grassroots grubstaking projects were approved that provided prospectors with basic operating expenses while they searched for new mineral discoveries in the Yukon.

Thirty-nine target evaluation projects were approved that allowed individuals, partnerships and junior companies to evaluate newly discovered occurrences and prepare them for option or sale.

Although the results from this year's work are not yet in, as the final reports are not due until January 31, 2002, I can summarize the results from the 2000 YMIP funding.

A total of $761,800 was funded; 54 projects were offered funding; 43 programs were carried out and provided a minimum of 1,217 person-days of paid employment. This figure does not include days spent prospecting by applicants in the grassroots module, nor does it include the economic spinoffs to Yukon's contracting or service sectors - positive impacts from things like heavy-equipment rentals and helicopter charters.

It also does not reflect the snowball effect, the one that happens from supporting a successful exploration project that leads to a discovery and future drilling. Real success stories have resulted in 500- to 48,000-percent increases in expenditures over and above the initial YMIP contribution. Overall, it is estimated that in the first year, on average, for every dollar government contributed through this program, the applicant spent another $1.55.

Most importantly, the Yukon mining incentive program in 2000 led to the reporting of 50 new showings or anomalies and the staking of 297 new mineral claims.

This program shows positive proof that it is achieving what it was set out to do - support our Yukon mining industry, thereby opening the door to potential new discoveries in our mineral-rich territory.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Fentie:      On behalf of the official opposition, I rise today to respond to this ministerial statement. I want to applaud the minister for his continued support for the program created by the New Democrats in this territory, a program implemented by the New Democrats in this territory. It's important to note, Mr. Speaker, that although the Liberal government is continuing to allocate monies to the program, I think Yukoners really want to know what the uptake was on this program. In other words, how many applicants, how much money was used in the last fiscal year and how many dollars were lapsed from the last fiscal budget.

Secondly, will the minister, when he gets on his feet, please provide the House with any information regarding mines soon to start up in this territory because of this very valued program? It also must be said, Mr. Speaker, that this new Minister of the Department of Economic Development also had another duty, and Yukoners have been waiting with great anticipation to hear from this minister what his plan is to address our economic woes in this territory. What is the minister's plan in dealing with the mess that this department is in thanks to his colleague, the Premier, and her mismanagement of Economic Development in the Yukon Territory? That, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, is what this statement should have been about.

This minister must come forward soon, if not already, and explain to Yukoners how he intends to deal with the economic situation here. I urge the minister to ensure that he receives the required funding for his department, that he ensures that the Department of Economic Development remains in place and remains focused on true economic development for all Yukoners so that we may realize at least a semblance of self-sufficiency in the future.

Thank you.

Mr. Jenkins:      On behalf of the Yukon Party caucus, I too am pleased to respond to this ministerial statement on the Yukon mining incentive program.

For the past 15 years, the Yukon mining incentive program has aimed to stimulate and assist the mining industry by providing technical and financial assistance to prospectors. The program has indeed been well-received by the mining community and was an initiative that the previous Yukon Party government supported and committed to, on average, $860,000 for each of the years that it held office. I am therefore pleased to offer our support to this increase in funding and hope that this government maintains that trend.

Having said this, I would appreciate receiving a breakdown of the funds that are being spent on the actual contributions to prospectors for this fiscal period, as well as the amount of money that is being spent on administration. While the minister is on his feet, I would also appreciate knowing how much money was spent on exploration in Yukon over this past season.

As the minister well knows, it is exploration and development that is the true indication of how well our mining industry is doing. Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that when mining does well, Yukon does well. Unfortunately, what we have seen in the last five years is anything but that. While the Yukon should be experiencing economic growth, relative to what we are surrounded by, we are not seeing this.

This Liberal government has literally put the Yukon economy into park. In just their first year and a half in office, this Liberal government has established four parks, with more on the way with the recent tabling of the Yukon Parks and Land Certainty Act. The title of this bill is somewhat of a misnomer because it will not create an economy or land certainty in the Yukon Territory. What it certainly will create are more parks.

Clearly, the biggest challenge facing the Yukon Liberal government lies in restoring investor confidence here in the Yukon.

A government cannot restore investor confidence by constantly enclosing mining claims within park boundaries. The NDP government in British Columbia did that and effectively destroyed mining in that province for over a decade. Now we see this Yukon Liberal government hasn't done that not once but four times, Mr. Speaker. Turning the Yukon into a system of interlocking parks is not going to restore that confidence.

Again, I am pleased to offer my support to this particular initiative but would caution the minister when using the phrase "continued support for the mining industry". If support was actually there, perhaps exploration and development in the territory would be at an all-time high, as it was in 1966, when the Yukon Party government held office.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

. . . 1996, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Kent:      I am glad the Member for Klondike clarified that remark as I was alive in 1986 and wasn't in 1966.

I welcome the opportunity to respond to the member opposite's remarks with regard to the mining industry. Although mining exploration expenditures in the Yukon are not where we would like them to be, the mining community indicates that YMIP and the introduction of the Yukon mineral exploration tax credit are efforts that are significant factors for some companies when making the decision on whether or not to spend their exploration dollars in the Yukon.

YMIP has been, and is, a mining success story. Some examples of success in 2000 include the following: Kluane Drilling Ltd. drilled two holes on Rob Hamel's hat property, located immediately north of the historic War Eagle pit in the Whitehorse copper belt. Drill holes yielded encouraging deposits of copper, gold and silver. Pamicon Developments Ltd. conducted an extensive soil sampling and mapping program in the Bear Paw area of the Clear Creek property, which is currently under option to Red Star Resources Corporation. This program lead to the core drilling of nine holes, which found gold at many levels.

An extensive drilling program was planned for the 2001 field season on this target. Tanana Exploration identified two main zones of mineralization of their Fox property southwest of Ross River. Detailed prospecting and sampling in the Avalanche Ridge area revealed lead-zinc values in excess of 25 percent.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of other examples that I could cite, and as I mentioned in my statement, it is estimated that during the first year of exploration, on average, every dollar contributed through YMIP generates an extra $1.55 in expenditures. I sincerely hope that a YMIP discovery can lead to another staking rush like that witnessed in the Finlayson district in the mid-90s.

In March 2000, the department reviewed projects to determine the return on investment. It found 20 cases in which the initial YMIP contribution resulted in returns on investment of up to 48,000 percent more than they received. Since that time, further expenditures may have also been made.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker:      Are there any further statements by ministers?

This then brings us to Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Mr. Fairclough:      I have a question for the Premier. Can the Premier tell the House what she has spent to date trying to sell her so-called renewal process to government employees and to the public and what she expects the final bill to be?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak in this House about our restoring confidence in government renewal initiative. As the member opposite knows, renewal is about two key goals: preparing for devolution and improving services to Yukoners. How many days have I spent working on renewal since its announcement in June? I would suggest that a portion of every single day that I have been at work has been spent in one form or another on renewal, in terms of examining options, working with a very hard-working team on this particular subject, and examining various options, including speaking with the public servants.

For precise amounts, the member may wish to know that over 700 public servants have contributed their views. I will have a total for him on the number of public comments and public renewal sheets that have been returned following conclusion of the public discussions this evening.

Mr. Fairclough:      I would appreciate having that information.

The government has printed 2,500 copies of the discussion paper and questionnaire. Now, it bought tons of advertising asking people to tell government what it doesn't already know, and it has been holding meetings throughout the territory with, I would say, very little turnout. This is expensive stuff, and renewal has, basically, just started.

The member says that there are a certain number of people who have responded; I think that is a very low number at this point. Certainly there isn't the public demand for renewal that the Premier is leading us to believe that there is.

Will the Premier tell us what specific research tools were used to measure the public desire for rebuilding government before this process was started?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      The most vocal of all the research tools was used by the public in indicating a desire for change when they voted on April 17, 2000. We heard over and over and over and over again at the doorstep that Yukoners wanted better delivery of services and that they wanted change. This government has listened to that. We have also listened to over 700 Yukon government and Government of Canada employees who have expressed to us their desire to provide better service delivery to the public. It has been some 20 years since the organization of this government has been examined in any great detail. That is what we have done. In terms of specific research tools, how other governments have done renewal has been examined by our government and I can recommend to the member opposite a number of articles for his review if he wishes to extend, as the Member for Whitehorse Centre has asked for, all-party support for this initiative.

Mr. Fairclough:      Mr. Speaker, when the Premier launched this exercise in shuffling deck chairs, she said it was about devolution and improved services to Yukon people. We know that devolution has been delayed again, and the Premier hasn't proven her case that the public was clamouring for improved services. So, we'd like to give the Premier a chance to set the record straight. Will the Premier finally admit that this whole renewal exercise is an attempt to appease a small group of influential friends of the Liberals who wanted to see government downsized and certain government services turned over to the private sector?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, I must correct the member opposite. Devolution has not been delayed. The fact is that devolution has been achieved by this government. No other Yukon government did that - no other Yukon government. That is an important fundamental point.

Secondly, renewal is also not only about preparing for devolution; it's about providing better service delivery. It's also about maintaining a skilled workforce and about providing the hard-working public servants in the Government of Yukon - and the Government of Canada, who will be transferred over - a sense of opportunity in the workplace, a sense that their contribution as professional public servants is recognized.

It's also about making government more effective, more accountable for the results - making it easier to do business with government. Time after time, the Yukon public has said that in a variety of ways, some of which form the basis for questions in Question Period from the members opposite and formed the basis for Question Period when I was in opposition.

The fact is that Yukoners who work for the government want the opportunity to provide better service, and Yukoners who use the government, who come to us for one service or another, even a simple issue such as a driver's licence or a moose hunting licence, want it to be easier to do business with us. That's what renewal is about, and I do encourage the member opposite to attend the renewal public meeting tonight in this building and listen to what the public has to say, as I will be doing.

Question re:  Education Act review

Mrs. Peter:      My question today is for the Minister of Education. Today I don't need the minister to tell me that I am wrong, and I sure don't need a lecture. All I need today from the minister are some answers. Yesterday the minister tabled Bill No. 47, called the Education Staff Relations Act. This appears to be the implementation of recommendation 140 in the draft document of the review committee, which proposes moving sections 170 to 194 of part 9 and part 10 of the Education Act into separate legislation. Bill No. 47 appears to do just that.

Why has the minister implemented one of the recommendations from the Education Act review draft document while refusing another when the process has not yet been completed?

INTRODUCTION OF VISITOR

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      I ask the House's indulgence while I introduce Chief Hager in the gallery.

Applause

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      To answer the member opposite's question, the fact of the matter is that very early on in the process, it was recommended and suggested by the steering committee that attention be paid to sections 9 and 10 of the Education Act review with respect to addressing the teachers' aspects of the act, feeling that the employment should be removed and placed in a stand-alone piece of legislation. So it was a recommendation and suggestion that came out from the steering committee long before the draft recommendations came out, Mr. Speaker.

Mrs. Peter:      Mr. Speaker, there are six other draft recommendations regarding part 10 of the Education Act. Either the minister has decided not to implement the other recommendations or the legislation will have to be amended following completion of the process. So what is the minister's next step?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      Mr. Speaker, the next step is to wait for the final recommendations to be supplied to caucus and Cabinet from the Education Act Review Steering Committee on November 15.

Mrs. Peter:      The Education Act review process has included a series of events that bring the entire process into question. This is yet another event that raises the question of how fair this process is, and whether there is in fact any part of this process that is legitimate. There has been repeated political interference in this process.

Since the minister has decided that the process is irrelevant, will the minister share with the Yukon public the changes to the Education Act that we can expect to see?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      Mr. Speaker, I did hear the member opposite in her first question suggest that I am not to lecture or remind her that she is wrong. Unfortunately, I have to advise the member opposite that she is wrong, that we are following through on the process that was established by the previous government. We are respecting the process that was established by the previous government in structuring the committee and allowing the committee, for two and a half years now, to forward its recommendations, following full consultations throughout the whole of the territory in a total group capacity, meaning that at no time was any partner of the group not present when the group was meeting with individuals in the territory.

So the member opposite is quite wrong, Mr. Speaker. I am respecting the process, and the process is that they will supply final recommendations on November 15, and caucus and Cabinet will review them seriously.

Question re:  Devolution

Mr. Jenkins:      I have a question today for the Premier. A successful - I misspoke once again, Mr. Speaker. It's not a successful federal Liberal government; it's that successive Liberal governments in Ottawa have taken the position that the Government of the Yukon is not entitled to own Yukon land and resources until it attains provincehood, which, under Canada's Constitution, is virtually impossible to achieve should Yukoners ever want to go that route.

Now, previous Yukon Party governments argued long and hard that Yukon could and should own and control Yukon land and resources in the territory without having to become a province. The Yukon Party also has argued that the Yukon's offshore boundary in the Beaufort Sea should be recognized in law, just the same as with the Northwest Territories and Nunavut.

Can the Premier advise the House if the devolution agreement that she announced on September 25 includes the ownership of Yukon lands and recognition of our northern offshore boundary with the Northwest Territories, or does it just stick the Yukon with the environmental liability for managing federal lands?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, the member opposite was quite correct in his reference to successful Liberal governments, and I thank him for recognizing that.

With respect to the devolution transfer agreement, Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite mentioned, it was publicly announced on September 25 that negotiators had initialled an agreement. The process from there is for that initialled agreement to be approved by the principals. As the member opposite knows, the details with respect to the devolution transfer agreement - the members of the opposition have been offered detailed briefings as the negotiations progressed, and they have not availed themselves of a most recent opportunity.

I can advise the member opposite that, once the Yukon Act has been tabled in the House of Commons, I will certainly provide a full ministerial statement to this House and, should the members wish in the interim for a briefing following up on what they have had already, we'd be more than happy to provide it.

Mr. Jenkins:      The Premier has stated that April 1, 2003, is the transfer date. It is not a delay; it is merely an effective implementation date we put forward in recognition that the land claims mandate runs out at the end of March, on March 31. Can the Premier explain why she has reversed her stance and adopted the Yukon Party's position that land claims should precede devolution when she was saying the opposite in the 2000 territorial election campaign? Is she now agreeing with the Yukon Party's position? Has she got the cart before the horse or the horse before the cart? Which way is it, Mr. Speaker.

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      With all due respect to the member opposite, no, I don't agree with his party or his party position. The Yukon government, the federal government, Council of Yukon First Nations and individual First Nation negotiators, in negotiating the devolution transfer agreement, agreed on an implementation date of April 1, 2003, and that is part of the negotiated agreement that was initialled and sent to the principals for discussion. Again, I would offer the member opposite a full and complete briefing, as we have offered several times in the past, on the specifics surrounding the devolution transfer agreement when it was under negotiation. We would be pleased to provide that to the members opposite should they wish to avail themselves of it.

Mr. Jenkins:      Well, the Premier stated that the devolution agreement has been finalized. Can she explain why it hasn't been released? Is she ashamed of it? What is she hiding? There has to be something. Or has she sold out the Yukon and she just wants to bury this document until everything is done? This is a very important document. Why can it not be released at this juncture? Why is the Premier ashamed to release it now?

Hon. Ms. Duncan:      Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the work that this government has done in our first 17 months in office, and I'm very pleased with the work of the negotiators in initialling the devolution transfer agreement.

The member perhaps is not aware, although I have stated it and it has been stated publicly, that the devolution transfer agreement then goes on to the principals to be approved; therefore, it's subject to Government of Canada approval. A Government of Canada Cabinet document is a secret document and it is not mine to table in this Legislature. The Yukon Act contains the devolution transfer agreement. Once the Yukon Act has been tabled in the House of Commons, I will be more than happy to table it in this Legislature as well - file it for information, not table it for debate.

Question re:  CT scanner

Mr. Keenan:      Today I have a question for the open and accountable Health minister.

Mr. Speaker, we know that government has an obligation - both a legal obligation and a moral obligation - to provide a standard of care, facilities and service, before allowing private sector involvement. That's a given. We know that.

Now, in response to a question about user fees yesterday, the minister did state that fundraising can give the community ownership of the CT scanner.

So, today, I would like the minister to set the record straight. I would like to ask the minister to make a commitment not to implement a program of user fees for medical services.

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      I appreciate being able to have this opportunity to clarify the facts. Our government believes in a one-tier health care system, Mr. Speaker, and we have made this very clear right from the beginning. We follow the laws outlined in the Canada Health Act very clearly.

Let me be very clear: this government will not be introducing user fees, Mr. Speaker. I have said that over and over again. We continue to look at alternative ways within the law to maintain quality health care for Yukoners, and we will continue that because we know the system needs an overhaul.

Mr. Keenan:      What we have here is another classic case of the flip-flop, and I expect that these flip-flops are going to continue every day.

Mr. Speaker, let me read a quote from the minister in the Yukon News on September 21: "What I'm being told is maybe it shouldn't be free. Maybe there should be user fees." That's a direct quote from this minister. Another quote from this minister, from just last week, in response to a question from the CBC about what the status of privatization is: "Well, as far as we're concerned, we're moving ahead with what we believe is the way to go at this point. We're probably a bit ahead of our time. I'd say we're not finished investigating, and we're not going to stop there." Well, Mr. Speaker, I could go on, but I think that says enough.

I'd like to ask this minister right now: what instructions has the minister given to our representative on the Romanow commission on this very point?

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Mr. Speaker, I'm so pleased that the members opposite believe everything they read in the paper. I'm so pleased. At least they have disciples who follow the truth as they print it - very good. It's rather interesting that when they were in government, they didn't have those same thoughts.

I will take this opportunity to clear up the facts again. As I said earlier, this government believes in a one-tier health care system. We follow the laws, as I have said very clearly. We do not and will not introduce user fees, and we will continue to look at alternate ways.

Now, the member sitting to my left here is working with the Romanow commission. She's looking very closely at where health care is going in the future. She is bringing to that table some of our concerns. We are a very small jurisdiction; we have a lot of unique needs and have a lot of increasing costs. So, hopefully, the information that will come from the Yukon and the north will help the Romanow commission look at the overall picture of how health care is delivered in Canada, because it can't be the same in Yukon as it is in downtown Vancouver. So that's why it's very important to have that kind of input.

I'm very supportive of my colleague here. She's doing a very fine job. She has just returned from a meeting with Mr. Romanow and his crew, and she will probably, by the end of January, have some type of report out - a preliminary draft - as to where it might end up.

Mr. Keenan:      Well, Mr. Speaker, I have just one more follow-up question, if I may, at this point in time. Again, I'd like to read a quote from the minister here, Mr. Speaker, ferreted out by the fine media of the Yukon Territory. "Switching to a private model that needed to be evaluated behind closed doors. As long as it's in the budget, as long as it's in the public eye, it's difficult to change the direction it was going." Another direct quote on October 19 by this minister.

Well, yesterday, I asked the minister if the minister knew the principles of the Canada Health Act. Now, the minister has had time to review those five principles. I'd like to ask this minister just which one of those principles it is that this minister wishes to contravene first.

Hon. Mr. Roberts:      Well, the member opposite and the Yukon public, the facts are that we, again, believe in a one-tier health care system, Mr. Speaker. We've always said that.

Interestingly enough, when the member opposite talks about reading quotes from the paper, we must never change our view about how health care is delivered now. That's the way it is from the beginning to the end. The member opposite constantly believes that that's what health care is all about. That's why we're in trouble, Mr. Speaker. We need to look at our health care system. We need to challenge what our health care system is doing, and it's very important, Mr. Speaker, that that be done in an open and public way.

There are some things, obviously - and if the member opposite is referring to the CT scanner, obviously, if the homework had been done way before this was put on the budget, we wouldn't have gotten into that discussion, because the public debate didn't take place before it was put in there. It took place after, because some very serious questions were being asked.

Mr. Speaker, if we had gone ahead with that one-slice, two-slice CT scanner, we would have ended up, in two or three years' time, buying another one. So, by doing our homework, we're at least going to get a state-of-the-art CT scanner.

For the member opposite, I'm going to give him the five principles with the definitions. I think he needs to have these for his -

Speaker:      Order please, I must ask the minister to conclude his answer.

Question re:  Alaska Highway reconstruction at Marsh Lake

Mr. McRobb:      What a Gong Show that was.

Now, many Yukoners and other travellers of the Alaska Highway south, along Marsh Lake, have noticed that the road surfacing is falling apart, causing a legitimate safety concern. The Yukon government just resurfaced this 9.1-kilometre section of road that extends from Army Beach to M'Clintock Place at a cost to the taxpayers of three-quarters of a million dollars. Can the Minister of Community and Transportation Services indicate whether this contract was completed to her satisfaction?

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      Indeed, the contract has been completed. As the member opposite is well aware, there has been some potholing. People are used to driving on a paved surface and, the last many years, it has been a very rough and broken up paved surface. Now they are driving on a chipseal surface, and that is a difference that many of them have noticed.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, Mr. Speaker, that doesn't satisfy the public concern that this party has picked up on. Obviously the government is not listening.

Is the minister not aware of the public concern about this road section? I am not talking about the difference between chipseal and pavement - it is obvious that there are complaints about the road section falling apart and causing a safety concern. Is she not aware of this public concern, and just what is she prepared to do about it?

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      Of course I am aware of the concern. My office has received several calls and, since the late 1980s, the department has developed a strategic long-term pavement management system to ensure that our pavements are maintained in reasonable and safe condition. This section in the Marsh Lake area was reshaped and surfaced with BST, which does not provide as smooth a ride as asphalt; however, it is easier to repair with local maintenance forces, and it provides better traction in winter. BST was approximately half the cost of the asphalt.

We are waiting to see if that section holds its shape before we make a decision on paving it. Paving it is the ultimate goal.

Mr. McRobb:      Well, Mr. Speaker, what the minister says raises all kinds of questions and additional concerns. For instance, if it deserves pavement, why was three-quarters of a million dollars spent on BST that obviously isn't holding up?

To cut to the chase, Mr. Speaker - and I'd like an exact answer from the minister - can she tell us whether she plans to redeploy this model for additional highways work expected in the near future?

Hon. Ms. Buckway:      Mr. Speaker, I believe the member's asking whether we're going to BST rather than pave other sections. We have concerns about this particular section, as I have said, with settling and we want to see that the reshaped road surface is going to hold its shape before we pave it. Decisions like this are made based on the individual section of road.

Question re:  School busing contract

Mr. Fentie:      Mr. Speaker, I'd like to follow up with some questions to the minister responsible for Government Services.

Yesterday, the minister - and I want to thank the minister for his very succinct answer - answered in the affirmative that he supports wholeheartedly his department's program objectives when it comes to tendering government contracts.

I want to ask the minister today if that also applies to all the other ministers in his government. Does he ensure that they adhere to those program objectives? Yes or no?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      Well, Mr. Speaker, this is day three on this subject, and we know where the members opposite are coming from. Again, I will respond to this question as the Minister of Education, because I do believe that it is reflecting on a question that has been posed in the House a couple of times earlier, and the contracting question is with respect to the Department of Education and its administration of it.

I will again repeat the answers that I have given to the members opposite. It's probably most appropriate that this House stick with the facts; that the Member for Whitehorse West did not talk to anyone about any contracts, Mr. Speaker; that the Member for Whitehorse West, as a matter of fact being a former worker, talked to his former colleagues and was just listening to what his colleagues had to say with possible options and increasing efficiencies within this government.

The Member for Whitehorse West was simply doing his job, but the members opposite just can't seem to appreciate that.

Mr. Fentie:      Mr. Speaker, this is starting to become quite a concerning issue in this House. Why is the minister responsible for contract services and contract administration not answering these questions? It is that minister, by the law, who is accountable for this department and its programs. I am to assume now that we have the minister of damage control on his feet trying to cover up something here, and it is the members opposite who are leaving the perception that they have something to hide and are proving that they are a government that simply cannot be trusted to do the right thing. Now, let me ask this minister of damage control this: why then did the Member for Whitehorse West, a member of this government, attend a meeting, discussing, in their own words, the need to cut costs, not from inside government but from outside government, which resulted in a request of reducing employees' wages so that a company could lower its bid? Why then did other potential bidders not receive the same courtesy and opportunity from this government to ensure that this government honoured the program objectives of his colleague, the Minister of Government Services?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, the member opposite is wrong. I am not the minister of damage control. I am the Minister of Education, and the busing contract was specific to the Department of Education. That is a fact that the member opposite should be aware of. So I am dealing with the questions that are specific to the contract in question and a member's actions relative - or, as the members opposite have tried to indicate, effected by the member's actions as well. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Whitehorse West was simply doing his job, talking to people in the community, talking to some of his former colleagues before the tender was let and before the tender was even considered. At that time, the member was only looking for efficiencies in assisting this government to be fiscally responsible and in the administration of finance. So that is exactly what the member was doing. He was doing his job.

Mr. Fentie:      Mr. Speaker, this minister, obviously a rogue minister who does not follow Government Services' program objectives for tendering government contracts, has a problem here. Mr. Speaker, when questioned yesterday about this very matter, this minister stood on his feet, and I will quote, in answering a question in regard to what took place during this meeting, this minister of damage control said -

Speaker's statement

Speaker:      Order please. I must remind the members that in this House it's customary that members should be referred to by their electoral district, and in the case of ministers, by their portfolios. The Assembly is not an amateur hour, and I would request that the members try to be a little more respectful in their addresses.

I remind the members further, regarding questions in Question Period, that for supplementary questions you're normally allowed one sentence for the supplementary and then ask the question. With that, before we close Question Period, I'd ask the member to please complete his supplementary question and have the minister answer it.

Mr. Fentie:      Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Education, who is now attempting damage control in this matter, answered a question, "He spoke upon the instruction, upon what we were all doing at the time - finding efficiencies, Mr. Speaker" , and that also related to cutting costs outside government.

Will the minister now answer this question: who instructed the Member for Whitehorse West to attend this meeting, and were any other instructions given to attend meetings with other potential bidders of this government contract?

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm not too surprised at the member's scrutinizing Hansard yesterday. The fact of the matter is that it was a general instruction. All caucus members and ministers within the government were to seek efficiencies within their respective departments, and that the caucus as a whole talk and listen to Yukoners to find ways that we can more efficiently provide services to the public at large.

Just for further clarification - because I know the members opposite will again scrutinize Hansard - or someone in their office will - to pick up misquotes, or however they interpret things on that side of the House - the issue is that the Minister of Government Services administers contracts within government, and this is a contract that is administered by the Department of Education. Just for clarification and the information of the members opposite, this is how this works.

Speaker:      The time for Question Period has now elapsed.

Notice of opposition private members' business

Mr. Fentie:      Pursuant to Standing Order 14.2(3), I would like to identify the items standing in the name of the official opposition, to be called on Wednesday, October 24, 2001. They are Motion No. 141, standing in the name of the Member for Watson Lake, and Motion No. 143, standing in the name of the Member for Kluane.

Mr. Jenkins:      Pursuant to Standing Order 14.2(3), I would like to identify the item standing in the name of the third party, to be called on Wednesday, October 24, 2001. It is Motion No. 13.

Unanimous consent re: withdrawal of motions from Order Paper

Mr. McLachlan:      Mr. Speaker, based upon an agreement of all members, in whose names certain motions are standing on the Order Paper, and on agreement between the House leaders, I would request unanimous consent to have the following motions withdrawn from the Order Paper. They are motions other than government motions nos. 4, 6, 8, 15, 16, 34, 41, 45, 53, 62, 69, 70, 73, 74, 77, 81, 86, 94, 105, 110, 116, 119, 120, 125, 126, 129, 130, 134 and 135.

Speaker:      Unanimous consent has been granted. I would ask the Clerk to make the changes to the Order Paper, as directed by the House.

Notice to call motion re Committee reports

Mr. McLachlan: Mr. Speaker, I give notice, pursuant to Standing Order 13(3) that the motion for concurrence with the second report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Elections and Privileges shall be called as government-designated business.

Speaker:      We will now proceed to Orders of the Day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Mr. Clerk:      Second reading, Bill No. 8, standing in the name of the hon. Ms. Duncan.

Speaker:      I was recently reminded that, from yesterday, according to my watch, there are 32 minutes, 27 seconds left, starting now.

Mr. McRobb:      Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I left off yesterday giving examples of how the Liberals are breaking their campaign promises and are now ashamed to say "We will do what we said we would do" because it should more accurately read that "We will do whatever we want to do, regardless of what we said to get elected."

I mentioned how the Liberals have failed to produce a five-year budget plan. This demonstrates that they can't live up to their own expectations. They chastised the previous government and then declared they would do it at the beginning of their mandate, not at the end. But it's too late now, Mr. Speaker.

For the Liberals, this is a lost opportunity and another broken promise.

Speaking of false expectations, Mr. Speaker, what about the Premier's criticism of the deficit budget tabled before the last election call. If anybody would like to see exactly what she said, you're invited to visit the on-line Hansard from February 22, 2000.

But what has her government done? You guessed it. It has tabled two consecutive deficit budgets and, with the record spending in this capital budget, the next one is sure to be the third deficit budget in a row.

You know, Mr. Speaker, my mother always said, "Don't criticize somebody unless you are prepared to do better yourself." Well, the Premier and her colleagues should heed those words, because they could stand to learn something.

Can Yukoners trust this government? No. This Liberal government will do whatever is politically expedient. They look out for themselves and their backroom friends - certainly not the interests of ordinary Yukoners nor the future of the territory itself.

Can Yukoners depend on them to be consulted on matters of importance? Absolutely not. But they have this "they know best" attitude - the "government knows best" attitude.

Where was the public consultation for this capital budget that has been tabled in this sitting?

Look at their failure to consult about the territory's spending priorities.

Did the Premier ask Yukoners if they wanted another school in Riverdale? No. But people will get one, whether they need it or not, thanks to pork-barrel politics by the Member for Riverdale North and the Member for Riverdale South. Did the Liberals ask Yukoners what they would like to see instead? No. How can this government believe for a moment this budget is the best way to spend the public's money when they didn't give the people a chance to express themselves?

Did the Liberals stimulate public discussion about the community development fund before they slashed it in half one more time? No. This popular program is now only one quarter of its former size. Did the Liberals ask Yukoners if they felt the territory should do more to guard against forest fires? No. Even though I called upon them to take action to protect Yukon lives, property and resources from this threat, the Liberals took no initiative whatsoever.

Shame on them. Can Yukoners rest assured they had fair opportunity to give their input to this budget? No. I want to discuss this a bit, Mr. Speaker, because our citizens were not even told there was an opportunity to give their input into this budget. No public meetings were held.

I see some members shaking their heads, but I challenge them, Mr. Speaker, to table even one public notice of a public meeting for this capital budget. I challenge them. Now, it is a fact the public was not told that there is a budget surplus of $100 million. Instead, the public heard excuses from these Liberals about how the Yukon government couldn't respond to their needs. These circumstances have resulted in an unfair process void of public input.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I have in my hand a pamphlet sent out earlier this year by the Liberal government for this sham of a public consultation process it held before the mains budget was delivered. You'll recall that this consultation process occurred after the budget had already been set. It was simply too little, too late. We all know the budgeting process requires lead time, and the Liberals conveniently orchestrated this consultation to be too late for that process. Anyway, looking at this brochure reminds me of all the excuses the Liberals gave about how the budget surplus was going to be very small. They used that as an excuse to deny Yukoners projects and programs they had suggested. I see one line in the centre of the pamphlet that stands out from the rest. It says, "We cannot continue spending money at the current rate".

Mr. Speaker, what a stunning and ironic statement that is. The budget mains for this current year was increased substantially through supplementary budgets now tabled, to bring the total spending to almost $600 million for this budget year. The government spent tens of millions of dollars on itself, not responding to the public wishes, and I say, "Shame on them." They did not let the public know the true state of the territory's finances before accepting their input. They did not create a new opportunity this fall to accept public input. In fact, Mr. Speaker, in reviewing this whole matter, one can see that the input they did receive, some half a year or more ago, was all under a false budget forecast that the Liberals tried to build the perception around - that the territory was simply broke.

We know now, Mr. Speaker, with a $100-million surplus, the Liberals were way out on their forecast. In fact, our party, the official opposition, was very accurate in predicting what the budget surplus would be for the beginning of this year and, in fact, underestimated it again, just as we had said it would probably be in the last sitting.

So, Mr. Speaker, this budget process the Liberals said they undertook was a sham. They paid the public only lip service and, to make matters worse, the Liberals have the gumption to have us believe their budget was developed through extensive public consultation. How ironic.

Mr. Speaker, I submit that is not doing it better.

I submit the NDP did it right with a thorough public consultation process, advertised in advance and brought to every community, every First Nation, every municipality - not in the backrooms. The Liberals are doing it wrong. That is not doing it better; it's another broken promise by this Liberal government.

I want to briefly turn to the Premier's budget speech and just put on the record how I thought this government demonstrated that it cannot resist stooping to attacking those who, it was thought, had no opportunity to respond, by trying to include in the budget speech very provocative and aggressive lines, such as the opposition parties don't approve of the pipeline. That's rubbish, absolute rubbish. It's political spin of the worst kind from a government that is scared to govern and has no leadership. It has to try to fabricate messages, misstating the positions of the opposition parties. I say shame on them.

But moreover, these Liberals simply don't know how to be responsible with the territory's finances. When in opposition, the Premier didn't know how to even read a budget book.

Look at what she said about deficit budgets, from that February Hansard, about how the Liberal Party believed in a balanced budget, not a deficit budget. Those lines were repeated in the media, they were repeated in a speech to the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce, so it was no accident, it was no slip of the tongue. This showed a firm belief by the now Premier, only one and a half years ago, that the Yukon government should not run a deficit budget.

And this belief was highlighted and positioned up front in her budget reply speech from that day in February last year, and the now Premier made a big deal about it. Well, what have they done themselves? The exact opposite. What was good enough for them in opposition, Mr. Speaker, is now suddenly not good enough for them in government. They are not doing what they said they would do. This government is snow-blind on the territory's financial position.

Just look at the inaccurate budget forecasting and the inaccurate understanding that they have of the territory's budget. They don't even understand how to consult the public on the budget, even though the previous government set out a very good example for how to do that. Even though members of the former government, now opposition, have described how the budget public consultation worked - I recall doing that in the first sitting after the election and also inviting the government to give me a call when they are having their meetings. I would like to attend. Has there ever been a call? No. Why? Because this government feels it knows best and it doesn't want to hear from anybody else. It wants to hear from its backroom friends - end of story.

One more example of their complete lack of understanding of budget process and fiscal responsibility and financial position of the territory was really driven home earlier this year. If you recall, back in January, this government nixed the proposal from the Call of the Wild series. This is a children's television series based on Jack London's novel.

The set is in the Yukon. The proponents behind this series propose to bring the set to the territory. The financial figures publicized at the time indicated this project would increase the territorial economy between $50 million and $100 million over a five-year period, producing more than 100 jobs.

Mr. Speaker, you will recall how we, on this side of the House, pursued this matter in Question Period and Committee, trying whatever we could to bring the Tourism minister around to understanding the importance of such a venture, the need to support an emerging industry such as the film industry in the territory, yet she and her colleagues said no.

Mr. Speaker, less than two months later, we found out why they said no. In Committee debate on the Tourism budget, the Minister of Tourism said that, back in January, the government thought it was broke. Now, for the rest of the story, the Auditor General says, at the end of last year, this government had $100 million. One hundred million dollars, yet they believed they were broke. Doesn't this government understand how to read a budget? Doesn't it know how to keep track of the territory's finances? Doesn't it understand how to read variance reports from the various months? Why didn't the Liberals call for the January variance from the budget, see how much money was in the bank, check the trend and understand there would be a huge surplus, and then make the right decision?

This program that was set up by the previous government that allows film companies to take advantage is merely standard in other parts of the country.

The producers behind this series were not asking for anything other than that. All the government had to do was increase the funds available for that particular program, just like it has slashed program funds for other things. Mr. Speaker, it's got the ability to take out the pen and readjust the numbers, and we on this side of the House made it clear we were prepared to support that, yet the Liberals said no. So the territory missed a golden opportunity, and that's a shame. It's a shame because the price this territory has paid so far while this novice Liberal government tries to learn is very regrettable to the present position, not to mention the future development of the territory. Very regrettable indeed.

Mr. Speaker, I might be prepared to soften my outlook on that if I saw reason to believe things were improving. However, after being back in this Legislature a couple of days now and watching the members of this government respond in Question Period and on other occasions, I think things are getting worse, not better.

Mr. Speaker, there's a belief out there that this government is deliberately providing inaccurate information in order to build up a war chest for the next election. They have money squirreled away here and there. They won't reveal where. It's very hard to detect, but I believe it's being used for political purposes. What other possible reason is there? And that's a shame. That's not what good government is all about. That's not what serving the public interest is all about.

These Liberals are focused on one thing and one thing only, and that is to try to save their own political skins by winning the next election. Let's make no bones about it.

That's their number one priority.

Now, Mr. Speaker, my concerns aside, I would like to indicate my support for some items in the budget that I believe are good. One of them is continuing some programs and projects created and supported by the previous government, such as road reconstruction, the Correctional Centre in Whitehorse, maintaining programs like fire smart, community development fund, a.k.a. Project Yukon - even in a reduced form, at least it's still there - and, as recently alluded to, the film incentive program.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I believe that moving up the budget to the fall also deserves merit, although the government has been very reticent to speak about the downsides of doing so. Obviously, they are more interested in spinning their positive yarn about this and many other matters, rather than getting down to the facts of any issue.

Mr. Speaker, there are some not-so-good things - some bad things, if you will. Cancelled programs like the trade and investment fund show no sign of being revived by this Liberal government. This is the very fund that helped to develop Yukon industry, helped to increase exports from the territory, and helped to diversify our economy. A few things that I can recall off the top of my head are the plant food business in Faro, the Chilkoot beer business in Whitehorse, and the Peters Drury Trio also benefited from this program, and there were several other examples. Well, the Liberals cancelled this program. Apparently, for some silly belief, there should be a level playing field.

Well, this Liberal government does not understand that a government has a role and a responsibility to kick-start the economy, to encourage businesses to get started and encourage businesses to maintain their existence and expand their outlook into other markets. So I say shame on them for cancelling the trade and investment fund. Now, I know that I am not alone in that - I hear it out there from a lot of people.

The tourism marketing fund is another example. This popular program provided business people, tourism operators, with small but important amounts of money for trade shows, for marketing, for Web sites - whatever - in order to increase the visitation to their operations and facilities in the Yukon. It was a very worthwhile program - another cancellation by this Liberal government. Shame on them again.

I also want to put in here the reduction of the community development fund - the three R treatment, if you will, which was review, reduce and repackage - is shameful. It goes against the desires of Yukoners. I know that, in rural Yukon, this program was very important. I know in some communities, when asked what their budget priorities were, the response was, "continued funding from the community development fund." That was the single priority, yet what does this Liberal government do? They cut it in half, and then this year, they cut it in half again for next year. Shame on them, Mr. Speaker, shame on them.

We will be watching the approved projects very carefully, and we will see how many of the projects go into the Liberal ridings. Maybe really what they did was cut out the riding proposals for the opposition parties. This certainly deserves and warrants some scrutiny.

Now, in that my riding is in the Kluane region, which extends from the border of the City of Whitehorse to the border of Alaska, both on the Alaska Highway and the Haines Road, I want to discuss what this budget does or, more properly said, doesn't do for Kluane.

Well, off the start, I did an analysis of the capital budget, and it's clear that the Liberal versus NDP budget for the Kluane riding is less than 70 percent. That means that funding for the Kluane area has dropped substantially since the NDP's last budget. Now, I have a proviso on that I'll get to in a moment. The capital budget for Haines Junction, Liberal versus NDP budget, is 23.2 percent, or less than one quarter of what the NDP provided for that community. Last year, it was 24.23 percent so, in fact, the amount provided by this government for Haines Junction is declining. This is unbelievable.

Now, to the provisos, Mr. Speaker. This excludes three things: number one, highway spending. The reason for excluding highway spending is for the very reasons given by the Liberals in opposition, and that was highway spending shouldn't be lumped in to communities miles away. The Premier said this when in opposition.

So, Mr. Speaker, my analysis is merely done in a way consistent with that platform.

Secondly, it excludes the business incentive program, or BIP, because, for the first time ever, we see BIP allocations worked somehow into the community budget. This is bogus. That's not the way to do it. It artificially inflates financial allocations to our communities, and it's very misleading to Yukoners to believe that number when the BIP is put in there.

Finally, the recoverables are not deducted from the community budget. Shame on them. In the handout that we were provided and the community breakdowns, there was no deduction for recoverables. This is inconsistent with past practice. Why have the Liberals decided to do this? Obviously, Mr. Speaker, it inflates the amount of money really going into the communities because it doesn't include what the government gets back for land development and other things. It artificially inflates what this government is doing for rural Yukon.

Why would they possibly do that, Mr. Speaker? There's only one answer, and that's because this government wants people in the community to believe that this government is responding to rural Yukoners, but they are not. Those factors lead me to be quite critical of what this government is doing in my riding - less than one-quarter of the expenditures in the NDP's final budget, which was an election budget - shame on them.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I wonder about this year's budget, the one that was only less than a quarter of the NDP's budget. Where did the money possibly go? Now, looking around Haines Junction, I see new pavement in the Government Services building parking lot, and I see some renovations in the James Smith Administration Building. But lo and behold, guess what? The money for renovations was in the NDP's government budget, the campaign budget; however, those monies were never spent.

They were revoted, Mr. Speaker, so the Liberals took credit for them when, in fact, it was in a budget they committed to passing in its entirety. Shame on them. I know that project was in the neighbourhood of $185,000, so my figure of less than 25-percent spending in Haines Junction for the last year of the NDP's budget doesn't even exclude that. If you exclude that, there would be virtually no money spent in Haines Junction by this government, and that's shameful. Yet this government has the audacity to travel up to Haines Junction and hold one of its staff meetings there and try to tell everybody what a good job it's doing. But did it reveal to the community of Haines Junction what I have just revealed? You can bet your life, Mr. Speaker, it didn't, and it didn't because it doesn't want Yukoners to know the truth. It wants people to believe the political spin that continues to yarn away in the backroom office of this government. That's where the directions come from, Mr. Speaker - the backroom office. They don't come from the town hall, produced by perhaps a community budget meeting; they come from the backroom, and that's where the Cabinet and caucus members get their marching orders from as well. That is quite apparent to us here in opposition.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what about some of the priorities I know this government has heard about from my constituents? What about telephones? I was at one of those too-little-too-late budget meetings held last winter at the end of January, led by the backbencher from Whitehorse Centre, and I specifically recall one of the priorities from the public was the need for telephones in some areas that currently weren't served.

Well, is there something in this budget to help these people get connected to this lifeline service? No - absolutely not.

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

Mr. McRobb:      Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now, I'm going to jump to some other general comments. Where is mention of the top Liberal priorities in the budget speech? They talk about land claims, DAP, YPAS and the change in attitude. Mr. Speaker, the Liberals said they'd have all land claims settled by last January. What a joke. The federal government even said before the Liberals were elected that they were prepared to move on the two outstanding issues on land claims. Well, what's happening? Is the Yukon government dragging this out? What about DAP? We don't hear much about DAP any more. And look at YPAS. The Liberals have failed to make any on-the-ground progress. The only thing they have achieved is delaying that type of action.

And what about attitude, Mr. Speaker? Well, we have seen a change in attitude, all right. More people are leaving, and the territory's population has plummeted below the 30,000 red line, and that is shameful. What about progress and promises? The Premier said her government would fulfill the 122 campaign commitments, which they costed at only $4.2 million. Why aren't they in the budget? The Liberals have spent about $1.5 billion with this capital budget. Where is their conviction? Mr. Speaker, they are not doing what they said they would do.

What about government renewal? Mr. Speaker, this is just an excuse to politicize the public service and purge the workforce. What about these 700 jobs they promised? How many of these exist now, Mr. Speaker? Does that ring a bell? Do you remember the reason why this Liberal government rejected the NDP supplementary brought in about a year ago? They said it was because they were only short-term jobs.

Speaker:      Order please. The member's time is expired.

Mr. McRobb:      Thank you.

Hon. Mr. Jim: I rise with pleasure today to express my support for the 2002-03 capital budget. This budget represents another sound step in my government's work to rebuild the Yukon economy and to restore confidence in government.

Before I go any further, I would like to dispel the myth that the opposition has been trying to create over the last few days. This is the myth that we have not consulted with Yukoners on this budget. As my colleague from Faro pointed out yesterday, members of our caucus spent over 200 days travelling to communities across the Yukon during the summer. Before the budget last spring, I was honoured to take part in the budget consultation on the north highway, talking to people in Haines Junction, Destruction Bay, Burwash and Beaver Creek. Since last spring's budget, I have enjoyed talking with Yukoners in Whitehorse, Watson Lake, Teslin, Dawson, Haines Junction, Carmacks and Ross River.

Listening to the people in the Yukon is not just a two-day drive down the highway with a budget consultation flag on the car; it is an ongoing part of the job of government, a part of the job that I personally find most rewarding. The reward is in listening to people's concerns and issues and trying to find a way to solve their problems.

Last month I was able to make the trip to Ross River. I heard concerns about their long-neglected recreation facilities. I am pleased that my colleague, the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, has provided $180,000 in next year's capital budget to begin to address the concerns in Ross River.

The projections for the following two years include another $1.3 million for the blue building in Ross River. Mr. Speaker, this budget is full of good projects that will create work today while improving the quality of life for Yukoners and providing an improved foundation for economic development.

This budget is an investment in our future - our economic future and our future quality of life. The increased funding provided by my colleague, the Minister of Economic Development, promoting the Alaska Highway pipeline and in mining programs and geological surveys, will pay dividends today and into the future.

The $40 million that my colleague, the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, is investing in transportation infrastructure will stimulate the economy while making driving safer for Yukoners and increasing the economical potential of the territory.

A large portion of the highway funding - about $7 million - will go toward improving the roads between Champagne and Haines Junction. When the caucus visited Haines Junction earlier this fall, I heard how jobs were plentiful this year. Thanks to this investment, the people of Haines Junction can look forward to another busy year.

Earlier on during this sitting, I also heard how the Member for Kluane states that the conditions of the chipseal on the roads is causing a safety concern. Causing a safety concern? Let's talk about safety concerns. Where was the previous government when mishaps after mishaps occurred on the Haines Junction corner? Where was the Member for Kluane with the Member for Kluane's list of safety concerns? Where was the capital funding from the previous government for the Champagne corner? Again: where was the Member for Kluane with the list full of safety concerns?

The fact, Mr. Speaker, is the list of safety concerns was in the bottom of the bag. Now, this government went out and met with the communities and listened to the Yukoners on their concerns. Be it safety, be it necessity or be innovative, this government listened.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Kluane should be thanking this government for the very things the member could not achieve. Mr. Speaker, the Member for Kluane should be thanking this government for making roads a safer place for motorists and for people of the Yukon, such as the family from Champagne, who were probably tired of the numerous vehicles that they have pulled out of their buildings because of these motorists on the Champagne corner. The Member for Kluane should be thanking this government.

In addition to the jobs across the territory that this budget will create, there are more specific benefits. I want to focus for a few minutes on some of the initiatives in this budget that most directly impact the constituents in my riding of McIntyre-Takhini.

The students that attend Takhini Elementary School, and their parents, will be pleased to see that the Minister of Education has included money in his budget to replace the heating system in the Takhini Elementary School. Last spring, I heard first-hand the passion that people have for the Takhini Elementary School, and I know that they will be pleased that we will be making their school a more comfortable environment for children to learn.

The Members of the Kwanlin Dun First Nation are a big part of the McIntyre-Takhini riding. As part of negotiating a comprehensive land claims agreement with Kwanlin Dun, my colleague, the Minister of Tourism, will be providing $1.2 million to a cultural centre, which will increase cultural tourism and economic development opportunities.

Of this money, $200,000 will be available for planning as soon as all parties agree on an appropriate site, with the remainder available at a later date.

The Whitehorse multiplex is a facility that will benefit everybody in Whitehorse. Indeed, I expect many of the people from the communities across the Yukon will have an opportunity to enjoy the facilities that are just beginning to be built. While many people will have the use of the multiplex, the people of McIntyre-Takhini are most conveniently situated to take advantage of the opportunities it will present. This budget contributes $1 million this year, with similar amounts in the coming years.

Mr. Speaker, while the expenditures that are part of this budget will be welcome, providing good government is about more than just spending money. I am proud to be part of a government that is tackling some tough issues - for instance, devolution. Bringing control of our natural resources back to Yukoners has been a target of successive governments for years. Time and time again, the difficult negotiations have forced previous governments to push back the target dates and set new goals.

This government has completed negotiations on behalf of Yukoners. The deal has been initialled by representatives on behalf of the federal, territorial and First Nations governments. The implementation date of April 1, 2003, is no longer just a target or a goal. It's fast and vastly becoming a reality.

The Yukon Act will be tabled in the House of Commons in Ottawa this fall. On April 1, 2003, the Yukon government and Yukoners will have full control of our lands, forests and mineral resources. This will bring with it new challenges, but we welcome the challenges. This government has never been afraid of being accountable.

In preparation for devolution and to provide better services to the citizens of the Yukon, this government has undertaken a process called renewal. This look at the way the government delivers services and programs is long overdue. I am confident that the results of renewal will be improved accountability and services to Yukon people, more efficient use of government and taxpayer resources, and a more attractive working environment for our professional public servants.

Another difficult challenge that this government is taking on is the Yukon protected areas strategy. While some people would have development with no consideration for the environment, there are others who would protect lands without regard for the economy. This government does not believe that economic development and the protection of our natural resources are mutually exclusive.

Yesterday, the Minister of Renewable Resources tabled the Parks and Land Certainty Act. This act sets out principles by which this government will protect a representative area in each of the ecoregions that have a substantial amount of land in the Yukon. This also is an investment in the future. This is one way that we can ensure that future generations of Yukoners enjoy the wilderness that we take for granted each day.

The main principle that this government will follow in protecting land for the future is the principle of balance. Resource assessments will be completed just as diligently as environmental assessments. Access to resources will also be an important consideration. Existing third party legal rights will be respected. At the end of the day, as areas of interest are identified, these assessments will be available to the public.

At the risk of repeating myself, let me say again that this government is not afraid of being accountable.

The departments I have been given responsibility for - Government Services and Yukon Housing Corporation - have a number of things in the budget that I would like to take this opportunity to highlight.

Yukon Housing provides social and staff housing for communities across the Yukon. While the benefits of safe, affordable housing go far beyond simple numbers, I would like to point out the contributions that Yukon Housing is making to communities.

Yukon Housing will be investing over $1 million into social and staff housing in the communities in the next fiscal year. This money will improve living conditions for people in virtually every community, while providing work for contractors across the territory. Renovations to staff housing will take place in Carcross, Dawson City, Faro, Old Crow, Watson Lake and elsewhere. Renovations to social housing will occur in Carmacks, Dawson City, Mayo, Ross River and Watson Lake.

As I mentioned earlier, Mr. Speaker, I was happy to be able to visit Ross River in September, and I have been working hard to address some of the concerns. The Yukon Housing Corporation will invest a total of $278,000 in Ross River social and staff housing units in the next fiscal year - $278,000.

As its name suggests, Government Services' primary role is to provide services to government. There are a number of things in this budget, however, that will provide economic benefits to people across the territory. Government Services will continue to make a $200,000 contribution to the Technology Innovation Centre. I attended the IT Conference and exposition last week and was impressed by the vibrant Yukon IT scene.

Partnerships, like those provided by the Technology Innovation Centre, can enhance the economic potential of this industry.

I know that my colleague, the Minister of Economic Development, is working on an IT sector strategy, and this will be another tool for Yukon's IT industry. The business incentive program provides incentives that encourage the use of Yukon workers on Yukon government construction projects, as well as the use of Yukon-manufactured products in the Yukon government buildings. I am particularly impressed with the quality of furniture that is being produced by woodworkers in the territory. I am pleased that Government Services has played a role in encouraging this industry.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my Cabinet colleagues for producing a capital budget that will create jobs across the territory. The jobs created in the 2002-03 capital budget will not die with the end of the fiscal year. However, this is a budget that is full of investments in the people and in the future of the Yukon Territory, and these investments will pay dividends far, far into the future.

Thank you.

Hon. Mr. Eftoda:      I take pleasure in joining my colleagues in responding to the Premier's capital budget speech. This is just the first of a few more capital budgets this government will be putting forward. We are well on the way to restoring confidence in a government that is taking the lead, continuing to build confidence in our public service, confidence in this administration and is willing to listen to all Yukoners. This capital budget is showing those same Yukoners that we have listened to what they have had to say.

As a member of the Liberal caucus, I am proud of the work we are doing for Yukon and its people - all of its people, Mr. Speaker. All caucus members have been travelling all over the territory the past 10 months, listening to what Yukoners have had to say and what they would like to see done by this government on their behalf in an efficient, responsible and accountable manner.

There have been extensive consultations on an ever-growing number of initiatives by this government - activities and actions that have languished for years or that were totally ignored by previous governments.

I will let my caucus colleagues speak directly to others, Mr. Speaker, while I focus on just a couple of those that I am most familiar with, like completely updating a 20-year-old piece of legislation called the Wildlife Act or replacing a very successful primary school, Grey Mountain Primary. Students and teachers are working in a building that is comprised of 38-year-old modulars, Mr. Speaker, a building scheduled and promised by previous governments to be replaced.

In June of last year, in 2000, the leader of the official opposition made a motion in this House asking the government to follow through on its commitment to parents to build a new Grey Mountain school. I quote: "THAT this House urges the Yukon Liberal government to live up to its commitment by putting the appropriate resources to begin the necessary planning and design work for this school replacement project." Well, this capital budget reflects our commitment to replace it. Imagine that, Mr. Speaker, a politician actually doing what he said he would do.

On Monday, the same member chastised this government for not being good fiscal managers by allocating money to the Grey Mountain School building project.

That the school was going to be built no matter what - that was wrong, Mr. Speaker.

We are following through on our commitments. We do listen to Yukoners - all Yukoners - and I did listen to the leader of the official opposition when he forwarded his motion in this House.

We have set for ourselves a very ambitious agenda for the next couple of years, dealing with many pieces of legislation - some quite old and outdated and which our professionals and Yukoners have been asking for. The government renewal exercise will allow us opportunities to more efficiently provide services to the public. By all accounts, devolution is going ahead. There will be many more services for which this government will be directly responsible and accountable. The whole of our public service is committed to this project and are to be commended for their dedicated involvement.

Our public servants, Mr. Speaker, are also Yukoners and are an invaluable resource for providing government with needed comment on just how we can best achieve our goals and objectives on renewal - simple and powerful suggestions, like simply answering the telephone with, "Hello, how can I help you?"

As the Minister of Education, I am looking forward to receiving the final recommendations of the Education Act Review Steering Committee. This committee was formed almost two-and-a-half years ago and has worked long and hard toward providing government with its final recommendations based directly on what the committee heard from all Yukoners.

Committee members formed a true partnership, comprised of representatives from First Nations, school councils, teachers and the Department of Education. Their consultations, Mr. Speaker, have been exhaustive, meeting with interest groups in every Yukon community, with individuals, with individual First Nations and with individual First Nation elders. I commit to the steering committee that caucus and Cabinet will exercise the serious review the recommendations require. The steering committee also received a large number of non-Education-Act-related comments that the Department of Education is now reviewing and organizing, some of which will be implemented over the next year.

There are a number of significant capital expenditures identified that will create a more healthy learning environment for our children. I mentioned earlier the long overdue replacement of Grey Mountain School. There is also the new industrial wing on the Watson Lake high school, a new addition and heating system for the Eliza Van Bibber School in Pelly, a new roof on Golden Horn Elementary, a new heating system in Takhini Elementary, and a much-needed cafeteria in Vanier Catholic Secondary School, something that has been missing from that school for a long, long time.

Incidentally, Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition said that the rural school construction schedule was a decision of school councils. Well, quite frankly, he was wrong. I know the members opposite don't like to hear that word, but it is factually correct - they were wrong. That list was a compilation of the Rural Facilities Study Committee. School councils made submissions to that committee, and then decisions were made on the whims of the previous government.

As Minister of Renewable Resources, I am committed to creating a balanced approach with the Minister of Economic Development, on both economic and environmental issues. This is very evident in the new Parks and Land Certainty Act that we will be debating in this House later in this session. Yukoners asked for certainty, and we committed to enshrining the principles of the protected areas strategy directly in legislation. This is the first jurisdiction in Canada to do so, Mr. Speaker.

The new Parks and Land Certainty Act will also provide us with tools to effectively manage parks and protected areas. Through devolution, we will gain direct control of our land base and this will require management of our parks, no longer relying on the federal government to set the parameters.

As indicated in the capital budget, work is continuing on the planning of our new Tombstone Interpretive Centre for the new Tombstone Park, with actual construction to occur in 2003. The MLA for Klondike referenced that we had established four new parks, and I would like to challenge the Member to name them. Perhaps the Member for Klondike would find it useful if he actually read the Parks and Land Certainty Act. The member uses the word "park" with as much distaste and disdain as when he is referring to certain members on this side of the House.

It was a commitment by this government to enshrine in legislation the principles of protected areas. We are doing what we said we would do.

In November 2000, the Member for Klondike put a motion forward before this House stating that the Parks Act should be utilized to create territorial parks, rather than the protected areas strategy. Well, that is what the Parks and Land Certainty Act will do.

Give us the tools to establish and manage parks in the Yukon Territory. The member also put forward a motion that certain principles should be included in protected areas legislation. Well, surprise, Mr. Speaker. We have done it.

The Wildlife Act, by judicial accounts, is an old and outdated piece of legislation. The members of both opposition parties have acknowledged in previous sessions their support for this much-needed revision to this act. I am pleased that this government has chosen to tackle this legislation in a three-phased approach.

Phase 1, which will be debated in this House later this session, is for administrative and enforcement issues. Phase 2 will directly relate to species at risk and will be debated in the fall of 2002. And in phase 3, land claims issues will be debated in the fall of 2003.

I would like to acknowledge here, Mr. Speaker, something all Yukoners and all members of this House can take considerable pride in - Yukon's campgrounds. I had the privilege of visiting all of our campgrounds, with the exception of two, during the month of July. This also afforded me an opportunity to chat with visitors to the Yukon, as well as to visit with Yukoners and department staff in almost every Yukon community. It is with pleasure that I commit to maintaining and improving our recreational places, as indicated by a capital expenditure of $270,000.

Just to correct the record, the Member for Klondike stated that I was gone for most of the summer. Well, Mr. Speaker, again I have to say he is wrong. I did not leave Yukon until late August.

Another significant piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker, to be debated this session is the Education Staff Relations Act. This act removes the labour portions of the current Education Act from the administration of the education system. It is a commitment made to building trust and respect for Yukon teachers and involving the Yukon Teachers Association directly in the drafting of this new act. It will clearly define the relationship between the territorial government and our teachers. Among other things, and most notably, it will confirm the rights of paraprofessionals and temporary teachers. We have also established a very open and a very positive line of communication between the YTA and the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few moments to express my personal and heartfelt appreciation to the Public Service Commission in their commitment to this government's renewal project. All staff within the Public Service Commission are very cognizant of the support that all our public servants require during this time of change, and I thank them for their caring and their dedication.

I would also like to personally thank all the individuals and staff who worked long and hard on preparing and completing all the legislation that we have tabled for debate in this session, as well as the preparation of the capital budget for the fall session. Their tireless dedication to the meetings and drafting is very, very much appreciation.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to reaffirm my commitment to the people of Riverdale North, whom I represent directly in this House. I have been doing my constituency walkabouts and will continue to make my way around the neighbourhood. I do appreciate all the comments and feedback that I have received to date and look forward to listening to more of what my constituents have to say.

I thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me the opportunity to express my appreciation to my colleagues, my caucus and my government leader.

Speaker:      Order please. I do have a speaking order here, and I don't see anybody on this side standing up, and I'll ask the Member for Ross River-Southern Lakes: are you prepared?

Mr. Keenan:      Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity. I was just confused for a moment.

I would like to also take this time to thank the hard-working YTG employees and the others who have helped to pull together this budget. Certainly, this budget is an economic empowerment for the Yukon Territory. It is the only economic empowerment in the Yukon Territory at this time. But I do want to thank the people for taking the time and putting it together - good work.

I would also like to take the opportunity to thank the folks in my riding. As I have gone about this summer - I heard the previous speaker say that about his walkabouts. I surely wish I had the luxury of doing a walkabout around my riding, only my riding is a very huge riding and everything I do in my riding has to be done by car, motor vehicle and whatnot, so it's a little bit more challenging but that is not an excuse; it is a pleasure to be able to serve the people of Ross River and Southern Lakes.

I am going to take the opportunity to not so much rebut what I have heard - there will be a few rebuttals to what I have heard so far - but to speak about the riding and to try to massage, if I could, or to empower the government of the day through listening to me, and give some advice. That is truly how I would like to work.

But in the meantime, I would like to state that I have listened to some of the backbenchers who stood up and ranted - absolutely ranted - about what this government is doing for rural Yukon.

I found it not only astonishing but also funny. As I took the time to think about last night, I thought that maybe it's not that funny - maybe it's not. Maybe this government is only giving the opportunity once a year to give their profile to the backbenchers. I've read in the Finance minister's speech about what everybody was doing. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think even you will have to admit that it was just tokenism, a quick community flit, I guess, if you could say it like that. But it does give them the opportunity to blow their own horn and defend their government leaders, and I guess that's the only opportunity they'll get. What a shame, what a waste. The government has people back there whom they can utilize, whom they could bring forth, and they can give them opportunity to integrate all of the Yukon's view into the budget process and into other processes that are happening here in the Yukon Territory.

And we are into constitutional change in the Yukon Territory. We have First Nation governments; we have municipal governments that have been empowered by the previous government; we have the territorial government. We have constant change, so it's going to take a lot of energy and a lot of people putting their heads together to come up with what is right for the Yukon and not to make it partisan. I certainly agree with that.

I'm not agreeing with the motion that was read out today, but I'm telling you that the energy should be a collective energy. It should be there, and it can and will be there if the government will listen. That's key, very key.

One of the things that I found out as I went around the riding this summer - and of course in my riding there's a lot of broken road, there are no telephones, so you have to travel through the hinterland to get to these folks.

Well, let me tell you, the honeymoon is over - absolutely over. In my riding, people who, simply last Christmastime, or the last time I had spoken to them before, said, "Let's give them a chance, Dave," so I agreed with them. Doggone rights. They're on a honeymoon.

Well, what a great disappointment these folks have turned out to be, these leaders for the Yukon people, especially in my riding.

Folks have come up to me and said, "Dave, I want you to know I voted Liberal, and I'm sorry for it." I said, "Hey, you ain't the first one to tell me that. Thank you very much, though." It shows you that everybody can make mistakes.

They admitted it, Mr. Speaker. They admitted they made mistakes, and they said they would never make that mistake again. Why? Because the things that have been suggested by them, whether it's through a formal meeting, whether it's through a letter, through an attempt to get a minister on a phone, or anything like as such, have been refuted. They said, "No, that's not the way it is, but a good idea, Mr. Smith." Maybe his name was Mr. Smith - a good idea, but, "This is the way we're going to do it."

Well, that's not consultation, Mr. Speaker. Gee whiz, that's not consultation. We know that. That's dictation, it's giving direction, very autocratic.

Consultation is so very critically important to the jurisdiction of the Yukon Territory. People are used to being involved. Folks here want to be involved with what's in government. They'll do it themselves, or they'll do it through their MLAs, but they want to have their opinion listened to. And if the government of the day cannot afford Joe Yukon - the average Yukoner, Joe and Jane Yukoner - the opportunity to talk, in some cases to vent, then we're not doing a good job.

Now, I see folks busily writing things down so they can rebut what I am saying here. Don't rebut me. I am giving this to you as a lesson to learn from what I've been hearing out there.

Consultation - last spring in this Legislature, the Minister of Government Services said he was going to go on his community tours and he was pretty happy about that; he was going to do it. Well, by golly, Mr. Speaker, I happened to be in Ross River, working, talking, yacking, listening - a great group of people up there. We were going to have a little bit of dinner and we were going to do different things together, but, you know, it was 7:00 at night and we were going to have a little bit of dinner before our round-table meeting and we were waiting. We were waiting for the Minister of Government Services. So we all sat down, we broke a bit of bread together and we ate because everybody likes to eat hot grub, especially me. So we ate our dinner, and the minister blew in at 10 minutes past seven. He was supposed to be there for dinner. The meeting was supposed to start at 7:00. That was the formal agenda. The minister gave a quick blurb. We had to massage a little bit of energy into him so he would actually listen instead of defend. It was done in a nice way at that meeting.

I was invited to go for a beer. I didn't go for the beer with the group at the time, but everybody was in the pub by approximately 9:00 that night - and then out the next morning at 9:00. Holy moly, is that consultation or is that just a little boogie around the Yukon Territory? Well, I do believe that the last time I polled the expenses of this particular minister, this particular minister blew his whole travel budget in one trip - that's the whole travel budget for the year, too, by the way, Mr. Speaker. So is that consultation? No, that's called covering your back. That's what that is called.

Well, we broke into the meeting, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry I have to talk directly to you because I enjoy that. But we broke directly into the meeting, and as we were doing that, I noticed one of the YTG bureaucrats. People were saying to him, "What about this?" and "What about that?" and, "Hey, man, we sent you a letter three months ago. We sent you a letter." And when this fellow stood up - and I guess it was in defence of government at this point in time, not an explanation but an excuse - the letter had just been faxed by the minister's office previous to that. Now, we are talking after 7:00 at night.

Is that good government? Is that good consultation? Is that the way the ministers answer their letters - by fax machine after the fact? Holy moly, Mr. Speaker, I'm pointing something out here. I hope that the little group huddled in the corner there and looking for a quarter back there, or whatever, is listening because I'm trying to point this out in a nice way, Mr. Speaker, as I normally do.

So, Mr. Speaker, consultation and letter answering are things that the ministers should get a little more deeply involved in. If we are going to do a community tour, let's do a real community tour. Let's not just do a pub crawl. Let's do a real community tour. That's what I want to see, and that's what people in the communities want to see because they do have something to say.

Mr. Speaker, it's going to be here for a bit, but $99 million is in the budget, and I have some ways to suggest how we spend it. Of course, these are coming from the constituents that I represent. What we need out there is more flexible programming. We need programming that will allow a community to - time out, Mr. Speaker.

Some Hon. Member:      (Inaudible)

Mr. Keenan:      I hear some thumping in the background here, and I'm not sure if you -

Speaker:      I'll stop the clock.

Mr. Keenan:      Do you just want to wait for a second?

Speaker:      I'll see. I just stopped the clock. Maybe somebody is hanging a picture. Okay, I'll start the clock again.

Mr. Keenan:      Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. For the record, that's just some folks working on the roof there that have been making noise up there. It's definitely not going to interrupt me.

So, Mr. Speaker, we have $99 million, and we do need more flexible programming. What the government is doing by moving the capital budget to the fall is very commendable.

I don't think the government should be taking too much credit for it. They implemented it - definitely - but let's start putting some projections forth in the capital budgets. I see it's stuck in there again, but let's go a little further. Let's try to do a little bit better, because what we're talking about - and it was kind of funny because the Minister of Government Services said that this budget was creating jobs today. We know that's not right. And then the Minister of Education said, "Some of this is going to be implemented." Some of it's going to be implemented.

So, Mr. Speaker, in their very own words, that shows that more flexible programming has to be done. The community of Tagish, right now, has $100,000. Much appreciated. It is a vibrant little community. I know a lot of Liberals have been around there, trying to lure them away from me, but they're doing good work. In the absence of flexible programming, what do they have? What are their tools? Their next budget is going to be a year and a half away. That's not fair to a community. That's absolutely not fair to a community and I think we should be looking at programs that are a bit more flexible, and those programs would be tailored by the community for the community's needs.

The CDF, the community development fund. I know we have Project Yukon in place at this point in time. I know we have that but, Mr. Speaker, is it good enough? Well, I think not.

Another thing that I think this government could or should do is stop pitting communities against one another. Maybe this government is doing it inadvertently, but it is happening. It's happening in my territory and it's happening in the Member for Faro's territory.

We have two distinct communities at odds with one another. I've heard it said that folks from Ross don't want to live in Faro's shadow. I've heard folks in Faro say, "We don't want anything to do with Ross; we have our own ways of doing things around here."

Mr. Speaker, that's bred by government. When I was the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, there was a distinct line of hiring between the two jurisdictions, because they both have grader stations and separate employees. I have attempted, through communication with the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, to find why that line's not there any more, because approximately eight or nine people who live in Faro work in Ross River, and that is totally demeaning to the community of Ross River.

Are they upset about it? You bet they're upset about it. Are they antagonistic about it? No. They're asking me to point these things out, and they have pointed these things out. Do some of the folks who work in Ross used to live in Ross? Absolutely. They've taken advantage of housing needs and other areas, but not all of them do. There are jobs where, through training and building capacity within the community, we can empower that community so we don't have two communities at odds with one another, in getting this or getting that.

Mr. Speaker, I can't underestimate the urgency of government needing to do something in this situation. Is it volatile? Well, this Liberal government has certainly driven the economy just a bit further into the ground. It's right into the ruts right now, so those small jobs are becoming very valuable jobs. They mean personal esteem; they mean family esteem; they mean community growth.

So, I would encourage you, Mr. Speaker, and the government to take this very seriously.

I asked the Premier of the Yukon Territory, in debate last year, and she came running down those stairs to answer the questions about two issues.

I asked the Premier if she was going to take to the Association of Yukon Communities these two issues: block funding and the need, maybe, for a look at revamping the block funding. We have a community in Ross River that has no block funding. They're driven by the whims of government. Well, I'm certainly glad that government is still proceeding, sparingly, with the round table.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, even one of the government departments did not know that there was a round table in Ross River. So how deep do we have, in our government here, the need to recognize each other? Do we have turf wars going on here, or do we have all communities or all departments of government recognizing that there is a government structure in Ross River? No, we don't have that, but I'm hoping that we do at this point in time.

It's getting serious, Mr. Speaker. We have to do something about it so that it doesn't - it's called creating a level playing field, I guess, so that people can work together. I know that there's a very strong desire in that area to work together. Little hiccups happen every now and then, and dinosaur tracks go missing and are never replaced - that sort of thing. But with a little bit of ferreting out there and whatnot, we managed to get those dino tracks back where they belong. But what a terrible process that you have to go through to do that.

So, Mr. Speaker, I'd very much encourage this government to create a level playing field so that we can have communities growing together and not working against one another.

Mr. Speaker, there should not be a political grab or a political movement for equal footing, I guess, if I can say it that way, in terms of government services or capital infrastructure. Of course, there are always the emerging needs, but there shouldn't be a footrace. There shouldn't be a footrace for these types of issues - the things in the communities - and there is now, and it's fostered by this Liberal government.

Now, the Premier said that the Premier is going to bring these issues to the Association of Yukon Communities. I asked the Premier if she would also, because a constituent of the Premier's phoned me and said, "We're not getting satisfaction out of our MLA," so would I be able to help them? So, I went to work for those folks. It was on contract regulations and there are no contract regulations, I guess, per se through the Association of Yukon Communities because some of the communities can do what they want and do what they need. They don't have to go to a bidding process or anything like as such with public monies.

I asked the Premier if the Premier would be looking into those issues. She gave me a commitment and said that, "Well, my sources say that those issues have never come up" - never come up. So again, I say that this Liberal government is fostering a division of communities. If we cannot live up to what we are going to say - a promise made is a debt unpaid - where did we all hear that?

I think that winter jobs are so very, very important, especially in this economic climate that we have now - eggs in one basket and that basket is going to - well we have put all our eggs in one basket, by golly, and those are definitely going to be hardboiled eggs by the time we get around to eating them and they might not even be good eggs any more. They might not be good eggs, so we should take a little bit of that $99 million that we have out there and look at progressively moving forward, in increments of course, and I can help to allocate or prioritize the needs for those dollars.

Highways - well, the government is putting much into highways. This summer I was generous to the Minister of Community and Transportation Services. You didn't see a letter a week from me, an open letter saying this and that. I thought, "No, there is a judgement call to yourself, Dave. Are you going to put open letters to the minister to get action? Nah, you are going to see what goes on because they said they were going to do this." I regret, at this point in time, not putting forth those letters to the editors.

I've been on roads in the Yukon Territory - and, mind you, the NDP is going to get blamed for this because, oh, we stripped the budget and whatnot. Well, what a bunch of hooey that is too because there are willows growing and there are a whole bunch of things happening along the roadsides that are not being taken care of. And in one particular section of the road - and it's a safety issue, so the Minister of Health must be very concerned about this also, and being a vibrant member of the Management Board, I am sure that he is going to come to the defence of this - which at 50 kilometres an hour - I did 30 kilometres an hour and I couldn't have good visibility, and this on a beautiful summer day.

Now, what can we do about this? Well, we should do something about it. I am bringing it to the attention of the government of the day now that we should be working toward cleaning up these situations - in a nice way, I must point out. So I would like the government to look to identify - and I will work with government - the South Canol and the North Canol. I even heard that there is an entrepreneur out there who is writing out a bumper sticker that says, "Yes, I've done the North and South Canol, both ways, dammit." Well, I'll tell you, that's going to go on a lot of cars because the roads are atrocious, absolutely atrocious.

Another complaint that I have coming to me from constituents is that folks, when they finally have the graders up there just before freeze-up- nobody knew the grader operator. The grader operator was from who knew where. Now, I know that we have unions and issues to work with, but this goes back to that local hire again. Can this government not put in provisions of local hire so that we can stop pitting communities against each other?

So, yes, by golly, there are about 250 miles of road out there that could have a little attention. Is it feasible to do it now in the winter? Well, that's a question for the professionals to see if the resources are there. But the resources are there so maybe we should be looking at that.

There are turn signs on the South Canol Road, which is a very touristy road, where you can't tell if the road is going to the right or to the left. There's a need for guardrails. I want you folks to take a trip on that road next spring to see the terrible state that road is actually in. I will bring forth the suggestion that it is not the crews who are doing this; it's the lack of resources, because when the crews are allowed the innovation to do something, by golly, there are some very good spots on that road where they have taken it and gone out. Mr. Speaker, you have driven the South Canol; I assume you know the windiness of it. They've taken out some corners, and done this and done that, and by goshes, they're doing a good job.

What I think the grader station at Quiet Lake needs, if we're going to make this a tourism venture - which of course the Campbell Regional Association for Tourism wants, and whatnot, and what we all want from Faro and Teslin, and from Johnsons Crossing and from everywhere - is Tourism dollars to come in here. It's a beautiful road, but it's a dangerous road at this time.

So, why don't we put the camp back in. Let's not be cutting highway camps around the territory. Let's be making our roads safer for tourists and the local people. I think that would be a very wise expenditure, if we did that, for safety reasons and for economic reasons.

I was talking with a constituent who lives around the Judas Creek area, who does have a few pieces of equipment here and there, as many do. It's on our equipment replacement list of who we have out there in the communities who can do this work. Let's take some of that $99 million and put some of these folks to work. It's not a make-work project; it's an incremental step to a safe highway, which this government says they want.

So, let's just do it. Let's get at it.

I'm sure that you wouldn't have any trouble bringing another supplementary into this House so we could do it.

Mr. Speaker, in Teslin - I'm going to talk about my home town. We have, in Teslin, a tad more in the budget this year than we had in the budget last year. A lot. Because last year in Teslin, Renewable Resources got a computer, and I have to say that the folks who use that computer are very pleased with it. But this year, the government has listened somewhat to the community of Teslin, the mayor and council - somewhat.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have?

Deputy Speaker:      The member has approximately 15 minutes.

Mr. Keenan:      Could I get 20?

In Teslin, Mr. Speaker, folks have been listened to a bit. I see the bridge rehabilitation project in here for $300,000, so I assume that that is going to be a part of our great Trans Canada Trail, our whole tourism strategy and pedestrian safety and making things better.

But where, where, is the sewage extension? The community has lobbied aggressively. It has been alluded to that it was going to happen. Well, when I talked to the mayor last Thursday, he wasn't very pleased with it, Mr. Speaker, because the resources are there. He knows that. The plans are there, yet there's a stalemate, or something, within the political realm of government that says no, we can't go that way.

Telephones are also missing from this budget for the Teslin area. Within the cottage lots - we could use some chip sealing in the cottage lots, we could use some telephones in the cottage lots, we could use some hard services in the cottage lots. There's no garbage pick-up, there's no water delivery, there's no water access. None, except for the people who took advantage of that fine new democratic program for wealth.

Now, that's years ago, mind you. Those are the only ones, and they remember.

In my riding, I have many seniors who live there and who want to live there. Mr. Speaker, I'm going to admit to the world that just a month ago I became 50, and holy man, already I can feel those aches and pains in my body a little bit. So I know that I'm going to be needing some services too in the future. I'm going to keep running and jogging and whatnot, so that I can stay in shape and prevent - like the Minister of Health wants me to. I'm going to adhere to his philosophy.

But there are people within the Yukon Territory who don't have the luxury of good health, yet they have homes they wish to stay in and they have animals. In some cases, the animals take over and give the pleasure of company that the children used to. Now, we all know that in this room, because I miss my dog, Gypsy, terribly too. So are we just going to say, "You have a problem. You have to come into Whitehorse now because that's where the hard and central services are," and slap them down. Let's have some human compassion, for goodness' sake. That's all it takes. Let's look at finding a way that we might be able to keep these folks in their homes and in their communities. If it means the government has to look at expanding or finding a way to provide these services - because they are within YTG's jurisdiction and not in the jurisdiction of the Village of Teslin - then we should be attempting to find that way.

And they need their roads plowed. They are chipsealed and plowed on a continuing basis. They need telephones. They need these things. And, Mr. Speaker, telephones have been around for over 100 years, yet a lot of folks in my riding don't have the luxury of a telephone.

I have heard three ministers over there speak about safety. Well, I'm pointing out that within that area, that's exactly what we need.

Mr. Speaker, I've also seen a young fellow - it will break your heart, absolutely break your heart, because here's a nine-year-old skateboarding on the Alaska Highway, and his little brother, Trent, who was about seven, says, "Get off that road, you're going to get hurt." Yet a kid has to be a kid and play. Who is addressing the recreational needs of those youth who live within Teslin and out of Teslin? I would suggest that it's going to take more than just a simple proposal from Project Yukon to hire an administrator to do those types of things. It's going to take more. It's going to take commitment, but let's get the kids off the skateboards on the Alaska Highway. There are youth there who also have a need.

There's also a tourism pullout, because certainly the community of Teslin is always looking to diversify the economy. Well, that hasn't even been addressed and there haven't been any letters back to anybody.

So what I'm saying is that, if you're going to make some tough decisions, try and communicate those decisions. Get people to buy into it so that people have a deeper understanding of where we're at and where they're going.

In Ross River, we have $180,000 to fix the blue building. Now, the daycare and the recreational association are out of the building, but I've been told that it's not enough to fix the building. I've also been told that it has been forwarded to government, but government says that this is what they're going to get.

Now, if it's not enough, why even put it there? I'm not saying take it back, for goodness' sake; I'm saying we can use it, but should we not be communicating to that community that this is the next step? That's only the first increment; this is the second increment. Yes, by golly, I think we should be doing those types of things. That's exactly what it's all about.

Was the community of Ross River involved in identifying a spot relocation on the Campbell Highway? Obviously not. Well, under my watch, they were always - if it was going to be effective within that territory, then they had a say, and I went and talked to them about it - the personal touch. I guess that's what's missing here, too.

So now I understand that we're going to spend $650,000 on the highway between Ross River and Faro, and I point out - is that just to make the road safer for the people from Faro, as they drive to Ross River in the mornings and evenings, after taking the jobs? I certainly hope not, and I would think that, unless we start to communicate these issues, that these are the types of concerns that will arise.

The North and South Canol, again, which affect Ross River, are in terrible shape, and we should try to find a program or way that the community, as they did under my watch, can participate in the rehabilitation of that area. We should be doing that.

The community, the youth in Ross River, should not be held hostage. We're doing something unique in Ross River, through the round table on social and economic affairs. The Minister of Community and Transportation Services warmed my heart when she stood in this House and said it's a special place, and we want to do something there to continue with it. It showed me that there was a real Yukon type of recognition that we have to do the right thing.

So, why are we playing these duelling proposals with the recreation people? Let's continue this experiment so that they can cast away their inhibitions and start to lead, if that's the case, where we have to go as a municipal citizen. Start on our youth, because we have the energy in Ross River to be able to do that. We have the energy; we just need the help and the resources.

So, it's good that they're getting social housing and staff housing, and we're doing the island park erosion. That's commendable, and I appreciate that, Mr. Speaker, I truly do, but I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't say what was there or what wasn't there.

Mr. Speaker, I tabled a petition in this House - you probably remember, because the Minister of Community and Transportation Services got very upset with me and said that I should know better. I should know better than to do that. Accuse me, poor old innocent me, of orchestrating this? That was the voice of the people. It was a community coming together identifying a need and saying we would like to go forth. Well, Mr. Speaker, lip service - $60,000 - that's lip service, when we have $99 million - the great one - $60,000 to a community that has not - has not. Well, let me tell you, by golly, it's a little upsetting.

I wrote a letter because, again, I took a little heart warming there from the Minister of Community and Transportation Services, saying, "Yes, I understand about children and streetlights and safety concerns and all those issues, and that's why I am going to be looking at this here streetlight policy." Well, that is absolutely not true, because I just got a letter back that said, "What are you talking about? There are streetlights in those subdivisions." Obviously the minister didn't read the letter, because he was in the wrong neighbourhood, absolute wrong neighbourhood. So, for goodness' sake, let's find ways to do things instead of beating up the people who bring the message to us. Let's find ways for children and safety issues for those children.

We live in rural Yukon. We don't have the luxury of a walkabout in downtown Whitehorse, and I appreciate the ones who do. There are wolves in this country, Mr. Speaker - they live in rural Yukon, too. Would you feel comfortable putting your six- or seven-year-old grandson on to a bus or saying, "Walk down there and just wait there"? Because in some cases that happens. No, absolutely not, so don't give me why we can't do things. Tell me how we can and when it's going to happen, because it's for safety issues of the children.

That's what it's about. I have been told by folks in Tagish and in other areas that if they want to see a nurse, they have to go to see a nurse. I asked last year of the Minister of Health, "What is the process of identifying if we need health services and more health services or a survey of sorts? After he got finished slapping me up and enjoying himself immensely, about two weeks later he came and said, in Committee of th