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

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

Are there any tributes?

Hon. Mr. Kenyon:  I rise today to acknowledge the National Wildlife Week in Canada, Biodiversity Awareness Month here in the Yukon, and the Celebration of Swans in many Yukon communities.

National Wildlife Week was created in honour of one of Canada’s most influential naturalists, the late Jack Miner. Established by an act of Parliament in 1947, the week provides Canadians with an opportunity to celebrate wildlife and take action to protect wild animals and plants. National Wildlife Week is held in the second week of April as a tribute to Jack Miner’s birth date. An avid and effective promoter of wildlife protection, Miner was responsible for groundbreaking conservation work, including the establishment of a bird sanctuary in southern Ontario that is still used today as a safe haven for thousands of birds.

This year’s Wildlife Week theme is "Native species, nature’s choice". Kits and posters prepared by the Canadian Wildlife Federation have been distributed to schools in communities throughout the Yukon.

The Yukon Fish and Game Association is an important contributor when it comes to promoting public awareness of National Wildlife Week. This past weekend saw their annual family fishing day at Fox Lake, and a similar event is planned for this coming Sunday at Pine Lake, near Haines Junction.

Environment Yukon biologists and conservation officers are hosting events in many Yukon communities this week as part of the National Wildlife Week initiative. This year’s National Wildlife Week theme, "Native species, nature’s choice", is timely for Yukoners. We have undertaken a special task with the federal government, the Nature Conservancy of Canada, First Nations and renewable resource councils to embark on the NatureServe Yukon project to identify the native and rare species of animals, plants, insects and birds that are found in the Yukon.

One of the NatureServe Yukon’s most important jobs will be to identify and rank rare species. This information will be critical for the time when we develop a Yukon species at risk act and need to identify species officially ranked as at risk.

Our wildlife managers deal with the concerns of threatened and endangered species every day in this territory. We have successfully worked on recovery programs for peregrine falcons, caribou and fish stocks, and one of the most innovative and exciting initiatives is unfolding this spring near Beaver Creek. We will have more details later this week, but I cannot tell you enough of how proud I am of the men and women who are working on a local and international level to try to bring back the Chisana caribou herd that roams the Yukon-Alaska border near Beaver Creek.

One of the more reassuring events that lets us know that it’s springtime is the return of the swans and the events that we have organized as the annual Celebration of Swans. I encourage everyone to check their mailboxes this week and to look for the blue flyer that lists all the events that have been scheduled for the annual celebration. Swan Haven is a wonderful example of the cooperative efforts by the Girl Guides of Canada, Ducks Unlimited, the Yukon Energy Corporation and Environment Yukon to offer an international showcase on the importance of biodiversity, habitat protection and awareness, and the wonders of our natural world.

Hundreds of Yukon students will be taken there to marvel and learn about the migration of these bird species as they make their way to their summer habitats. Many of us will want to take our families to Swan Haven at M’Clintock Bay this weekend, then the Easter weekend to view the growing bird population.

Here in the Yukon we have taken the National Wildlife Week and the Swan Haven events awareness a step further by organizing the events under the umbrella of April being Biodiversity Awareness Month.

We encourage everyone to recognize, celebrate and appreciate life in all of its myriad forms. It’s a time for us to remember that every animal, plant and insect species has a vital role to play in our ecosystems and that they enrich our lives in many different ways.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in encouraging all Yukoners to get out and enjoy our precious environment, to take in some of the planned special events and, most of all, to conscientiously appreciate the biodiversity and natural systems that support us all.

Thank you.

Mrs. Peter:   On behalf of the official opposition, I rise to join members in paying tribute to the National Wildlife Week. We in the Yukon have a deep appreciation for the Yukon’s environment and for the wildlife.

Yukon First Nations, the first people of this land, have and hold respect for our land and animals. Our elders have taught us that if we do not care for our land and animals, we would, in the end, have nothing. We would be a poor people.

We believe that all that is living on this earth is connected; therefore, it is our responsibility to take care of it. The beauty, cleanliness and freedom of our environment is one of the many reasons people choose to make Yukon their home. Visitors to our land notice how very blessed we are when they see the many plants and species of animals that roam free.

National Wildlife Week is held in celebration of Canada’s wild heritage. The week provides an opportunity for Canadians to take action for conservation. This year, the theme is "Native species, nature’s choice", which reflects concerns about the harmful effects of alien species on wildlife in Canada.

Many organizations play an important role in promoting public awareness about our wildlife resources. This week, let each of us not forget the value of our wildlife population. Let us honour those people who work for us in our own way so that we will always be blessed.

In the north, the wildlife population faces many challenges: some are man-made, such as industry; some are dramatic, such as climate changes. We need only remember the struggle of the Gwitchin people in trying to preserve the Porcupine caribou herd, which feeds many people. The pressure is always on development for oil and gas in the birthing grounds of this herd. One of our elders told this story a long time ago and said that this is exactly like going into a nursery in a hospital, disturbing and disrupting the babies and their families.

The challenge for Yukoners is to preserve and to protect our wildlife habitat, not only for ourselves and our grandchildren, but for those who are not yet born.

Mahsi'cho.

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   I rise today to ask my colleagues in this House to join me in recognizing April 7 as World Health Day. This year’s theme is shaping the future of life, creating "Healthy environments for children".

I believe that we can all agree that a healthy future for our children is of utmost importance to us all, despite our political differences.

Every child deserves the right to health and no child should have that health threatened by unsafe environments at home, in the school or in their community.

A child’s world centres on the home, the school and the local community. These should be healthy places where children can thrive, protected from disease. In these very places, sometimes we put children at risk. There is unsafe drinking water, indoor air pollution, poor food hygiene, unsafe housing, inadequate waste disposal, and there are modern risks concerning the unsafe use of dangerous chemicals and long-term environmental threats — persistent organic pollutants and chemicals are an example. There are also emerging diseases.

Many environmental threats to children’s health are aggravated by poverty, conflicts, natural and man-made disasters and social inequality. The children most affected live in the developing world, but many children in developed countries are also very much at risk. Children who are chronically sick or disabled cannot regularly attend school and their social and intellectual development suffers. In turn, this huge burden of ill health among children constrains social and economic development.

Children with chronic disease and long-term disability cannot grow up to be healthy and fully productive members of our society.

We’re very fortunate here in Yukon that our children do not face all these risks that are faced by many of the children in Third World countries. More than five million children under the age of 14 die virtually every year from diseases linked to the environment in which they live, learn and play. It is important to know that we can improve the quality of our children’s future by making informed decisions at all levels, by promoting healthy environments, ensuring safe water and food, creating spaces free from pollutions, so all our children can grow into strong, healthy adults.

Mr. Speaker, let us all heed the message today and every day, and make decisions that will impact on the future well-being of the upcoming generations of not just Yukoners, but children all over this world.

Thank you.

Mr. Fairclough:   On behalf of the official opposition, I rise in tribute to World Health Day, founded by the World Health Organization in 1948. Today, April 7, is celebrated around the world to remind us of the importance of health to ourselves and our family. I pay tribute and say thanks to our local nurses, doctors and other health officials who work under stressful conditions every day. They maintain a level of health care that is the envy of the rest of Canada and the world.

This year, the theme of World Health Day is "Healthy environments for children", and children are our future. An investment in the health of our children is vital to everyone. Five million children, from the ages of zero to 14, die each year from diseases related to the environment. That same number — five million children — are left homeless because of AIDS every year. That number is equivalent to the number of children in the United States under the age of five.

The physical environment that children grow up in is of prime importance.

Providing food, clothing, shelter and safety for our children should be our first concern. Modelling healthy attitudes toward physical activity and nutrition is essential for parents. We know the dangers of second-hand smoke, and every effort should be made to have smoke-free environments at home or wherever our children are, but healthy environments do not only consist of the physical environment. Our children’s emotional health is equally important. With current high rates of separation and divorce, the family unit is an ever-changing environment for many of our children. We must remain cognizant of the emotional well-being of the youngest members of our family and of our society.

Publicly funded health care is still in crisis despite recent agreements with the federal government, Mr. Speaker, and for those of the public who would like to hear a bit more and are interested in coming out and hearing Michael McBain, the national coordinator of the Canadian Health Coalition, he will be speaking at 7:00 tonight at Hellaby Hall.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, although Volunteer Week is some days away, I rise to pay tribute to the Yukon Girl Guide organization.

Guiding is still the largest single organization for girls led by women in the Yukon and in Canada, and it fits in well with the other tributes today, Mr. Speaker. I note the involvement of Girl Guides in Swan Haven and in Water for Tomorrow projects as well as guiding as an organization that promotes active healthy lifestyles for girls as young as five.

The great game of guiding began in the Yukon in Dawson City in 1914. We are now active throughout the Yukon with over 380 girl and adult members in Old Crow, Dawson City, Haines Junction, Teslin, Watson Lake, and throughout Whitehorse. Atlin, British Columbia, is also included in the Yukon membership.

At this time of year, the major fundraising activity to support guiding begins with the sale of Girl Guide cookies. This year, guiding is introducing a new cookie. Not to panic, it’s still the great vanilla and chocolate taste in each box. The look is new. The recipe for growing girls is still the same.

Mr. Speaker, I do have a box for my colleagues in the Legislature and in the media gallery and in Hansard. However, that is out of order so I will deliver them at a later date. As you know, we can’t eat cookies in the Legislature.

All funds raised from the sale of Girl Guide cookies supports girls throughout the Yukon. All the money stays here and supports their unit activities. As Yukoners greet the Sparks and Brownies and Guides at their doors this month, selling fun fuel for girl power, I encourage all Yukoners to imagine the power of a cookie.

The Girl Guide organization is a tremendous organization supporting girls and young women. Mr. Speaker, I encourage, as I said, all Yukoners to greet the Sparks and Brownies and Guides and the adult volunteers with a smile and encourage the sale of Girl Guide cookies throughout the territory because it’s all about the girls.

Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

Hon. Mr. Lang:   I would like to introduce today, Tara Christie. As Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, I would like to give a big thanks to Tara, who is President of the Klondike Placer Mining Association for the help that she has given us and Yukoners and all the support for the industry that we all know has been on the top of our minds since December 16. So I’d like to introduce Tara Christie.

Speaker:   Are there any further introduction of visitors?

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling the Yukon Health and Social Services Council annual report for 1999–2000 and the Yukon Health and Social Services Council annual report for 2000–01.

Speaker:   Are there any further documents for tabling?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   I am pleased to table the annual report for the Yukon Liquor Corporation for the period ending March 31, 2002. There is a legal requirement under the Liquor Act to table the annual report to the Yukon Legislative Assembly.

Speaker:   Are there any further documents for tabling?

Hon. Ms. Taylor:   I also have for tabling the annual report of the Yukon Law Foundation for the fiscal year ending October 31, 2002.

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

Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

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

THAT this House recognize that, with devolution, the Yukon now has administrative power over its forest resources; and

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the development of responsible regulations on long-term timber access, efficient logging operations, stumpage fees, manufactured wood products, and comprehensive reforestation programs will result in improving the utilization of Yukon forest resources; and

THAT this House urges the Government of Yukon to work with First Nations, the forest industry, and stakeholders to develop responsible regulation of Yukon forestry.

Speaker:   Are there any further notices of motion?

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) during the last election campaign and since, the Yukon Party government promised to adopt an approach to governing based on consensus, cooperation and compromise;

(2) a more cooperative approach to governing should include cooperating with elected representatives of the Yukon people who sit on the opposition side of this House in their attempts to get the information they need to examine government policies and spending priorities; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Party government to respect both its election commitments and the proper role of this House by providing information related to government policies and spending priorities in a cooperative, thorough and timely manner, as requested both orally and in written form by opposition MLAs.

Speaker:   Are there any further notices of motion?

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that under a Yukon Party government

(1) the number of people working in the Yukon is at its lowest level in 18 months;

(2) retail sales have dropped;

(3) funding for tourism marketing has been cut;

(4) funding for highway construction has been cut;

(5) the overall capital budget has been cut by 30 percent; and

(6) capital projects that would have created jobs immediately, such as the replacement of the Whitehorse Correctional Centre and the construction of a new recreational centre in Mayo, have been cancelled; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Party government to immediately introduce a supplementary capital budget that includes funding for the construction of new jail and a new recreation centre in Mayo.

Speaker:   Are there any further notices of motion?

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

THAT this House urges the Government of Yukon to revoke the appointments made to the Yukon Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board and the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal on March 31, 2003, until such time as the minister responsible has conducted a full, transparent and impartial consultation process that satisfies the intent of the Workers’ Compensation Act.

Speaker:   Are there any further notices of motion?

Are there ministerial statements?

This then brings us to Question Period.

Mr. Cardiff:   My question today is for the minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board. Mr. Speaker, we know the minister is providing information on appointments to the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board to the media but has failed to provide the same information to the official opposition. I have miraculously obtained some of the details of the minister’s consultation process, which I’ll provide to the House. This includes the list of organizations that the minister consulted. The list is comprised of 38 employer groups, including the employer consultant, and eight workers groups, not including the worker advocate.

Will the minister explain how that configuration represents balanced consultation?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Full consultation was adhered to, and I’d like to take the member opposite to the actual legislation governing this area, and this is with respect to the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board. It says that the Commissioner in Executive Council shall appoint a chair and an alternate chair to the board to act as chair during the absence of the chair. It goes on to say that employers and workers shall be consulted about the appointment of the chair and the alternate chair.

Full procedure, Mr. Speaker, was followed, adhered to, and the selection was made from the names put forward. The best individual was selected, with the best background in this area, the most expertise, and hopefully Yukon can be very, very happy that we have attracted this calibre to the position to serve as chair of WCB.

Mr. Cardiff:   Well, the minister is right. Section 92 of the Workers’ Compensation Act obligates the minister to consult in a defined way. Maybe it doesn’t say that it has to be a balanced way but one would assume that the minister would want it to be balanced.

Now, the groups with whom the minister consulted about recent board appointments do not include a lot of groups representing employees. The minister didn’t consult with the Teamsters, he didn’t consult with plumbers and sheet metal workers, and he didn’t consult with the Building Trades Council. The minister also excluded the Yukon Injured Workers Alliance; they’re not on the list and this is a group that represents injured workers, people who are clients of Workers’ Compensation.

Can the minister tell me why he excluded these groups from the consultation process?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Mr. Speaker, the act is very specific, in that the minister must consult with the various stakeholder groups. That’s what I have done, Mr. Speaker. What the member opposite is trying to make the case for is that this position of chair has to be determined primarily by an election from all the names put forward, and whoever puts the most votes in front of one member or the other, that’s the winner. This is not the case; this is a consultative process. It’s not an election, as the member is trying to make the case, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Cardiff:   Well, the minister’s right, and there were suggestions made to the minister about how to make that process more open and transparent and what would be a better way of doing it. While the minister has excluded groups representing employees, he obviously considered advice from individual employers, which makes one wonder whether or not he would consider advice from thousands of individual employees, as well. Today I tabled a motion calling on the minister and the government to revoke the recent appointments to the Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board and the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal until such time as he has conducted a full, transparent and impartial consultation process — "impartial" is the important one, I think, and it has to satisfy the Workers’ Compensation Act. Will he do that today?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   I was very pleased to hear in the member opposite’s preamble, he said, "The member opposite is right," that I’m correct, and I’d like to extrapolate on that correctness that I’m demonstrating in this Assembly, Mr. Speaker, in that the full terms and conditions of the act have been followed and adhered to. We have selected, after due process, the most qualified individual of the three names that were put forward. That’s a given. The biggest amount of political interference in the board took place under a previous regime, when they basically got rid of a chair. That’s not the process we follow. We follow due process in our government, Mr. Speaker. We’ve selected the best individual, the most qualified, and Yukon should be very pleased that this individual has seen fit to stand a term as chair of Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board.

Mr. Fairclough:   My question is to the Minister of Health and Social Services.

One of the promises that the Yukon Party made was to implement programs that will attract and retain health care professionals in our communities. This minister has focused on government spending trajectory and cutbacks. In the meantime, our social workers are overloaded. Why is the minister allowing Yukon social workers to carry caseloads that average 85 percent over the standards recommended by the Child Welfare League of Canada?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   I agree with the member opposite that we have some very serious problems in our children’s services area in the Government of Yukon, and our government recognizes the seriousness of the problem. There is an immediate concern for the staffing levels for children in care. We are examining our options, and we are starting to look at how we can move people around to address the needs where the needs exist. We have a number of social workers who are being underutilized, and we have quite a few who are being well over utilized, Mr. Speaker, and it’s our responsibility as a government to address the need where the need exists. That is what we will be doing.

Mr. Fairclough:   It is critical for the minister to deal with this matter. The situation, as the minister said, is serious, yet this government has been crying poverty since forming government.

There are cutbacks in the departments in many areas. If the minister is really taking this matter seriously, why has the minister made the situation worse by downgrading the family support worker program in Yukon communities?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   What the member opposite is alluding to is the situation in Pelly where we had an on-call auxiliary, and now that on-call auxiliary is being replaced with a full-time assistant. We are recognizing the need where the need exists and we are staffing it to the level commensurate with what is required. We are doing our level best to address the needs with staffing and with operation and maintenance funds to address these serious issues in the outlying communities and right here in the capital city of Whitehorse.

Mr. Fairclough:   Well, it’s not just Pelly Crossing — the minister should know that. He has a plan for Pelly Crossing. I asked him what other plans he had for other communities, like the community of Mayo.

Mr. Speaker, our social workers are stressed — that is a fact. The demand for their services has increased and their workload is getting bigger. How does the minister respond to this? By cutting back in the Department of Health and Social Services, even though he knows that there are millions of dollars more coming into the department.

I would like to ask the minister this: will he lay out his new plan, if he has one, to bring social worker caseloads down to a reasonable level, or are we going to continue to face cutbacks?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Well, Mr. Speaker, what we’re looking at are long-term solutions and short-term solutions, but let’s concentrate on the area where we are not going to see the results immediately but they are going to be occurring.

Long-term solutions don’t only lie in the creation of new government positions. We must recognize the importance of FASD. We have started to do that. We have initiatives with the Yukon Medical Association, the Child Development Centre, with FASSY — those are just some of the initiatives we have underway.

This is the third largest budget ever in the history of Yukon, and one of the largest budgets is in the Health and Social Services area. We are concentrating our time, efforts and initiatives on these areas and doing it in a very, very good manner, recognizing the needs where they are and addressing those needs, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, the Member for Mayo-Tatchun has raised the issue of extraordinary caseloads of family and children’s services workers. In Question Period on March 19, I also pointed out to the Minister of Health that the demand is very clear. There are a tremendous number of Yukon families in crisis. The caseloads for social workers are double and triple what is considered acceptable, and there are major staffing shortfalls. The government’s response so far: nothing.

It’s now very clear to the Yukon public that the Yukon will receive millions of dollars in additional health money. The services to children and families in crisis are paid for from the Health budget. We’ll be receiving $4.5 million in the primary health care transition fund, $20 million over three years from an agreement reached last week, and $12 million agreed upon at the first ministers meeting. That’s $36 million in new money.

My question for the minister: will any of the additional money be used to meet the needs of Yukon families in crisis and address the staffing shortfalls in family and children’s services?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   The short answer, Mr. Speaker, is yes.

Ms. Duncan:   Well, Mr. Speaker, that was a commitment from the minister, the first direct answer we’ve seen in Question Period, and I appreciate it. It’s $36 million in new money, and it’s a significant amount for health care.

Now, the families are in crisis. One of the key issues is staffing shortfalls. That was the number one recommendation of the Child Welfare League of Canada. Will the minister go even further and say that, yes, a portion of this new money that he said will be used to address families and children in crisis will be used to address the staffing shortfall? It’s a critical question.

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Well, let’s begin by starting to call a spade a shovel. The health care situation in Canada wouldn’t be in the crisis situation it’s in today had it not been for the federal Liberals and their tremendous cuts to health care. That’s where the problems began; that’s what is being addressed and, through the auspices of the Premier of the Yukon, in conjunction with the Premier of Northwest Territories and the Premier of Nunavut, we were able to achieve an agreement — an accord — with Canada for the provision of $20 million over three years in base funding.

Given the spending trajectory in health care, which is $7 million to $10 million, the member opposite makes the case that we have this tremendous increase of money flowing through to the Yukon. Mr. Speaker, the case cannot be made, given the spending trajectory that the Yukon has to deliver health care programs and services.

We will do our level best, and we are doing our level best, and staffing is one of the issues that will be addressed, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Duncan:   The minister very carefully did not commit that he would ensure that additional money coming to the Yukon would be spent on the staffing shortfalls in Family and Children’s Services. So let’s go through this again. The facts of the matter are, number one, the Child Welfare League of Canada recommended to the Yukon government that it should address social worker and supervisor staffing shortfalls. My colleague has established how high the caseloads for these workers are. The Yukon Party, since taking office, is receiving millions more in funding for this department. The government can afford to hire more social workers. There are families in crisis, directly — yes or no, will the minister, today, commit that additional funding will be used to address the staffing shortfalls? That’s a very specific commitment. It’s a yes-or-no answer, but I would like a very specific commitment from the minister on the floor of the House today.

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   We will be addressing the issues of staffing across all of the Department of Health and Social Services. The issue that we’re faced with here today is the staffing levels in children’s programs. We have a real serious problem there, and when we focus in on where the demands are, the department is spending an inordinate amount of time appearing before the courts and appealing decisions of the courts, which is taking up a lot of social worker time and a lot of costs. Now, by redeploying our focus on meeting the needs of these children and maybe taking a different approach we can effect some very positive changes that will probably be well-received across the Yukon. So the solution isn’t at all times to put in more dollars or more staff. Let’s examine what we’re doing, how we can do it effectively, and we’re doing a two-prong approach. We’re examining what we’re doing, how we’re doing it, and we’re going to be putting more money into the issue and addressing the staffing shortfalls, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Duncan:   The Minister of Health has not directly answered the question. He has talked about funding priorities for his Department of Health. So far, the minister has clearly indicated his views on transition homes in his riding; their funding has been cut. Health investment fund — cut in half. That fund helps people dealing with FASD, youth, people battling addictions. The hospital equipment fund — cut by $100,000. The homeless shelter in Whitehorse is on life support.

Today, we’re reminding the minister that Yukon families are in crisis and the professional people who help them are desperately short-staffed, as the Child Welfare League of Canada has reported.

There is additional money coming to the Yukon — $36 million of additional money. The minister will not commit that that money will be used to address the staffing shortfalls. He talks in some vague terms about redeploying and other initiatives. Well, we know what the minister’s priorities aren’t. We know they aren’t women fleeing abuse situations in Dawson.

Speaker:   Order please. Would the member ask the question please.

Ms. Duncan:   Certainly, Mr. Speaker.

What are the minister’s priorities for this new health care funding?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Mr. Speaker, simply stated, to deliver cost-effective, efficient health care needs to all Yukoners.

Ms. Duncan:   Well, Mr. Speaker, meeting the health care needs of Yukoners includes families and children who are in crisis. The minister had no hesitation, when it came to the primary health care fund, to say exactly where that money would be spent. We have two reports that say Yukon families are in crisis and the professionals who help them need more support.

Perhaps the minister needs to take a closer look at the situation. Perhaps then he would truly recognize the need. Will he do this? Will the minister spend a day with a family service intake worker and see for himself how badly this issue needs to be addressed? Will he do that?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   The Anglin report, the Child Welfare League of Canada reports — they did identify very serious problems. But there must be more recognition of the importance of dealing with FASD. We have to have a family-based approach to this whole situation and we have to have solutions.

Now, we can always spend money on all these initiatives that the member opposite has identified, but what we have to really seriously focus on is how we are going to deal with the children and what we are going to do for the children. That is the focus.

The size of what we set up as a department to deal with that is secondary to the focus, which should be to meet the needs of the children who are having difficulties and have to be taken into care.

Ms. Duncan:   What the minister has just said on the floor of this House is that in spite of two reports by professionals in the field, which specifically recommended additional staff — specifically recommended that — the minister has just said, "No, we know best; we are going to do it differently."

I challenge him to really find out first-hand. I challenge the minister and ask him: will he find out just what it’s like for a family service intake worker in this territory? Will the minister spend a day — and I could say a 9 to 5 day, Mr. Speaker, but their days aren’t 9 to 5. These are professionals who help people, who help families in crisis, and they need our support.

Will the minister spend a day and find out what it’s really like and spend a day with a family intake worker? Yes or no? Will he spend a day on the front lines?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   The member opposite only suggested that there were two reports on this issue. There are more than two; there are four that are current. When you cross-reference all of these reports, you get a very different picture of the situation. Our government is very cognizant of its responsibilities to address the needs of children in care. We will be focusing on delivering the services that the children need. That is underway, and yes, we will be directing some of the additional health care dollars that are flowing from Ottawa to Yukon to these initiatives.

Mr. Fairclough:   My question is for the Minister of Health and Social Services. I would like to have the minister table those additional reports, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the recommended caseloads standards developed by the Child Welfare League of Canada represent what is accepted as the best current thinking and practice in child welfare. Yukon social workers, in every type of service to children, far exceed those caseload benchmarks. For instance, a half-time family service worker has 41 cases, and the recommended number is 7.5 for that half-time work. That is 447 percent higher than recommended. One result of this stressful work is that there’s a very high turnover rate for social workers in the Yukon. Does the minister think an annual turnover rate of up to 40 percent is an effective way to provide continuity of services to Yukon children and their families?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Well, the member opposite is absolutely correct. Any time you have a high staff turnover, you have difficulties. We have a high burnout rate, high staff turnover, and it’s very hard to contend with. It is a very serious problem.

Mr. Fairclough:   The minister didn’t answer the question at all. Not only are caseloads of Yukon social workers so high that they are stretched to the point of illness to keep up with them, the caseloads are becoming more complex. Social workers are required to work more in the courts, do more in-depth counselling and give other support to clients. Mandatory referrals such as mental health assessments are not being done in a timely manner. Social workers are required to meet certain standards of practice. Why is the minister preventing them from meeting those standards by not providing the adequate resources?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   The member opposite is incorrect in his overview of the matter, Mr. Speaker, and we’re doing our utmost to address this issue.

Mr. Fairclough:   Well, Mr. Speaker, if the minister was, I wouldn’t be asking these questions.

The first recommendation in the Child Welfare League of Canada 2000 review states that, given serious consequences of understaffing at the front line, it is recommended that the department review the current level of supervisor and social worker positions compared to the Child Welfare League of Canada’s benchmarks, and address the staffing shortfalls.

What specific steps has the minister taken to date to implement this and other recommendations of the Child Welfare League’s report?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   What we have here is a report that is based on knowns and givens primarily in other areas and other jurisdictions in Canada. What is not being recognized to the degree that it should be is the focus we should have on First Nations here in the Yukon.

It’s a sad part of society here that a majority, or a great number, of the individuals in care are First Nations, and our approach to the apprehension of these children and how we treat them has to be looked at and has to be addressed. We have to take a new approach, as a government and as Yukoners, as to how we deal with the issue of children in care when they are of First Nation background.

What it’s going to take, Mr. Speaker, is a new children’s act. That is going forward under our government, and we’re going to have provisions in that new act that must be there that identify the issues, similar to what British Columbia has in their new legislation. So, this is where we’re focusing and this is what we’re going to be doing. But in the short term we have to address the needs of these children in care and we will be doing so, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Fairclough:   Same minister, Mr. Speaker. I encourage the minister to read the reports that were handed out here. It was done across the territory. The Employees Union has made a very strong representation to the minister about concerns regarding the workloads and staffing resources in family and children’s services. In a detailed letter dated March 28, 2003, they requested a response by the minister by April 1, 2003.

What is the minister doing to respond to the union’s letter, or has he even met with them yet?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   The issue of the bargaining unit directly approaching the minister has been referred to the appropriate agency in our government to deal with it.

Mr. Fairclough:   The minister didn’t answer the question specifically about the letter. This government doesn’t provide proper resources for social workers to maintain professional standards of care. Because of the minister’s failure to address caseload issues that have been repeatedly pointed out to this department, social workers are very concerned they may lose their professional credentials.

What is the minister doing to protect Yukon social workers from losing their professional credentials?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Our government is very cognizant of the role the social workers play in the department, and there has been no initiative to remove any credentials from any officials that I’m aware of. Perhaps the member opposite can share the concerns that we’re removing credentials. The workplace, the whole environment under which these individuals are employed and work, are well-defined and spelled out. They’re represented by a bargaining unit. I’m not aware of anyone on the management side taking away credentials from these individuals, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Fairclough:   Again, that was a non-answer by the minister.

One of the biggest concerns, Mr. Speaker, is the high burnout rate and stress related to illness among social workers. Some are working some 30 hours overtime in one month, and many use their vacation leave to recover from the heavy workload. This is a very serious health issue in the workplace. So I would like to ask the minister: can the minister, in following up with the minister responsible for the Public Service Commission, tell us the annual cost of the employees assistance program that is directly related to the stress-related illness among social workers and the support staff in family and children’s services branch? Can the minister responsible tell us that?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   That’s a question for detail, information that we do not have readily available, but we will provide that information to the member opposite, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. McRobb:   My question is for the Minister of Highways and Public Works, who is responsible for airports. Last fall, the former Liberal government changed the government’s policy to allow air miles points collected from government work travel to be used for personal use. An uproar ensued about the impropriety of such a policy. The issue was referred to the Conflicts Commissioner. He decided that the policy should be rewritten because no government employee should be allowed to personally benefit from the use of travel points collected while travelling on government business. Can the minister inform the House where this matter is at? What exactly is this government’s policy?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   With regard to that question, it’s under review at the present time. I understand that we are not carrying forward with any until such time as we deal with the other airline.

Thank you.

Mr. McRobb:   Well, under review — isn’t that interesting?

Now, the September 11, 2002 edition of the Whitehorse Star reported the former Premier as saying that she would be asking all government officials, elected and not, to review their points accounts, if they have them, and to give back any points awarded as a result of government travel. That was nearly seven months ago and we still, today, don’t know where this government stands on that issue.

Can the minister tell us if he has at least followed through on that particular commitment?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   For the member opposite, an honest answer is that I haven’t followed through on that.

Mr. McRobb:   Well, I thank the minister for an honest answer, Mr. Speaker.

The most concerning aspect of this whole policy deals with how points are handled by elected officials and their staff. The reputation of us all is at stake here.

Last fall I led the way and tabled my air miles point statement with the Conflicts Commissioner. That is the only way the Conflicts Commissioner can possibly monitor this situation. This matter needs to be cleaned up. All MLAs and staff who engage in government air travel need to table their statements with the Conflicts Commissioner.

Now, the deadline for the annual filing of our disclosure statements is at the end of April. Will this minister ensure that all such statements are filed by the upcoming deadline, including the points account statements?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   I’ll take the member opposite’s request under advisement.

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

Clerk:   Third reading, Bill No. 27, standing in the name of the hon. Mr. Fentie.

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   I move that Bill No. 27, entitled Act to Repeal the Government Accountability Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker:   It has been moved by the Acting Premier that Bill No. 27, entitled Act to Repeal the Government Accountability Act, be now read a third time and do pass.

Speaker:   I declare that Bill No. 27 has passed this House.

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.

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

Chair:   Committee of the Whole will now come to order. The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 2, Third Appropriation Act, 2002-03. Do members wish a 15-minute recess?

Some Hon. Members:   Agreed.

Chair:   We will stand in recess for 15 minutes.

Chair:   Committee of the Whole will come to order. We will continue on with the Third Appropriation Act, 2002–03 with Vote 10, Public Service Commission.

Chair:   Is there any general debate?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   It is my pleasure to introduce a supplementary budget for the Public Service Commission. There is an increase of $1,406,000 in funding for the Public Service Commission for operation and maintenance expenditures and an increase of $54,000 to funding for capital expenditures.

The increase in operation and maintenance is due largely to an increase in the employee leave and terminations benefits adjustment. This is a result of a change in accounting policy that allows the department to recover the costs for employees on pre-retirement leave. It also includes funding for additional support for the workplace harassment prevention officer and additional support in the provision of human resource information management.

The increase in capital is to provide for additional and replacement computers and equipment as well as an office renovation.

This concludes my comments for the supplementary for the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Hardy:   I’ll probably just ask for some detail in the line-by-line. I have very little in general debate, unless something comes up as we go through some of the discussion with other people who may have some comments. I find this is a substantial increase in money, compared to the overall budget. You mentioned a change in accounting policy. Could you explain that a little bit better? I’m not sure what you’re talking about.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Apparently the employees who are going to retire are being paid from that account on the vacation leave.

Mr. Hardy:   Just for clarification — so, for the people who are retiring, this is their vacation pay that has accumulated and is now being paid out?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   That’s correct, Mr. Chair. Some people have up to a year.

Mr. Hardy:   Is this an ongoing practice, this amount? I’m not familiar with the size of this in a supplement that would come forward. Is this something that we can expect to see year after year or is this a one-time only and then it goes into the main estimates for the following years after that?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   This was a change in accounting practice, and the leave liability is capped now so it shouldn’t be a reoccurrence of as high an amount.

Mr. Hardy:   What brought about this change in accounting practices?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   There were a lot of people coming due at the same time and the departments were having a bit of difficulty in being able to meet those demands. So what they did was cap the leave liability funds.

Mr. Hardy:   So, to get this in my head right, there’s a cap on the amount of leave that can be accumulated — sick leave, because that’s what you referred to originally. There’s now a cap on the accumulated sick leave they can book, I guess, and then they have to take it out, or what?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   There was a cap on the leave liability, but the change was that it now allowed the people to draw the money out of that account — the people who are retiring and on leave.

Mr. Hardy:   Would they not be allowed to draw it out if they were retiring anyway? I’m trying to understand why there is a change, because if you were retiring, Mr. Chair, my assumption is you would be allowed to draw out your accumulated leave.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Yes, you can, but it used to come out of the departments, and they were having trouble when they had to come up with that money. Now it’s obtainable through this pot of money, and it’s capped.

Mr. Hardy:   Actually, I think I’m going to stop here, because this is getting into a financial question about forecasting, and I will probably be looking at more financial questions on this. I’m going to stop at this moment on this one.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, if I could just enter briefly into this debate — as I understand it, there are two issues with respect to the leave liability account. Number one, the departments used to fund a leave for a public servant out of their department or someone who was retiring and you could accumulate up to a year or more — rather than have each department put that in their line items and then it’s highlighted and everybody knows then because it’s a very small jurisdiction — so, rather than do that, we’ve put the money into the Public Service Commission with this supplementary vote. That’s one issue. Is that correct?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Yes, that is correct.

Ms. Duncan:   The second issue is that there is a fund called "leave liability" and "termination benefits account". At various points in time, that has been capped by government and uncapped. What the fund is for is, if everybody decided to retire in one single day — heaven forbid that should happen — to make sure there’s enough money in there. There are disagreements between governments and auditors as to how much should be in there at any one point in time, so different governments have capped and uncapped that fund. Does the minister agree with that statement?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Yes, that is correct. The last three successive governments have done that.

Ms. Duncan:   So it’s not unheard of then for a government to cap the fund in the first year and uncap it in the second or third. It has happened. The minister has just confirmed that the previous three governments have, at various points in time, capped and uncapped that fund.

The minister has said the Yukon Party has capped that fund. What is the total in the employee leave and termination benefits account now with the supplementary vote? He can get back to me by legislative return, if he wishes.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   To the best of my knowledge, it has never been uncapped; it has only been capped. The amount is approximately $32 million, but if you need an exact figure, we can get back to you with it.

Ms. Duncan:   No, $32 million is fine. Let’s go to this "capped" and "uncapped" discussion.

What I mean by that is that, at various points in time, some governments have said, "Yes, there’s enough in the fund right now; we’re not going to add to it," and have capped it. They have said, "$32 million is enough. We’re not going to contribute more to this because the realistic idea that we would use $32 million in one year is pretty unrealistic, quite frankly."

What the minister is saying is that there have been different approaches to this. At times, government has contributed and, at other times, they haven’t.

We continue to contribute to the fund, but at times we contribute more than at other times.

The minister responsible is saying that the Yukon Party government, as a matter of their decision making, have said that putting $32 million into the employee leave and termination benefit account is enough. The fund should stay at $32 million for now.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   That’s correct. We haven’t done anything with that. We’ve left it as was.

Ms. Duncan:   Actually, what the minister opposite has done is put this much more money in and now we’re saying that’s enough.

So, what the minister is saying is that, with this money that’s up for vote today that we’re discussing right now, the fund will be at $32 million; it’s going to stay at that level.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   That’s correct.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, we’ve had lengthy discussions about the actuarial evaluation of the pension plan. Does this fund receive an actuarial evaluation, and when is that done?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   This is done every three years and we’ll probably be doing one next year.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, could the minister just advise me: is this under the Public Service Act, or where is it listed when the actuarial evaluation must be done? For the members, it’s under the members, employees and pension legislative allowance act. What’s the act requiring this?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   There isn’t one actually, but it is just good accounting practice to do this.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I don’t disagree that it’s good accounting practice.

Will the minister then make a commitment that the actuarial evaluation can be made public and that he will provide it to the members of the Legislature? It’s a requirement under the MLA one; that’s why I was asking about the legislative background. It’s a requirement that it be made public, so I’m asking for the same thing with this one.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   There isn’t a requirement to make it public, but we will examine it and, if possible, we will provide it to you.

Ms. Duncan:   I thank the minister for that. Could I just clarify with the minister that what I heard the minister say is that there’s no legal requirement to make the report public. However, he commits to do so barring any privacy concerns.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   That’s correct.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, it’s a general question always asked in the Public Service Commission debate. I’d just like to ask the minister in the supplementary in general debate — I understood that, as of last September or October, the number of classifications waiting to be heard by the Public Service Commission was down to very, very few. Could the minister provide the current number of classification appeals currently awaiting the Public Service Commissioner’s decision?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   At the present time, the Public Service Commission has received job descriptions for 126 requests and is waiting for 213.

Ms. Duncan:   So there are 126 requests for job descriptions and there are 213 appeals waiting to be heard on classifications.

Would the minister also advise the time period this covers, please?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   That number is for current, but out of 339, we still have 213 descriptions from departments that need to be completed.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, what I’m trying to get a handle on from the minister is how many classification appeals are waiting now. I understood there was substantial work and resources put in by the Public Service Commission to reduce the number of classifications waiting to be heard, to reduce it to next to none, or very few. So there was a low point in recent months.

Maybe we should start with verifying that. Was the number of classifications waiting to be heard substantially reduced?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   It has been, but the increase sort of got overloaded a little bit with renewal and, on top of that, with devolution coming across, again the workload has been increased, so the demand has been pretty strenuous on the staff.

Ms. Duncan:   I understand that. Perhaps the minister could just clarify for me. My understanding was that the reclassification appeals, at the conclusion of renewal, were pretty much close to significantly down in numbers. For post-renewal and the job assignments, we weren’t looking at 300 reclassification appeals. It’s really the post-devolution work that is causing the reclassifications. Is that not correct?

Perhaps the minister could give me the time period?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   We don’t really have the time-related things with us here, but of the 339 outstanding classifications, 47 percent were directly linked to renewal.

Ms. Duncan:   Could the minister elaborate on that statement, please?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Again, I state that, of the 339 outstanding classification requests, 47 percent of those 339 were renewal related.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I heard the statement. I heard the statement twice. What I’m asking is for the minister to explain that.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The link here is that, because of the reclassification, there were changes to some of the jobs because of renewal and that’s where this number comes in, the 47 percent.

Ms. Duncan:   What’s the average time length for reclassification?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   If all the information is there for a request from an employee, it can be done fairly promptly; however, if all the information isn’t there and it has to be done basically complete, then it is going to take a lot longer than if there was a lot of information available for the reclassification of a job, from the job descriptions from the department.

Ms. Duncan:   Could I ask the minister to be a little more specific with the "fairly promptly" and "it takes a little longer". So, fairly promptly, an employee makes a request and has all the information, and the job description from the department has all the information. So, three months, six months, two months, two weeks — what are we looking at?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   We’re going to have to get back to the member opposite on that time frame so that we get an accurate time frame.

Ms. Duncan:   I’m sure the minister will be prompt with his answer.

I’m not looking for a precise answer — that it is six months. I’m just looking for a ballpark. Are we looking at months, weeks? What are we talking about? Just a best guess.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Because of the large numbers we’re talking about here, classification could take up to six months.

Ms. Duncan:   There was substantial work done with respect to finance and administration systems between the Public Service Commission and the Department of Finance. Is all that work complete now? There were discussions about HRIS, I think it is, and some of the difficulties — the human resource information system. Is that work then complete, and is the system functioning so far?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Part of this budget is actually to address exactly what you’re talking about. It’s going to fund two additional resource people to work in that area.

Ms. Duncan:   I understand that that’s what the additional money is for — to fund the resource people to get the system working. This budget has been in place for awhile now; it’s a supplementary. So my question is, to put it frankly, how’s it going? Have we got it done? We put the additional resources in. This is an ongoing issue. These two individuals were necessary additional resources. Is the system working? People used to have to work hours and hours and hours of overtime on dealing with payroll issues and so on. The system has not worked that well for us, quite frankly, but the advice I was given is that it was going to get better. So my question is, did it? Has it gotten better? Does HRIS work now?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Yes, apparently it has improved in this area. They were able to catch up on some of the backlog, and things are progressing fairly well now in that area.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, it seems to me we also had to pay a significant sum for an upgrade to the program, and it didn’t come with warranty and so on, and some decisions were going to have to be made around HRIS. Have these been discussed, or are we just clunking along amd things are working pretty well now?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The upgrades are in and done. We’re now working on making some further improvements to the system.

Ms. Duncan:   So, when we modify these systems, though, to meet Yukon needs, we don’t get a warranty or it voids the warranty that normally comes with a computer program. So my fear is that we’ve spent another tremendous amount of money on this system and we are kind of out there without any guarantee because we’ve modified it for Yukon needs. Is there a backup plan, or are we just going to continue to clunk along, thinking the system works pretty well until there’s a problem?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   When the modifications were done, they were working, but now what’s happening with this area is that we’re trying to do away with some of those modifications and do some improvements in the other area.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I’ll look forward to regular reports from the minister on that particular system. Perhaps he can keep the House advised.

I have one other question. The employee recognition that usually takes place in November — the long-service awards, where we recognize individuals — has increased significantly in the last number of years in terms of the employees with long service. For example, there used to be one or two employees with 25 and 30 years, but now there’s a rather large number of people who are serving the government for longer periods of time. It’s a very important program and one I believe very strongly the minister should continue. Although the numbers are increasing, that’s to the credit of different governments that this is a good place to work.

The numbers will also increase substantially with devolution, so my question is twofold. Is it the minister’s intention to continue with that program? Secondly, logically there will be increased funding as a result. Will the devolution employees be included in that? So, if you had five years of service with the Government of Canada, would you then be eligible after five years with us for a 10-year service pin or just a five?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The answer is yes, we are going to continue with the program, and we are also going to recognize all the federal employees coming in.

Ms. Duncan:   The minister has said the program will continue — I’m assuming at the same levels? There won’t be a reduction in the program?

Secondly, the employees’ service with the Government of Canada will just carry over. It will be cumulative with the Yukon.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The answer is yes to the federal employees being able to continue on. There is no intention of making any changes.

Chair:   Is there any further general debate?

Mr. Hardy:   Has there been an increase in the employees with Public Service Commission?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Yes, there has been. We’ve increased by two employees in finance and administration, and two in the employee harassment area.

Mr. Hardy:   Could you give me the reasons why there has been an increase of four employees?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   With regard to the finance area, the two employees were brought in to try to get the system up and running, as the member of the third party alluded to earlier. In the other area, the two employees were hired on term due to the backlog of some of the concerns that employees had around workplace harassment issues.

Mr. Hardy:   Sounds like we have a problem in our workplace if we’re hiring more and more employees to deal with harassment. Is there an anticipation of hiring more employees due to devolution? As part of the devolution, were some employees who were with the federal government being transferred over into the Public Service Commission?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Yes, there were five positions transferred to Public Service Commission through devolution.

Mr. Hardy:   Do you anticipate any changes in the employment numbers after, say, a year of working through the devolution issues?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I don’t quite understand what the member opposite is asking there.

Mr. Hardy:   What I’m asking the minister is does he anticipate changes in the numbers? If there were five transferred over to the Public Service Commission as part of the devolution, and there have been four more hired in the last year, that’s nine more people in the Public Service Commission. Does he anticipate that number having to be increased or is it going to be decreased through retirement? Or are there term positions? A little description of this would help me.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   We expect this number to be stable, and the only two that we may do an evaluation on are the two term positions to try to cover the backlog of concerns filed by employees.

Mr. Hardy:   Obviously there’s a need for the two term positions; if there’s still a need after the term expires or comes close to expiry, are they going to be made full-time?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   We will be looking at those two term positions. That is going to be part of the evaluation process, as to whether or not we could keep them full time or not.

Chair:   If there is no further general debate, we will proceed line by line. The page reference is 14-3.

On Financial and Administration

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, could I have an explanation of that expenditure in that line, please?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   There is an overall increase for staff development of $51,000. This is a result of increases in requirements for the employee assistance program of $80,000. The commission has also identified a reduction in contracts of $29,000 to offset required capital expenditures. The net result is the change of $51,000.

Department of Education

Chair:   We will now proceed with Vote 03, Education. The page reference is 7-2.

Is there any general discussion?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I am pleased to rise today to speak to this request by the Department of Education for supplementary funding. I would like to give a brief summary of the changes. Within the education support services program, forecast needs have decreased by $106,000 due to identified miscellaneous savings of $75,000 in such areas as program materials, communications and travel. These savings were realized as a result of the reorganization that took place over the previous summer months, a $28,000 transfer of a position from the human resources unit in education support services to the Department of Finance, and a transfer of a small amount of money — $3,000 — to the Wood Street centre to support their grounds maintenance project.

Within the public schools program, we have reallocated funds. The net effect is a $92,000 increase. A summary of this reallocation includes a total increase of $172,000 covering the following: revote of funds, $117,000 from the 2001-02 fiscal year for accreditation, $101,000, and grassroots, $16,000. Both of these funds are for school-based programs. There’s $30,000 in new funding from Industry Canada in support of our network of innovative schools. This funding is for three schools that were selected as recipients of awards under this program. This money is 100-percent recoverable from the federal government.

There’s a $25,000 increase for the teacher mentor fund. This is the start-up cost of this program in this fiscal year. Funding for this program continues in the 2003-04 budget. The above increases were offset by an $83,000 transfer of the adult French language unit to French language services. This transfer was a position and the associated support costs.

Within the advanced education program, the requested increase in spending authority is for skills development funding of $125,000. This money is 100-percent recoverable from the federal government, Human Resource Development Canada. It is to be used for training of employment insurance clients at Yukon College and costs incurred for courses taken by Yukon apprentices.

The above concludes the request for operation and maintenance funding. I would now like to speak to the capital requests included in this supplementary.

The single largest change included in this budget is the lapse of funding for the Eliza Van Bibber School project. This lapse is due to delays in the project that resulted in a request from the contractor to begin work in March. As members will see, the project continues in the 2003-04 capital budget. This budget includes the return of the unspent funding from the Grey Mountain School planning. Members are aware of the cancellation of the project, and I wish to assure you that we are continuing to support the school with funding in the 2003-04 budget that we will be debating shortly.

Another major project that will be of interest to the members opposite is the funding for completion of the Mayo school; $357,000 of this request was a revote from the previous year. The other $240,000 is to address a need for increased funding to cover costs such as the demolition of the old school, funding for the commercial building incentive program and repair of some settling problems at the new school.

Members will note that there is a large sum, $1.41 million, included for the Catholic elementary school expansion. This money is being revoted from the previous year to complete construction work at Christ the King Elementary School over the summer of 2002.

Members will note that there are a number of projects that show lapsing funds, such as F.H. Collins replacement, Watson Lake high school technology wing upgrade, Golden Horn Elementary roof upgrade and the school painting program. These funds have been reallocated to fund projects already approved for 2002. For example, the F.H. Collins money was reallocated to air quality projects. It was used to cover additional costs associated with projects at Vanier, Whitehorse Elementary and Christ the King Elementary schools.

The Golden Horn funding was transferred to the Mayo school, Watson Lake technology wing and Takhini heating system. The Watson Lake technology wing could not be completed as originally planned, and members will notice that there is money in the upcoming capital budget for phase 2 of this project.

There is a request of an additional $139,000 for school-based equipment purchases. The majority of this money is a revote from the previous year and is part of the site-based allowances used by the schools to do projects that are of special interest to their school.

I would like to address the requests included in advanced education. The first is a revote request for the community training trust fund. This $272,000 is money that was committed to various organizations during the 2001-02 fiscal year but not yet paid out by March 31, 2002.

The final amount that I would like to talk about today is the $148,000 in the student financial assistance system. Again, this is a request to revote money from the 2001-02 fiscal year and will be used to complete the computer system to be used by the student financial assistance staff to manage the various grant and loan programs available to our students. This system was paid for by the federal government as part of a Canada-wide system. Funding will be required in future years for ongoing support costs for this system.

I would be glad to answer any further questions, or I am prepared to proceed to the line-by-line.

Thank you.

Mr. Fairclough:   I only have a couple of questions in this supplementary. Since we’re in general debate, I would like to ask a question of the minister. Mr. Chair, we all know Yukon’s economy is in poor shape and we’re in a recession. People are looking for work, and we have a number of projects that have been cancelled. I’m sure the minister and his party colleagues heard a lot on the doorsteps during the election. I would like to ask the minister what projects they have considered after listening to what people had to say on the doorstep — capital projects, school replacements and so on? What projects has his party put a priority on?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I believe that the projects that were already on the table have not been totally removed. There were some concerns brought up with regard to how the projects would proceed. Therefore, they have been deferred and will be addressed in the future.

Mr. Fairclough:   The minister didn’t answer the question. I would like to know which capital projects the Yukon Party has put a priority on.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   At this point in time we are going to be doing renovations in Teslin, Watson Lake — a lot of different projects like improvements to school grounds, painting contracts. Of course, on the table, there is still the school being discussed for Carmacks.

Mr. Fairclough:   As a priority for school painting — this minister cut back in that area at a time when Yukoners could have used a $40,000 contract with regard to school painting. So I am surprised that the minister says that and at the same time cuts it out of the department.

What rationale did the Yukon Party use in putting this priority list together? The minister listed Teslin and Watson Lake. I did not hear, to my surprise — I heard some mention of the school in Carmacks — F.H. Collins mentioned. Maybe the minister could give me some rationale to their priority list.

Hon. Edzerza:   In prioritizing the capital projects that we took on, that was sort of looked through and dealt with in conjunction with the amount of monies that we had available.

Having come into a situation where there wasn’t an awful lot of money available, we went ahead with some of the projects that were already sort of designated to be done this year.

With regard to F.H. Collins, that whole project was really put on the table because there was going to be a possible demand that it would be used for the upcoming games. However, that plan has changed now so the department is going to have to look very closely at the capacity of the schools as they sit. Eventually there’s going to have to be a determination as to whether or not our government would go into building new schools when the student population has declined.

Mr. Fairclough:   Mr. Chair, I’m really surprised at the answer from the minister — looking at just the population increase or decrease for building new schools. Public safety should be the biggest one. We have schools that are falling apart — literally falling apart. If you have a look at what happened in Old Crow, it came so close to the community losing some of their children in a fire. It was a matter of minutes, and if they had been much slower in getting students out, they might have lost some. That school needed to be replaced, and so did Ross River and Mayo, regardless of the populations there. They need to have replacements and, because of a little wrinkle in what communities might want, I’m surprised that it gets bumped off the priority list — for example, the Tantalus School.

The people in the community voiced how they wanted it designed. Because they did that, it got bumped off the list. The dollars there could have continued for planning money, and that’s when governments could have worked with the community to build a new school there. But now it’s gone and, really, nowhere in this mandate of the Yukon Party will we come close to seeing a school built in that community.

I would like to ask the minister: there are planning monies in the upcoming budget for the Teslin school. How did it get there before other schools’ serious needs were addressed? What is the Carmacks school so far down on the priority list of the Yukon Party?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I feel that some of these questions may be going out of the context of this supplementary that we’re discussing and should maybe be discussed in the mains.

Mr. Fairclough:   Whether the minister wants to answer then or now, if he needs more time to put his thoughts together, then he should just say that, Mr. Chair. I will ask that question again, and maybe the minister will be more prepared then.

We’re talking about general debate; this is general debate. I’m not going into lines. I’m looking at the vision of the Yukon Party. Right now, the minister said painting was important, that it was a priority, but they cut it back in this supplementary budget, and that’s what I’m getting at. I want to see people working. If things like this are cut out, it’s one fewer job for a person, which could be feeding their family. That’s what I’m getting at. It’s part of that. When you look at planning in schools, it takes a whole year to do a planning session. Carmacks is looking at three years down the road, if possible, if F.H. Collins jumps ahead and gets built, if there are dollars available through the government. There are all kinds of concerns. They waited very patiently for this. All of a sudden, the First Nation raised concerns, and it gets bumped down.

They’re disappointed in that. I’ll ask that question again, and hopefully the minister will have some clear answers.

In regard to the Mayo school, the member said there were additional dollars spent on addressing the settling problems. Does the minister anticipate continued problems in this area with permafrost and the lifting and sinking of this school?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   There were repairs. Repairs to the foundation may be required to repair settling that has taken place near the east entrance. The potential costs are not yet known but are expected to be in the range of $75,000. This figure is included in the cost overrun identified above, but the funding for the settling repairs was included in the $160,000 given in the supplementary.

As far as trying to predict whether or not there will be more problems, I can’t say for certain.

I also would like to say to the member opposite that when we talk about funding, I don’t think anybody really, really in their heart would want to deprive any community of any kind of capital project. The thing I will say is that when the money is scarce, one can’t expect to have multi-million dollar projects put on the table.

I would like to say that with regard to the Tantalus School, the property right next door to that school was purchased under an NDP government, and I believe maybe, if the facts are right, the member opposite was even the minister in that government, and there was no school built then.

Under the last regime, this was still on the table. Under the last government there was no school built. I say this without any kind of disrespect to the members opposite because I respect any decisions that were made by previous governments with regard to any capital project. At that particular time, when they were in the position of making the decisions, they obviously had their reasons why they made the decisions they did.

Just like today, as the Minister of Education, I have reasons why I had to make a decision with regard to the Tantalus School. I respected the request of the community. Again, I stated earlier and on more than one occasion, that there was some very — you might say extraordinary discussions that have to take place with regard to that school. For example, I don’t know if the Yukon government has ever decided to build a school on settlement lands. Well, this is one of the requests in that letter — to build a school on First Nation settlement land. We don’t know the implications of doing that. That is one of the reasons why we said that some more consultation and more discussion has to take place in this area.

Mr. Fairclough:   I could see this debate going on and on forever with some of the answers from the member opposite. What does he do with a place like Old Crow? What do you say when you build a building there? The community is mostly First Nation. There’s nothing wrong with building a public building on First Nation land. It’s part of the community. Roads are built through it; they didn’t have a problem with highways. They have gone through reservations, and those are still not settled.

I’m surprised that, just because it is possibly going on a more suitable piece of land that happened to be First Nation land that this minister would bump it down on the priority list — just because a First Nation raised this — bumped it up another notch — it then gets bumped off the list. That’s what planning money is all about — $500,000 being spent to work with communities, governments, local governments, the village and the First Nation and the public to design a school suited for the community.

This minister did bump it off the list. He supposedly has a rationale for putting the Teslin school ahead of this one, and I don’t dispute the fact that Teslin needs a school — they do, and we want to see that happen too, but it appears that this project will never see the light of day if it continues down this road.

The member opposite talks about purchasing the property. Well, the Old Crow school, the school in Ross River and the Mayo school were all built under the New Democrats with the others on the list to be built a year after. So far that hasn’t happened. If it didn’t happen under the Liberal Party, and now it won’t happen under the Yukon Party, how do you think the community feels? They’re frustrated.

They want some clear answers. I won’t belabour this. I’m going to bring it up again in the main budget, but I’d like this minister to commit to a meeting as soon as possible — which could be this week — with the First Nation, the village and the public in that community to get the ball rolling for a commitment to build a new school. This could be reflected as early as the fall supplementary budget. I would really like the minister to do this. Get the design money; it goes throughout the rest of the winter, and when we come back to a budget in the spring, those dollars could be reflected to build a new school there. Will he commit to those meetings with the community?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I have no problem whatsoever making a commitment to meet with the people in Carmacks. It is the intention of this minister to do that and at the earliest convenient time.

Mr. Fairclough:   Time is going by quickly. There wasn’t enough time to meet with them before the budget was being put together, so I’m asking the minister to meet with them before the supplementary budget is put together, to give them certainty. The minister has committed to that, and I will relay the message back to the community.

On the doorstep during the election, especially in the minister’s riding, he must have heard all kinds of concerns about government needing to support First Nation education. The minister said he is working on a First Nation strategy in education. Why wasn’t there any funding for a First Nation education commission as was established at the Council of Yukon First Nations?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I would have to say that I wasn’t aware of any First Nation commission that was established at CYFN.

Again, I will stress to the member opposite that it takes time to do things. We have been pressured very, very heavily to get to where we are today and I have full intentions of having consultation with the First Nations to have their input on what they see as their involvement in education. I’m not about to predict or give direction to anybody without any kind of consultation. It’s important to me that they have total involvement.

Mr. Fairclough:   I’m surprised at that answer too, Mr. Chair. I know the minister knows some of the issues that have been brought to his attention by First Nations and, if the minister doesn’t know, the education commission and CYFN did fall apart close to the end of the review of the Education Act. If the minister is serious about having First Nation involvement, that is an organization perhaps the minister should pay some attention to.

How, then, is the minister going to involve First Nations in a complete review of the Education Act?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   With regard to the Education Act, at this point in time that act was already basically ready to be presented to this Legislature and put through. At the eleventh hour, apparently there were some concerns from not only First Nations, but other stakeholders. This government has made the commitment that we will identify those stakeholders who had concerns and learn what those concerns were and deal with it accordingly.

Mr. Fairclough:   Can the minister tell me what his plans are for the Education Act — the review, the one that was partially done?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   One of the goals for me as minister is to put a closure to the Education Act. In order to do that, we have made the commitment to identify those stakeholders who have concerns with it. We would like to get a completion to this process as soon as we possibly can.

Mr. Fairclough:   Let me help speed up the minister’s job to identify the stakeholders. They are basically the people in the Yukon who use the education system. Those are the people who came forward with concerns.

One of the things that went wrong with the Education Act is that suggestions made to the department about possible changes didn’t come back to the people — to Yukoners. They were compiled and the department decided what was best to do with this and it didn’t go back, even though that was supposed to be part of the process.

Is the minister committed to that part of the process, to take those written concerns back to the people and say, "This is what was said out there." People wanted to hear it.

For example, people in Teslin may have made suggestions that are very much of interest to people in Mayo, Pelly or Dawson City.

So, will he make that commitment to take it back to the people?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   To the best of my knowledge, the public consultation and services process directed by section 326 was completed in November of 2001 with the submission of recommendations from the Minister of Education. With regard to what’s going to happen in the future with this, there still hasn’t been a real concrete decision yet, but the next steps are under consultation.

Thank you.

Mr. Fairclough:   Maybe the minister can lay out what the next steps are.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I think I mentioned more than once that the next steps are obviously to consult with the stakeholders. I have to stress that there is a difference of opinion between me and the member opposite with regard to where the Education Act review is really at, because it has not been brought to my attention that every stakeholder who was involved with it is not satisfied with it. I have had some organizations come and meet with me and say that, "Look, this Education Act is ready to go. Why don’t you guys put it through the House?" And again, I explained to the individuals I met with that, "While you are satisfied with what has transpired, there are, however, some who have difficulties. We need to also talk with those individuals."

So, we’re getting it from both sides here. Some say it’s ready to go; others say they want more consultation. This party has committed to looking at identifying the particular stakeholders who say they still have a concern with it, and we need to have some discussions with those stakeholders to identify exactly what it is they don’t agree with, or what it is that was omitted.

Mr. Fairclough:   I’m really surprised at that answer too, Mr. Chair. I don’t believe the minister has a plan in place — just kind of putting it together as the minister goes along.

The minister said this just now — that not all the stakeholders could be contacted. So should this go back out to the communities, or will there be a select few who will be consulted? The minister just said that there was a group of people he feels he has in mind for this. I would like to know which of the stakeholders the minister is committed to.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I want to state for the record that there was $830,616 spent on this, so that’s roughly $850,000. When I listen to the member opposite, it’s almost like a suggestion that all that money was wasted, when in fact I believe a lot of the information that came in from the stakeholders is very valuable. I respect all the hard work that was done by the committee that was put in place, and I certainly can’t believe that every bit of that information is worthless.

To go back to the same people and have the same discussions, who’s to say we might not come out with exactly what was already said. I stated earlier and I’ll say again that we are going to identify those stakeholders, which at this point in time I don’t believe to be a huge number, but I can definitely tell you today that we are not going to start from scratch. The $800,000 worth of work is not going to go to waste.

Mr. Fairclough:   I urge the minister to pay attention to the conversation, the debate. I asked the minister to take all the comments and follow due process, proper process the government has had and not start from scratch. Take it back to the people so they know what other people across the Yukon are saying and make the decisions on what the amendments should look like in the Education Act.

Why is the minister deviating from a campaign commitment to ensure that all stakeholders are consulted with?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Again, I believe there is a difference of opinion here between the member opposite and me. I don’t believe I said I’m deviating from anything. I believe I said that we are going to follow through with our campaign commitment. We are going to have discussions with the stakeholders who come forward and ask to have some consultation with respect to this Education Act, and we will give them the opportunity to voice their concerns that they feel were not represented in the act as it stands.

Mr. Fairclough:   The members, the Yukon Party is famous for this, Mr. Chair. They say one thing at the doorstep during the campaign and another thing when they are elected into office.

Now the minister is only going out to a selected few stakeholders and he is only going to consult with those who come forward to him, but in the election platform it says that they will be seeking consensus — not just input or consultation, but consensus — from all stakeholders — not just one or two. I hope the minister is listening to this about the Education Act review. That was the promise to the people. Again, this minister is breaking that promise. I want to know why.

Some Hon. Member:   Point of order.

Chair:  Mr. Jenkins, on a point of order.

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   On a point of order, Mr. Chair, pursuant to section 19 of the Standing Orders, the member opposite is coming very, very close to imputing false or unavowed motives on the part of the minister in our government.

Chair:   Mr. Fairclough, on the point of order.

Mr. Fairclough:   I haven’t violated anything under section 19. The person who called the point of order referred to the whole section in the Standing Orders, nothing specific. That should have been part of his point of order.

I am getting information from the minister.

Chair:   The Chair shall take that under advisement.

Chair:   Order please.

There is no point of order here; it is a dispute among members. But I would caution the member that deliberately stating that a member made a statement with the deliberate intention of breaking it is a very serious accusation and one that can’t be made lightly in debate here. It must be made by a substantive motion. If the member wishes to make that accusation, he should do so in the appropriate place.

There is no point of order. It is a dispute among members.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The department at this present time is preparing materials for Cabinet consideration relating to the recommendations and the companion amendments proposed. But at this point in time I believe I could commit to providing the member opposite with details of a plan when confirmed.

Mr. Fairclough:   When confirmed, Mr. Chair? I just asked a question about the commitment they made, and it’s in the Yukon Party platform, right here. It says "seeking consensus from all stakeholders". That’s what it says in the Yukon Party platform about the Education Act.

The minister, in my view, is breaking that promise by saying that only a selected few stakeholders will be consulted, and that’s when we’re going to end up with the final product in the Education Act. Why is that promise broken? That’s all I want to know.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   With regard to the whole process of this Education Act review, approximately 70 percent — and that’s a really high percentage — of the comments were not even related to the act. This is a real contributing factor as to why a lot of the information has to be reviewed. We need to sit down with some of the stakeholders involved and get the comments more relevant to the act itself.

Mr. Fairclough:   I still didn’t get an answer from the minister. I’m going to repeat the question. But I wanted to make a couple of comments in this regard.

Education is more than the Education Act. It’s an opportunity for government to make improvements elsewhere and to take those comments seriously and not put them aside because they doesn’t relate to that section of the Education Act.

I’m surprised the minister would even take that tactic — to not listen to the other concerns. And I know the minister is going to say that he will listen to them, or he will have a report or summary for us on the other comments that were made in the consultation that took place across the Yukon.

I want to know why this minister is not going to seek consensus with all stakeholders on the Education Act, as they promised on the doorstep. This was part of their platform commitment. Why is the minister not doing this?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I would have to state to the member opposite that — I believe I said it before, and I’ll say it again — I’m not an individual who does things sporadically. They need to be thought out, and we want to put closure to this Education Act. We want to do it so that we aren’t going to be having it brought back and brought back.

And if it’s going to take another year, or a year and a half, then that’s how long it’s going to take. And if it takes that long to get a consensus, then we’re going to work at it. It’s something that was a commitment, and we intend to follow through with it.

With respect to the comments made by the member opposite about not listening to all of the concerns, I believe there was a comment made about me having no brains before when I said that we were looking at and putting an education strategy in place. I mentioned then that all of these comments are important.

They will be of value. I don’t take it lightly that anybody would voluntarily come out and sit down and get involved in a public issue like a revision of the Education Act. I appreciate all the hard work that they do, and I don’t take any of their comments lightly.

Mr. Fairclough:   Again, the minister didn’t answer the question about why he wasn’t seeking consensus. We’re getting mixed messages on the floor here. I’m not going to go to the member’s comments about his brains. I just won’t go there. Mr. Chair, the minister said that he’ll be consulting stakeholders, and there are a few selected ones, but he’s going to be consulting stakeholders who come forward to him, to the government when, in their platform, they did say they would be seeking consensus from all stakeholders. That’s what I’m getting at. I know I’m starting to get the message through to the member opposite, because in his last comments, Mr. Chair, he did talk about consensus with all stakeholders. They all have to agree to this. That is what the Yukon Party platform said.

How then, if we’re back on track with the Yukon Party platform — and it took a long time to get the minister there — how does he propose to do this?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I believe the mixed comments are coming more from the other side of the House than they are from here. I don’t know how many times I would have to repeat — I could stay here all day and repeat exactly what I’m going to say again. It’s a process that obviously, from the length of time it has taken to date to review the Education Act, is not a process that is really something that can be done within a matter of weeks and days.

Again, I will state for the member opposite that we will move ahead with our commitments, and we will be proceeding to identify the stakeholders who had concerns. If an organization had such strong opposition to this Education Act review and what was put into the Legislature here, I have enough faith in that organization to come forward now and say, "Look, all of the input we had was not acknowledged." I think it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack to go out to everybody in the Yukon and start asking them individually if all their concerns were met. I’m quite certain these individuals will come forward and say, "Look, we want to sit down and talk with this government because, when we were involved with the process previously, we weren’t heard." I certainly hope that’s the case and this will transpire.

Mr. Fairclough:   I urge the minister to read the Blues tomorrow. Read Hansard if he doesn’t get a chance to read the Blues tomorrow. Read Hansard and follow along with this conversation. I’m talking about the Yukon Party platform and their promise to the people on the doorstep. That’s what they were supposedly elected to do.

All I’m doing is asking how it’s going to be done. I don’t want the minister — the minister thinks about something so much that I believe he believes that’s what is being said on the floor of this Legislature. I didn’t talk about weeks or going back to the beginning at all. Comments have already been made on the Education Act. All I want the minister to do is to follow the process that many Yukoners were used to. Comments were made; comments in Teslin were made; the communities would like to hear what suggestions were made — good suggestions. They may make the same ones and speed the process up.

I don’t think that this was well-thought-out when it was put into the Yukon Party platform, because the Yukon Party committed over and over again — it was on the air, in the media, in the newspapers and on the radio — that they would be seeking consensus from all stakeholders. Now the minister is saying he will be identifying the stakeholders. I don’t think it will take weeks to do that. If they would just look at the book, Mr. Chair, members opposite would see that there are a number of people who made comments and would like to see government act even more than what is there in the Education Act.

If the minister cannot lay out clearly to me here how they are going to seek consensus from all stakeholders, perhaps then he could bring that forward to me in a legislative return.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I believe that I’ve already made a commitment to the member opposite that when something is agreed to we will be presenting it to him.

Ms. Duncan:   I would like to also follow up on some of the commitments made by the Yukon Party with respect to education. There was a commitment in the campaign literature — it’s specifically in the brochure from the current Minister of Justice. It says, "Increased educational resources in our existing classrooms instead of constructing a new Grey Mountain School." The Grey Mountain School is certainly a reduction in this budget by $470,000. Does the minister believe this commitment has been met?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   That money from the Grey Mountain School was redirected back into other projects, and I don’t have that information at this point in time. The monies that were cancelled from that school were just returned to the Department of Finance.

Ms. Duncan:   So, Mr. Chair, we have a problem. Yukoners have a commitment in writing from the Minister of Justice that the educational resources in classrooms would be increased once Grey Mountain School was cancelled. Grey Mountain School was cancelled. The commitment has not been met.

What the minister has just said is that money from the cancellation of Grey Mountain School — $470,000 — was taken out of the Education budget. It was returned to general revenues. In other words, it was not put back in our classrooms. How does the Minister of Education intend to reconcile this? How does the Minister of Education intend to deal with this commitment that has been made in writing by the now Minister of Justice.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The dollars that we’re talking about for the Grey Mountain School were in the capital budget, and the dollars for resource staff in the schools are in the O&M budget, so we’re talking about two different budgets here.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I’m very well aware of that, but I didn’t go door to door in Whitehorse West and campaign and put it in writing for constituents that Grey Mountain would be cancelled and the money would go into classrooms. The minister’s colleague did — door to door, in writing, for all Yukoners to see: Grey Mountain School cancelled, the money into classrooms. This commitment is very clearly not met.

The minister said it was because one is capital and one is O&M. Exactly, but unfortunately, constituents aren’t going to accept that as an excuse for breaking a promise that was made in writing — a commitment in writing.

How does the minister explain, not only to the Whitehorse West constituents but to everybody else, how there can be a commitment made in writing and then not met by the Yukon Party government? How does the minister explain that?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   At this point in time, I would say that it’s still very early in the year, and I can’t say for certain that this commitment will not be met because the Yukon Party has stated all along that, if the need arises, the money will be found.

Ms. Duncan:   Well, let me take the minister back through this. There was a commitment made, in writing, by one of his colleagues — specifically increase educational resources in our existing classrooms instead of constructing the new Grey Mountain School. So we have before us a supplementary that takes $470,000 out of Grey Mountain School. Instead of constructing this school, the Yukon Party promised that that money would be put into classrooms.

Now, the minister has said it’s a difference between a capital and O&M budget. Is that the reason they’re giving Yukoners for not keeping this commitment, or will the minister stand on his feet and say that that commitment was not met because, in fact, it wasn’t? Will the minister admit to that — that the commitment was not met as was promised in writing?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I can’t really, honestly make that commitment, because when we do start looking at the education strategy, I believe that would be part and parcel of being able to identify the needs in the classroom. I believe we need to get a handle on what the big picture is before you can really start putting money into anything. To just pour money into a classroom doesn’t make any sense to me. You need to know why you’re doing it.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, let’s start with this. First of all, the minister’s first response was that Grey Mountain is in capital, and educational resources in the classroom are in O&M. Let’s start with that. Does the minister believe it’s possible to transfer money between those two? Is it possible to take money out of capital and put it into O&M?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   To the best of my knowledge, I believe you can do that.

Ms. Duncan:   Yes, Mr. Chair, you can. Why did the minister not do it? The minister had a choice. The minister sits on Management Board. He had a choice. He had a commitment from a colleague who said very clearly in black and white for every voter to see, not just in Whitehorse West but throughout the Yukon, that the Yukon Party government would take the resources for Grey Mountain and put them into the classroom. That’s $470,000. Where is the $470,000 going into the classrooms? Will the minister tell me that?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   To the best of my knowledge, I don’t believe we even had time to put that into this supplementary. I think maybe this line of questioning may be better answered in the mains.

Ms. Duncan:   No. I’m sorry. I don’t find the minister’s answer acceptable. This was a direct commitment, written in black and white, by his colleague. The commitment was not met. The money was taken out. They had time to take the money out of Grey Mountain School. The member is a member of Management Board. There was time to put this money into educational resources in the classrooms, as they had committed to do.

The fact is, they — the Yukon Party — did not do it. They did not do it. It is a broken commitment. It is written in black and white by the now Member for Whitehorse West saying this would happen. It did not happen. Half of it did; the money came out of Grey Mountain School, but the money did not go into the classrooms, as was promised and committed to.

The minister has admitted that, yes, the money came out of Grey Mountain School. The minister has admitted that it can be transferred from O&M to capital. We know for a fact that the minister is a member of Management Board, which makes these decisions. We know for a fact the commitment was made, and we have established this afternoon that the commitment was broken.

In his opening comments, the minister did say that the funding for various school capital projects has not been totally removed.

What are the plans for Grey Mountain? Are they going to build it or not?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   At this point in time, the Grey Mountain School is not going to be built. The Grey Mountain School will carry on the usual process that it has been.

Ms. Duncan:   So, Mr. Chair, is the minister guaranteeing the jobs at Grey Mountain Primary for another year?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The answer to that is yes.

Ms. Duncan:   How is the minister addressing the health and safety concerns at Grey Mountain School?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I am not aware of any health and safety issues at the school at this point in time.

Ms. Duncan:   Well, let me encourage the minister to ask, to go back and read the rural and Whitehorse school facilities study, to recognize that those portables that passed for a school are more than 35 years old and that there are mould issues that are major problems at that school. Let me encourage the minister to go back and ask about the health and safety of the children who attend there.

Is the minister — and is it the department’s intention — to accept kindergarten registrations there as well for next year? Kindergarten registration starts in May/June — we get expressions of interest. Grey Mountain is continuing for another year — logically children will be starting kindergarten — if there is only a year’s life in that school, they may see a decrease — the decrease the department loves to see in registrations at Grey Mountain — in spite of the success of that school.

The minister has granted them a stay of execution; he is not closing the school this year. Is he still accepting kindergarten registrations at Grey Mountain?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   To the best of my knowledge, the mould issue had been repaired at that school.

To the member opposite, I say that I did attend a meeting with the school council at the Grey Mountain School, and there was no mention of any deficiencies in the school. In fact, I specifically remember the only request I had from the school council was that they have their school painted. I believe that has been granted.

As far as kindergarten enrolment, I don’t believe there has been any decision made on that yet.

Ms. Duncan:   Parents spend a great deal of time making a decision as to where they’re going to enrol their children, particularly in kindergarten — make a choice between, for example, Catholic schools, French first language, French immersion, or their neighbourhood community school. That is not a decision that is arrived at lightly by a parent, and it is not made in a week or two. So is the minister saying that he doesn’t know yet, that there has been no decision on whether or not Grey Mountain will accept kindergarten registrations for the 2003-04 school year? There has been no decision on that.

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   At this point in time, to the best of my knowledge, there have been no plans really made for Grey Mountain School. According to a report that I reviewed, it has a lifespan of approximately five to 10 years. At this point in time, this government has no plans of changing the daily activities at the school.

Ms. Duncan:   So, Mr. Chair, when the notices appear to register your child for kindergarten, Grey Mountain will still be an option?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I believe it will still be an option for this year.

Ms. Duncan:   The answers from the minister are not very definitive. For a parent making a choice, I believe it’s going to be an option for this year. When you start your child on his or her school career, you don’t want to be thinking they’ll be changing school in grade 1 — they’ll just start somewhere and then have to change schools. If you’re enrolling your child in a K to 3 school, you’d like to know that school is going to be there from kindergarten to grade 3. Otherwise, you may make another choice, and there are some options.

Grey Mountain was a very successful school, as most, if not all of our Yukon schools are very successful schools. A good part of Grey Mountain’s success is because it’s a very small environment, that kindergarten to grade 3 environment. Its catchment area is not just Riverdale. That’s a misnomer and a misunderstanding in the general public. There are students from all over Whitehorse who attend Grey Mountain. It also successfully builds upon the work of the Child Development Centre.

The minister won’t give any long-term commitments other than one year to that school. That’s what he said on the floor of the House today, and the only repairs that are being done is that the school is being painted.

I’d like to ask about the other schools. Has the minister toured the school in Carmacks?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   No, I haven’t.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, closer to home, in this supplementary budget the technology wing upgrade in the Watson Lake high school didn’t go ahead. I’d be interested to find out if it is going to go ahead. The Golden Horn Elementary School roof upgrade didn’t proceed. Also, one of the key capital maintenance projects that is larger than first anticipated is the Porter Creek high school. That school is at capacity and there is difficulty in two areas: one is with a hallway that is too small to accommodate people and the other is that the shop is too small. These are badly needed capital issue changes to that school and they’re just as important as the roof in other schools and as the technology wing in others. I see a reduction in capital money. I don’t have a sense from the minister of a commitment to the capital expenditures in schools.

Can the minister tell me what the plans are for the Watson Lake, Golden Horn and Porter Creek schools?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   With regard to the Golden Horn Elementary School roof upgrade of $200,000, these funds became available for transfer when it was thought the problem could be resolved by replacing the membrane at the connection beam. The funding was transferred to the following projects: $80,000 to the Mayo community school, $80,000 to the Watson Lake high school technology wing and $40,000 to Takhini school heating system replacement. The Watson Lake high school technology wing upgrade of $115,000 — the net lapse of $115,000 is comprised of a revote of $5,000 to complete the final design work on this project. With the completion of phase 2 of this project not occurring until the 2003-04 fiscal year, $120,000 was returned to the Department of Finance and has been requested in the 2003-04 capital budget.

Ms. Duncan:   Well, we’ll debate whether or not the request has actually been met. The ministe