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.

Tributes.

Introduction of visitors.

Hon. Mr. Kenyon: It gives me great pleasure today to introduce guests in the House, Mr. Danny and Uli Nolan, the former owners of the Yukon Wildlife Preserve.

Speaker:   Any further introduction of visitors?

Speaker:  I have for tabling the 2002-03 Annual Report of the Yukon Human Rights Commission.

Are there any further documents for tabling?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling the Yukon Health and Social Services Council Annual Report for 2002-03.

Hon. Mr. Kenyon:   Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling the Annual Report of the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment, April 2002 to March 2003.

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

Are there any reports of committees?

Are there any petitions?

Mr. Hardy:   I have a petition for tabling, on behalf of all opposition members, bearing the signature of 391 Yukon people calling on Cabinet ministers who owe money to the taxpayers to pay up or resign.

Speaker:   Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) the recent economic impact assessment and cost-benefit analysis of Yukon College proves beyond a doubt that the College is a significant player in the territory’s economy both in direct spending and jobs;

(2) higher education pays many benefits, not only to the individual who acquires a university degree, but it also stimulates social and cultural progress in society; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Party government to fund a feasibility study that will look into the cost and benefits of expanding Yukon College to a four-year degree-granting institution.

I also give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that

(1) the University of the Arctic is a unique partnership between northern circumpolar countries and their institutions of higher learning in the north, including Yukon College;

(2) the university promotes cultural diversity and northern knowledge;

(3) it delivers courses in contemporary issues in the circumpolar region and a bachelor program in circumpolar studies both on-line and in the classroom; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Party government to work with Yukon College to find ways to assist the development of the University of the Arctic.

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

THAT this House urges the Yukon government to increase the budget for restorative justice programs in the territory to adequate levels while ensuring a fair and balanced approach to the distribution of funds and to work with Aboriginal Justice Canada to accomplish this goal.

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

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Alaska Governor’s proposal to tax cruise ship passengers to help pay for state government will have a negative impact on Yukon’s tourism industry; and

THAT this House urges the Minister of Tourism to immediately contact the Alaska Governor’s office to register her opposition to such a tax.

I give notice of the following motion:

THAT this House recognizes that the Yukon Party promised during the election campaign that the development of the Whitehorse Copper area wouldn’t go ahead unless all concerns were addressed; and

THAT this House recognizes that the government has proceeded with this development; and

THAT this House urges the Yukon Party government to right this wrong and halt the development of this area until residents have been assured that all concerns have been addressed.

I give notice of the following motion:

THAT it is the opinion of this House that the Yukon Party government’s loan policy could result in two Cabinet ministers paying nothing on their outstanding loans to Yukon taxpayers; and

THAT this House urges the Premier to redraft this policy in order to ensure that his two Cabinet ministers repay their loans in full, including interest, to Yukon taxpayers.

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

THAT this House urges Old Saint Nick to deliver gifts to all the children in the Yukon Territory on Christmas Eve.

Speaker:   Are there any further notices of motion?

Is there a ministerial statement?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to announce a new government policy. Cabinet has approved an order-in-council directing the Yukon Housing Corporation to remove child support payments from the calculation of rent for social housing tenants. This change will be effective January 1, 2004.

Yukon’s social housing program makes an important contribution in addressing the economic and social challenges that communities and individuals face in their efforts to address issues associated with poverty and homelessness.

How the program works is that with the exception of social assistance recipients, tenants pay rent for a subsidized unit from the Yukon Housing Corporation based on a proportion of the tenant’s total income.

These tenants will now be able to deduct child support payments from their income and therefore retain more money for use in potentially meeting the other needs of their children.

Mr. Speaker, this government promised that it would exclude child support payments from social housing rent calculations, and we have followed through.

The unfortunate reality today is that many families live apart. Those parents who find themselves raising children alone are often faced with financial problems, even when they receive payments from the other parent.

The changes in our policy are designed to leave more disposable income in the hands of custodial parents who are, more often than not, single parents. Research indicates that custodial parents are typically women with lower incomes or lower income-earning potential.

Various federal, territorial and NGO research studies and reports generate a consistent picture of the status of single-parent families in the Canadian and Yukon society. The findings show that the vast majority of all single-parent households are headed by women, that the Yukon single-parent households have less income than the Yukon median, and that the great percentage of single-parent households are social housing clients, with an overwhelming majority headed by women.

Child support payments will continue to be considered as income to assess eligibility for housing assistance. This ensures that those most in need of affordable, adequate and suitable housing will continue to be given priority consideration for social housing.

I am proud to say that we are contributing in helping Yukon children and families to achieve a better quality of life, just like we promised we would.

Mr. Cardiff:   I would like to thank the minister for the ministerial statement. It’s a good change in policy and I’m sure that there will be many women and children helped by this initiative. However, the vast majority of single-parent families living in social housing are not receiving maintenance payments and we need to address the issue of why some of them aren’t receiving the maintenance payments that they deserve.

We are not sure how many families this affects and we would like the minister to provide a statement of the actual financial implications of this policy.

It might even be better if the Minister responsible for Yukon Housing would talk to his colleague, the Minister of Health and Social Services, as well. It might be better to raise social assistance rates as we’ve been asking, since many social assistance recipients are single women living in Yukon Housing’s social housing, and they’re not receiving those maintenance payments. There are a few other options that the minister could also think about implementing. He could put a cap on rents, as the government does for its own employees living in Yukon Housing so that it would affect families who are struggling to save their own homes, and it would be fairer.

Another initiative that the minister responsible for Yukon Housing could take action on would be to implement the affordable housing program initiative that was put forward by the federal government over two years ago, which would assist even more families that are in need of good housing. The bottom line is to address the income of families on social assistance who are in need of affordable housing.

The other thing about the statement is that it’s unclear — and maybe the minister could clarify this in his final statement — where it says that child support payments will continue to be considered as income to assess the eligibility for housing assistance. We’d like to know what is meant by that statement.

Ms. Duncan:   I rise on behalf of the Liberal caucus to respond to the ministerial statement. Today is national chocolate-covered anything day. There was no need to sugar coat this particular announcement. It is sweet. I appreciate that the minister has done the right thing in approving an order-in-council directing the Yukon Housing Corporation to remove child support payments for the calculation of rent for social housing tenants.

Congratulations, minister. I appreciate your hard work at the Cabinet table.

I would, however, ask that you keep up this good work and encourage the good feelings to spread like melted chocolate. Social assistance cheques have been released early by previous governments to ensure that families were able to have these funds in time for Christmas. I would ask the minister to ask his colleague, the Health minister, to do the right thing and release the social assistance cheques early.

Hon. Mr. Hart:   I would like to thank the members opposite for their kind words with regard to this new policy, and I’d like to assure them that this is one small element of assisting those in great need and it’s a part of meeting our commitment. I’d like to thank them very much.

Speaker:   This then brings us to Question Period.

Mr. Hardy:   A few minutes ago, I tabled a petition bearing 391 signatures, and I can tell the members opposite that there are over 400 signatures out there. This was the 391 we managed to gather up just today.

This petition has only been in circulation for a couple of days and has only been available in a few Whitehorse locations. It’s just the tip of the iceberg of Yukon people who are disgusted over delinquent ministerial loans.

Before the next sitting begins, will the Premier guarantee that the two ministers who owe hundreds of thousands of dollars to the taxpayers are either caught up on their payments or are no longer in Cabinet?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   First, I want to say on behalf of the government that we accept and recognize the spirit and the intent of the petition. We certainly place a great deal of value on the views and opinions of Yukoners.

As far as the member opposite, who seems to be singling out two individuals from a much broader, serious problem the government has had for many years, I would make this point: that this government, the first one in 15 years plus, has brought forward a solution, a solution that makes sure that NGOs are forgiven, a solution that allows other delinquent loans to come forward and renegotiate terms and conditions, and also be provided a three-year interest hiatus. But the Cabinet ministers in question do not get that benefit. Their portfolios will go forward, in full, bearing all the interest to date.

So the solution, Mr. Speaker, is one that addressed all the variables, all the problems and all the discrepancies in this portfolio. The government is moving it out to the private sector; the government should not be in the loans business.

Mr. Cardiff:   For the second time in a week, the Minister of Community Services has had to distance himself from questionable decisions made by his hand-picked consultant from Rossland, B.C. Will the minister now admit that he has botched this file, replace the supervisor and adopt a more constructive and positive approach to Dawson City’s municipal officials?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   It doesn’t matter how the members opposite address this question. The issue remains the same. It’s the state of Dawson City’s financial affairs. This current state is a direct result of the past mayor and council and the past government decisions. Difficulties are due in part to past projects that went over budget, as in the arena, which could cost the city more money after arbitration. The new supervisor, based on the current information, has received and is predicting Dawson will be in a deficit position in this financial period — $725,000 in an area roundabout. Dawson is also requesting outstanding loans in excess of other municipalities, and I repeat that most people in Dawson City must already know the city’s financial state is not in good standing.

Thank you.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice says she has a letter from the RCMP supporting her decision to release a tow truck. The minister also said she has a legal case that supports her decision. Will the minister end the secrecy and publicly provide these documents she says exists?

Hon. Ms. Taylor:   I welcome all opportunities to address questions surrounding this matter, and as I have reiterated many times, again and again and again — I’ll repeat it again. Based on the case that came to our office, which was presented to us, I acted in strict accordance with the law, the Motor Vehicles Act, the provision that actually states the Minister of Justice shall grant early release of a vehicle that has been impounded if it was found wrongfully impounded. I did so, and I stay with my position.

Mr. McRobb:   The Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources was happy to be quoted in a government news release endorsing his decision to release $3 million of security to the owners of the defunct Brewery Creek mine. Yesterday he refused to say whether his decision was based on a legal opinion regarding future liability.

Can the minister responsible for mines in the territory tell us what public good was served by refusing to answer that question, like so many others?

Hon. Mr. Lang:   It gives me great pleasure to address the member opposite on our last day in the House. Again, he knows full well what the answer is. The answer is: that is the Minister of Environment’s portfolio. If he would direct his question to the proper minister it could be answered.

Mrs. Peter:   The Minister of Justice, like so many of her colleagues, does not provide answers or information to this side of the House. I would like to give her another opportunity.

Will the minister table the letter she says went to all Yukon First Nations seeking representatives to oversee a Yukon-wide consultation on correctional services and a record of who has been involved in designing the consultation process?

Hon. Ms. Taylor:   I am very proud of the efforts to date by our government. As the member opposite is fully aware, our Premier did sign a memorandum of understanding with Kwanlin Dun First Nation earlier this year committing us to involve all Yukon First Nations in the review, design and evaluation of correctional services in the territory. We have done so. Our government, to this end, is working with Yukon First Nations to develop a public process that will look at just this.

As I stated yesterday to the media and to the member opposite, we have also placed letters to each of the First Nations with a draft work plan, at which time, once the committee has been struck, the work plan has been reviewed, timelines have been reviewed and all has been agreed to among the committee members, then I will be happy to provide the members opposite with the information as requested.

Mr. Fairclough:   Yesterday the Minister of Education said there was a direct link between low academic achievement by First Nations students and high consumption of alcohol. How does the minister expect to achieve positive results by labelling First Nation students with such a negative stereotype?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   I’m inclined to believe today that the members opposite will possibly be the most knowledgeable bunch of citizens in the Yukon Territory after this sitting. I say this because of all the information we have provided them with over the last few weeks.

The member opposite appears to be confused here. As I would state today on the floor of this Legislature, the ones who stereotype are the ones that are sitting on the opposite side. I have done my utmost to prevent that.

Mr. Cardiff:   I have a question for the minister responsible for the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board. How is the public good served by the minister’s refusal to adopt occupational health and safety regulations that were developed through four years of consultation, at great expense, and have the support of stakeholders?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   As I informed the member opposite previously, there is a complete comprehensive review of the Workers’ Compensation Act underway currently. That has been expanded, and funding has been provided to other stakeholders so that this review can be as comprehensive as possible.

That said, the other area is the occupational health and safety regulations, which are part of another piece of legislation. But they do dovetail into workers’ compensation, and they are responsible for the enforcement of this legislation. That said, that review will take place after the conclusion of the WCB act, and we’re very fortunate in having a very capable team in place to conduct the review of the act. We’re hoping that this team can move forward on the review of the OH&S regulations after they have concluded this initial review. We’ll see the results and the fruits of their very capable labour very, very shortly. I don’t want to put timelines around this initiative, but it will take some time.

Ms. Duncan:   I have a question for the Minister of Environment. Will the minister publicly release the results of the investigation into his conflict of interest?

Hon. Mr. Kenyon:   In response to the member opposite, the letter has been shown to the media and one would assume that that does involve the public.

I would like to state for the record, however, that I certainly have never been to an Irving fishing lodge; I’ve never attended an Irving fishing lodge to study salmon; I’ve never flown on a private jet of any description; and, to my knowledge, we’re not planning any fountains in Crestview or Porter Creek North.

I’d also like to include, in closing, that I’m still in difficulty with a passport as the formerly honourable Minister of Environment under the Liberal regime has to date refused to return his passport. So, again, Mr. Speaker, maybe the member opposite has some better information on a return to power and that’s why she also retains hers.

Mrs. Peter:   I was pleased to learn today that the Minister of Environment has had a change of heart regarding one of the excellent recommendations of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board.

Will the minister now guarantee that future appointments to the board will be based on experience and commitment to sound environmental stewardship rather than loyalty to the Yukon Party or its pro-development agenda?

Hon. Mr. Kenyon:   The member opposite certainly brings up the very excellent work of the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board. We do not plan — and I can state that unequivocally — to go along with any political interference, as the leader of the last party suggested by a motion in this House. The members of the board are selected by either the government or by the First Nations. The major criteria for this are the experience of the people, the training of the people and their ability to understand and deal with the issues. Those are always the most important factors, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Hardy:   I’ve asked questions before in regard to the computer use investigation. As a matter of fact, I’ve asked a multitude of questions in that regard. I’d like to go back to a question that I asked the minister previously, and it’s in regard to when the minister admitted that the government’s computer use investigation had spiralled out of control. We all agreed upon that in the House that day. The question I have is when the minister realized that the process was starting to spiral out of control, exactly what did he do about it? What instructions did he give to the Public Service Commission, and what help did he seek from the Premier?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   The member opposite is quite right. He has asked this repeatedly, and I don’t know what this side of the House could do, Mr. Speaker, to get it through to the leader of the official opposition that personnel issues are not discussed on the floor of this House. Now that in itself sounds very, very simple, and I fail to see where the leader is making it so complicated. We will not discuss personnel issues on the floor of this House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Hardy:   Well, isn’t that a very interesting non-answer that we got. This minister continually confuses the issue of what are personnel issues and what are not. He tries to fool the public, and he tries to use that excuse in this Legislature to avoid answering questions, and that is wrong.

That question I just asked was not a personnel question. And we have to remind him that this is the Public Service Commission that he is supposed to be the minister of. A lot of the issues happen to deal with personnel. We are allowed to ask these questions, whether he likes it or not.

During this sitting, my colleagues and I have asked over 110 questions related to the infamous computer use investigation. Ninety-five of these questions did not get answered. Apparently, the buck doesn’t stop at the minister’s desk under the Yukon Party. In fact, the buck doesn’t even slow down. And I have question 111, Mr. Speaker, for the minister responsible for the Public Service Commission: how has the effective operation of government or the public good been served by this minister’s refusal to answer or to accept responsibility for how this investigation was handled?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Well, I guess I would have to stand up on the floor of this Legislature and state that I honestly believe that maybe there is just a difference of opinion here. The member opposite never fails to repeat on the floor of this Legislature that he appears to have the answers and knows everything with regard to this government. Well, I say again today that personnel issues will stay there.

I want to state for the record again that this whole investigation was conducted because there was a breach of the government harassment policy and it was also a violation of the Human Rights Act. So, whether the member opposite would like the public at large to believe that they would have handled everything and shoved it under the table, I believe they would have an obligation to the citizens of this territory to do exactly what this government did. I want to say that the Public Service Commission did an excellent job in conducting this investigation.

Mr. McRobb:   Now, the minister responsible for highways refused to provide information in response to a letter I wrote him back in August regarding highway camp budgets and projects. Instead, he promised to deliver the information in the Legislature this fall.

Well, here we are at the end of the road without that information. Can the minister tell us what public good was served by refusing to answer my information request?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   When we get to my turn in the budget, I will respond.

Mr. Fairclough:   The Minister of Health and Social Services has doused the lights on a few family Christmas trees this year. He will be getting his government paycheque before Christmas, but families on SA won’t. How does this minister’s refusal to follow past practice of releasing the January SA cheques before Christmas show either good fiscal management or basic compassion for families in need at this time of year?

Hon. Mr. Jenkins:   I’m sure the member opposite went back and reviewed what the past practices of previous governments have been, but the only government that has released cheques early was a Yukon Party government. The Liberal government did not; the NDP government did not.

I’ve checked back quite a number of years.

That said, the SA cheques for December are out and they contain an amount of money in there as a small additional supplement for the people for Christmas — for those who are in our social safety net — and the January cheques will be out at the earliest possible opportunity. The December cheques have already been issued, and they do contain a Christmas bonus.

Speaker:   Before the Member for Mount Lorne stands up, we’re at question 13, and it’s my understanding that this is generally a question that goes to a government private member.

Mr. Cardiff:   Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the government for their generosity.

Many constituents, not just in my riding but in several other ridings, are concerned about the willy-nilly release of land through spot land applications and the fact that the government is ignoring the advice of duly elected governments in those areas.

Could the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources answer this question: how is the public good served by the minister ignoring the advice and input of hamlet councils and local advisory boards at the Land Application Review Committee table?

Hon. Mr. Lang:   We have policies in place and we follow those policies, as far as spot land transactions are concerned. So certainly we are considerate of all the levels of government that we work with. We are just proceeding in that fashion.

Ms. Duncan:   My question is for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. When does he intend to pay back in full the more than $100,000 he owes taxpayers?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Surely the third party would have had much more preparation in a set of questions for the last day of the sitting — other than this one. But we all know how the opposition, through their focus on personnel issues, have mired themselves in negativity while this government has focused and worked with Yukoners on building a future for this territory. The opposition has been focused and mired in reconstructing the past.

The solution for the loans is out and public. This is the first government in 15 years plus that has acted on this issue. I take up again the Member for Kluane’s comments about how other governments had looked at this issue and backed off because they were afraid of the political fallout. Well, we’re going to get political fallout. We are not afraid of it. We will not be deflected or deterred from the agenda that Yukoners put their faith in this government in: that is to build a bigger, better and brighter future for the Yukon. That’s what we’re doing.

Mr. McRobb:   I’d like to follow up on the issue of Brewery Creek. Since the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources won’t provide an answer, maybe the Minister of Environment will. Can he indicate whether he has a legal opinion regarding future liability of the mine site and the release of securities? Can he tell us if he has a legal opinion?

Hon. Mr. Kenyon:   As the member has hopefully learned, the release of securities is the purview of the ministry of the Environment, which acts as an enforcement agency on this. One of the things when you look at a mine site and what assurances and securities you must have in place is the track record of the company. We take the track record of every company into account — now that we have control of this since April 1 and devolution — and we determine what securities are necessary. We do not need the most draconian securities for the best companies. Therefore, it is not necessary to have acts, legal opinions and documentation. As you pay a mortgage, you like to see the value of that mortgage reduce as you pay it. No one would pay a mortgage on a house or a chattel loan on the car with the entire amount outstanding until the thing is paid off in full. That is not good business. No one would buy a house under those circumstances. I am suspicious the member opposite didn’t buy his house under those circumstances.

Ms. Duncan:   My question is for the Minister of Community Services. The supervisor in Dawson has been a complete disaster. Will the minister fire him and end this fiasco?

Hon. Mr. Hart:   I guess the chocolate has all dried up.

I repeat that Dawson City has a financial problem — a problem that this government inherited from the previous government and the previous mayor and council. We are awaiting the consultation of the supervisor with mayor and council and his final report. Once we have it, we will react.

Mr. Fairclough:   Mr. Speaker, in rural Alaska, 30 percent of the teaching staff is native. In the Yukon, across the territory, three and a half percent of the teaching staff is First Nations. Why are the YNTEP graduates not being hired in Yukon schools?

Hon. Mr. Edzerza:   Well, Mr. Speaker, for the record, I’d like to correct the member opposite because the YNTEP graduates are given top consideration for teaching jobs, particularly when the jobs are in their home communities. To date, we have had 71 Yukon First Nation people graduate from YNTEP, and I am pleased to stand on the floor of this Legislature and say that many of them are now teaching in Yukon schools. Many more are working for First Nations at Yukon College or teaching outside of the territory. So the member opposite is incorrect in saying that they don’t have jobs. Thank you.

Mr. Hardy:   Well, earlier on, I tabled petitions that had over 391 signatures. In my hand, I have another 53 signatures, which totals 444 signatures. Now, I’m going to ask the question here in regard to this petition. Now, what the petition says at the end — these are people signing it in less than two and a half days. It says, "The undersigned ask the Yukon Legislative Assembly to direct the Premier and Minister of Finance to make them pay or resign their Cabinet positions." It has nothing to do with the past, as this Premier likes to talk about or make excuses about. I will ask this question on behalf of the Yukon Party constituents, since no one else is asking on behalf of them. What other options were looked at in collecting these loans?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Obviously after 15 years of inability to collect these delinquent loans, one would then conclude that many options have been looked at. This government committed to bring forward a solution that brought closure to the issue. There’s a cost to carrying these loans. There are all kinds of issues here, but this government is not going to single people out, unlike the NDP, which is demanding foreclosure on two individuals. One can only assume, then, that they mean foreclosure on the whole portfolio. That’s 67 delinquencies. We’re not going to do that, Mr. Speaker.

The solution is public. It is fair and the two Cabinet members in question do not get the benefits of any renegotiation of any interest hiatus over three years, but their portfolios will go to the private sector in full with all interest accrued.

Mr. Hardy:   That’s interesting, Mr. Speaker. To listen very closely to this Premier, you recognize that we’re not the ones who are singling out these two Cabinet ministers. This Premier just admitted himself, on the floor just a minute ago, that he was the one who singled them out. He singled them out by making a double standard in the second part of his final solution he has been proposing for this. He also singled them out by making them Cabinet ministers and bringing this to the attention of every single person in this territory who finds this an affront.

Mr. Speaker, in just a few short days, we’ve had over 444 Yukon people sign a petition calling on the Premier to make his two delinquent Cabinet ministers either pay up or resign. Of all the complaints we have heard about this government — and there have been many — this issue tops the list. It is a thorn in the side of this government. It is a source of anger for taxpayers and for many people who repay their government loans. It is an embarrassment for all elected people.

Will the Premier scrap the ineffective policy he brought forward last week and bring in a policy that requires his two colleagues to pay up or get out of Cabinet?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I would urge the member to calm down a little. The righteous indignation is certainly getting through. We understand the NDP’s position.

Let me be clear. This government places great value in the opinions and the views of Yukoners and we will continue to do so. This government has also brought forward a solution. This solution is a fair one. It’s the one that will bring closure to a long-standing issue. We are moving forward. Our government’s focus is on issues very important to Yukoners, such as the economy. We are not going to reconstruct the past; we are going to build a future. That’s why this government is here. We will continue to focus on that.

If the members opposite want to remain mired in negativity, that’s their choice, but at the end of the day, the measurement will be on what we deliver. There are two individuals in this government in Cabinet who are contributing a great deal of value in this area. It is their talent, their skill sets and their contribution that is a part of success for the future.

Speaker:   The time for Question Period has now lapsed.

Some Hon. Member:   (Inaudible)

Speaker:   My apologies. First supplementary.

Mr. Hardy:   That’s all right. There have been a lot of questions today.

If the Premier would listen closely, what he’d be hearing in my voice is the sound of Yukon people very indignant about the actions of the Yukon Party government, but obviously he doesn’t put any value in that.

Now, the trouble with the Premier’s collection proposal is that there is no guarantee whatsoever that the two ministers will ever repay a dime. Constituents of every riding in the territory are telling their MLAs that they want these ministers to pay up.

What is shocking is that there are 12 Yukon Party MLAs across the way who are trying to defend this $400,000 Christmas gift the Premier is proposing as his permanent resolution to the loans issue. Is the Premier prepared to allow his MLAs to break rank on this issue, or will all of his MLAs — or will any of his MLAs — have the courage to stand up and tell the Premier what their constituents are demanding: that these ministers should pay up or move out?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Again, I point out something. The value of opinions and views of Yukoners is very much recognized by this government. I think the member opposite is going a little far with his assumptions. There is a lot of work to do here. There is a six-month period where delinquent loans and the individuals or corporate entities involved in those delinquencies can come forward to negotiate terms, conditions and interest to try to get to a manageable portfolio or loan, if you will.

Also, they are also being provided a three-year hiatus on any interest, another important factor. The two members in Cabinet do not have that benefit. Their portfolios go forward in full. The ultimate point here is that the government has made a decision to put this portfolio into the private sector. As far as demanding that these two ministers remove themselves from Cabinet, on balance, that’s not going to happen, given the contribution they are making to this territory and its future.

Mr. Hardy:   Well, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that the public would sure love to see that contribution in the cash that they give back to this territory, that they took away. I would also challenge the Premier on the floor today to show me the public that supports this cash giveaway. Show me. There are a lot of flaws in the Premier’s so-called final solution. It does nothing to recognize that many, many conscientious Yukon people, businesses and non-profit organizations live up to their obligations and pay their loans. By turning over the loan files to private sector collection, there is also absolutely no guarantee that the Yukon businesses won’t end up having to file for bankruptcy or face major financial hardship.

Will the Premier withdraw this badly flawed policy and come back with something that will work for the best of all Yukoners?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   You know, Mr. Speaker, this member, the leader of the official opposition, is making some tall assumptions with absolutely no reflection on what may transpire over the next six months.

Speaker:   The intimation is that the leader of the official opposition is misleading, and I would ask the Premier to withdraw that, please.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw that, but opinions sometimes do not reflect the facts. So let me put it that way. And we are going to continue with this solution. We are getting out of the loans business — period. We applaud and commend every Yukoner, every corporation, every company that repaid their loan, but when you look at the delinquencies here and the time expired, there is evidence that there are many other problems with this portfolio, and I would say to the members opposite: is it their intention to go to Mayo and foreclose on the $400,000 plus owed there, when that loan was given out with the same intention?

There’s nothing in this solution that is requiring foreclosure. There’s everything here to make this portfolio manageable for those delinquent. They are delinquent for a reason: they cannot pay. And for this issue to come to closure, we must find a way to ensure that they can somehow manage this issue. And the two members in Cabinet do not get those benefits. Their portfolios go forward in full, with all interest accrued.

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

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

Chair:   Order please. Committee of the Whole will now come to order. The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 7, Second Appropriation Act, 2003-04.

I understand we’re going into the Economic Development department. Before we begin, do members wish a recess?

Some Hon. Members:  Agreed.

Chair:   We’ll rise for a 15-minute recess.

Chair:   Order please. Committee of the Whole will now come to order. The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 7, Second Appropriation Act, 2003-04.

Chair:   At this time we will move on to Vote 7, Department of Economic Development. Mr. Fentie.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, along with a number of other commitments in the first year of this government’s office — which would include a stand-alone Department of Tourism, the reinstatement of the Women’s Directorate — we are now, with this supplementary budget, bringing to fruition the creation of the new Department of Economic Development. We are very pleased with the process that has evolved to date. It began with the choosing of a deputy minister, which was very much involved with stakeholders, and it has continued on in creating the structure of this department, which I’d like to go over briefly.

The new Department of Economic Development, I must say at the start, is a smaller department. It is some half the size — 50 percent of the size of the original department in the Yukon government.

It has a new focus, a new purpose and a new direction, and that begins with its structure. It has five main pillars within its structure, which include investment, trade and business development; strategic industries development; regional economic development; policy, planning and research; and, of course, corporate services. Now let me just break down briefly each of these pillars.

Number one, the investment trade and business development portion or structure of the department is there to identify and attract investors to the Yukon. That’s a critical element that is required in this territory — creating investment certainty and then attracting those investors to the territory. Promoting the Yukon as an attractive and strategic place to do business is an obvious economic tool that is a necessity. We will assist Yukon businesses to export and expand markets — part of investment and trade is to do exactly that. In doing so, we create jobs and benefits for Yukoners.

We will establish and maintain a Yukon presence in priority markets, to identify and develop sources of investment capital, which is certainly something that is required in building our investment pool here in the territory, and to facilitate new and existing SMEs to develop and expand.

Now, all these areas within this component of the department are focused and strategic, as is the next one: strategic industries will promote the development of Yukon’s strategic and emerging industry sectors to work in partnership with industry and government to establish common priorities and plans for growth and expansion. And part of this is to ensure that Economic Development is the quarterback within the Yukon government, to make sure that other departments that have an impact or are related to Economic Development are heading in the same direction — to identify strategic opportunities for business projects to benefit Yukon’s economy, promote and work with stakeholders and partners to make projects happen and to facilitate closure by supporting stakeholders through government policy and approval processes.

All of these things are very strategic and it’s a new approach to the Department of Economic Development.

Another vital area is regional economic development. Given the diversity in this territory and the differences, region by region, this is a very significant step in the structure of this department. It will serve as the government’s focal point, Mr. Chair, for First Nation economic development and partnership, and that’s key to our commitments and agenda — work with First Nation business partners in the economic development of the territory to the mutual benefit of all Yukoners, consistent with what it is we want to do in developing our economy in partnership with First Nations.

Another is to work with partners in initiating and implementing regional economic plans, work with communities and community groups to help facilitate projects with sustainable economic benefits, and to proactively administer the community development fund, which is a mechanism or vehicle to help short-term stimulus.

The other areas are more mechanical, if you will, or operational in policy, planning and research. And, of course, corporate services is also another area of administrative capacity.

In the policy planning area, we will develop policies, strategies, programs and legislative instruments to support sustainable and responsible economic development. We will monitor and evaluate economic trends, issues and opportunities affecting the Yukon and provide information, analysis and advice to decision makers to ensure balanced and considered economic actions. Working closely with other governments is something that we’ve already embarked on with our cooperation accords, whether it be national, regional, First Nation municipal. We want to cooperatively achieve Yukon benefits and provide relevant and reliable economic research and analysis to support broader understanding of the Yukon economy. I think that one particular part of this structure of the department is even as important as strategic planning, because understanding the Yukon economy is a prerequisite to building it.

Corporate services will just provide support services to the Department of Economic Development branches including managing financial and human resources — which is a required administrative function. There will be provision of technical advice and assistance as well as maintenance of records and a resource centre for the department. And of course one of the most important vehicles to our contracting community is the administration of the business incentive program. All these areas have been developed with a great deal of stakeholder input and a lot of thought. We are pleased that we are now poised to go to work on the Yukon economy, although, even with the limited resources available to it, the department has done a number of things already.

Mr. Chair, in this budget we are providing and fully resourcing the Department of Economic Development. I would commend the officials in this department for carrying out their duties as they have until we got the supplementary budget and fully resourced the department.

And I want to introduce some of the detail in this area, Mr. Chair. The new Department of Economic Development, as you know and we all know in this House, began with a budget of $1. But that’s no longer the case. In order to fulfill this government’s commitment to develop a stand-alone Department of Economic Development, we now have a supplementary budget of $2.844 million operations and maintenance dollars and $7,956,000 in capital expenditures. Now, Mr. Chair, 72 percent of both the operating and capital budgets are being transferred from other departments — in other words, from within existing resources that were retransferred back into this department. They are being revoted from the 2002-03 budget or recovered from the federal government.

In order to build the Department of Economic Development, we have repatriated trade and investment from Tourism and Culture, the community development fund from Community Services, and the business incentive program from Department of Highways and Public Works, and also economic policy and research from Finance and Tourism. We have added additional areas that were not in the old Economic Development department — strategic industries and regional economic development and the Film commission, for example — to provide a new focus on regional economic development and new and emerging strategic sectors.

But only 28 percent of this supplementary budget is new money, and I think that shows exactly how much work was being done by officials with that $1.

A large portion of the new resources, some $825,000, will be committed to the film industry through the film incentive fund. This is one of the economic sectors we anticipate will take off and provide sustainable, creative work for Yukon people. Another large portion, some $862,000, has been added to the business incentive policy to cover our commitments under that policy. I am pleased that these funds are required as a direct result of putting Yukoners to work.

Using the resources in this supplementary budget wisely, the department will work to develop a strong, stable economy. It is one of the smallest departments in the Yukon government today. Economic Development will work toward a sustainable and diverse economy for this territory and we plan to do this through partnerships, innovation and native entrepreneurial spirit of the Yukon.

Investment, trade and business development — and as a step toward the development of a strong private sector, the investment, trade and business development program, with an O&M budget of $1,236,000, will obviously deliver on elements that I mentioned previously. And with a capital expenditure of $1,624,000, this program will support the film industry, develop the technology sector and undertake industry research and provide microloans. The majority of the resources of this program have been previously debated in last year’s budget and you will also note a corresponding decrease in the supplementary budget of Tourism and Culture due to the transfer of this program to the Department of Economic Development.

In regional economic development, we know what the focus is and what this area will do. There is $106,000 for operating and maintenance and $4,079,000 in capital to carry out its duties and responsibilities within the department.

For strategic industries development, we have an operating budget of $200,000 and also $200,000 in capital. This is an essential branch, and I will just repeat that it will promote the development of Yukon strategic and emerging industry sectors, work in partnership within industry and government to establish common priorities and plans for growth and expansion, identify strategic opportunities for business projects that will benefit Yukon’s economy, and facilitate the completion of projects by helping stakeholders through governmental policy and approval processes.

The staff of strategic industries development will be working with partners and stakeholders in non-renewable industries, renewable industries, cultural industries, communication and information technologies and an innovation to make good projects happen.

When it comes to policy, planning and research, Mr. Chair, there will be $763,000 for O&M and also, through NGO recoveries, some $92,000 of federal funding. Here, too, you can see a corresponding decrease in the Finance and Tourism supplementaries for the resources transferred over to the department. Corporate services, which is a major administrative function — the operating budget for this branch is $539,000, while capital is $1,853,000, which includes the business incentive policy resource, totalling some $1,562,000.

This policy has long been considered an aid to Yukon industry and will receive these resources in order to meet the obligations of the policy to business and industry when putting Yukoners to work.

Mr. Chair, these programs and projects, together with new projects and programs under development for introduction in the next fiscal year’s budget, will provide Yukoners with a good solid base on which to build the economy, rather than the band-aid and scatter-gun approach we have previously experienced. I’m convinced that with the excellent people we have in the department and those we will add to the team, and with the resources in this supplementary budget, we will accomplish what others have not been able to accomplish in the past with the Yukon economy.

It comes down to vision and a plan — a plan that, in the first year of our office, has been to focus on changing the spending habits of government and policy in order to get the territory heading in a new direction.

It is a direction that would lessen our dependence on government and the southern taxpayer and increase the involvement of the private sector in the Yukon’s economy.

Let us just recap. The plan and the vision begins with our relationship with First Nations, full partnership in economic development and sharing in the burdens of decisions — but in sharing in the benefits that accrue from those decisions. In the creation of a stand-alone Department of Tourism and also the creation of the Department of Economic Development, we have now two departments focused in strategic areas for the economy of this territory and certainly for the future of this territory in building that economy. It’s about fiscal management by increasing the surplus by almost $50 million this first year of office. It’s about finding more room under the surplus/deficit cap, such as an amendment to the TPA, to be able to engage the private sector and other governments to increase the spending power in this territory.

Cash flow is the most important element of any economic engine. Without it, there is no fuel. Without fuel, there is no engine that can run. We intend to increase the spending power in this territory to make every possible economic engine available to us get up and running. That is much of what the Department of Economic Development will be doing.

There is great potential in this territory. There is a bright future. There are many opportunities. It’s up to us to seize those opportunities and advance strategic areas of economic development — first to lay the groundwork in those developments through responsible and sustainable policies and direction, to ensure that we get the private sector back into the territory by providing a secure and comfortable investment climate, increasing their participation in economic growth, which is another vital element that is required, and by continuing to focus in on our asset bases such as resources, to build on the talents and the uniqueness and the diversity of our citizens, who have a great deal to contribute to the development of the Yukon economy.

It’s to forge ahead with that full economic partnership for First Nations in this territory, who also have a tremendous amount to contribute to the Yukon economy, and it’s time that their involvement and contribution be made and brought front and centre to this particular area. Also, Mr. Chair, it’s to continue working within government to ensure that focuses and impediments and other issues that have long been a difficult, unmanageable situation when it comes to economic development, such as the Yukon protected areas strategy, are addressed. There is no question that there are a number of things we can do and that is why, along with the structure of this department, we have commenced a regulatory review committee, which is to address many of these things in many of the areas that will help us create the investment climate we seek.

Mr. Chair, I am very, very pleased to commend this supplementary budget for this department to the House. It’s a new beginning; it’s a new direction. It has vision. It has a plan. It has a strategic structure. It is certainly going to do some good works for this territory when it comes to the economy. With that, I would like to hear from the members opposite, who have not asked one question this sitting about the economy, what they have to offer and what is the most important issue for Yukoners.

Mr. McRobb:   I’d like to thank the Premier for the long speech, but it’s not as if we have time available today to accommodate such long speeches, and I would urge him to shorten up on the responses or this will be the last department dealt with in this sitting.

Mr. Chair, I believe the Premier misspoke by saying there were no questions related to economic development in this sitting. I seem to recall asking at least one. Perhaps he was on one of his many trips outside the territory at the time.

I would like to commend the Premier for following through on creating a stand-alone Department of Economic Development, because it’s something that we in the official opposition support. It’s something that we had structured when in government up to the year 2000. It was something that was changed under the previous government and, of course, we did not support that approach, so we welcome the stand-alone department.

However, Mr. Chair, we do not support the long period of inactivity within this department and how it has affected the Yukon economy in the past year. There has been virtually very little on-the-ground progress out of the Department of Economic Development. It finally has a Web site up and running; it’s good to see it has a deputy minister, but we’re well past the one-year mark of this government being in power, and this is very short in terms of production.

As well, about a month or so ago, the government announced it would be embarking on an economic development strategy. It was also strange, Mr. Chair, to see a government only starting in year two to develop a strategy, and it raises the question: at what point will we be seeing action?

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to conclude that we might see action in year three or four of the term of this government. It leaves very little time to assess the action before the next election. Mr. Chair, that raises questions about the quality of actions this government intends to take. We saw it remove the accountability standards that were implemented by the previous government, as a first order of business in the spring. We have to ask the question: where are the performance standards within this department? We will be getting to that, and I expect an answer to that question from the Premier.

I would also like to put on the record our objection to the refusal by the Yukon Party government to provide a briefing for this department. We felt there were sufficient grounds to justify a briefing because it was a new department. And in order for the opposition parties to become familiar with the department, a briefing certainly would have been helpful.

On the record on many previous occasions, the government has offered briefings if so desired. We expressed a desire repeatedly, day after day, for this briefing but we were turned down by the government House leader, the Member for Klondike. It raises the question: does this government really want to be held accountable by raising the level of knowledge in this House? Obviously the answer is no. It has a problem with that. And that is wrong.

We’ve seen very little action in terms of productivity coming from this department. We’ve heard lots of promises and grandiose statements out of the Premier, primarily, in the past year or so. One of them was the promise of a pan-northern economic development agreement to the tourism roundup that occurred more than a full year ago. It was November 2002 at the tourism roundup when he told everybody to expect this. We haven’t heard much on it lately. It raises questions as to what resources are available to use as tools to help develop our economy. And time permitting, we hope to find out more about that question and others this afternoon in the limited time that we do have available.

This department, if it is assigned to be the starter for the economic engine of the territory and the government can provide the fuel through its budgets, then we’re anxious to see just how powerful an engine this department really has, what it has got for spark plugs, and so on — maybe take a look at the transmission to make sure that maybe reverse gear isn’t the biggest gear in this vehicle.

People have expressed to me concerns about having a large department that produces a lot of paper but very little action. I know the Premier, when he sat with our party, was always concerned about that and I don’t think that he has lost that principle, Mr. Chair, and he is still concerned about that. Since he is the minister responsible for this department, I would be interested to see how he has remedied that concern.

In addition, there are a number of big-ticket items on the radar screen. There is the potential for the Alaska Highway natural gas pipeline. There is potential for a railroad. I know that is designated within the Highways and Public Works department; however, Economic Development has a strong role to play as well.

There are initiatives like the trade and investment strategy. I asked the Premier in the spring sitting what he is doing to reintroduce that strategy. We have heard very little about it and I’m looking forward to some more information today on that particular program.

We have seen economic outlook after economic outlook inform us of nothing much more optimistic than gloom and doom on the near-term horizon. Yukoners are looking for something to be optimistic about to keep them living in the territory under tough economic times and they do need hope to stay because, for a lot of people, they are having trouble putting food on the table and there is always the lure of a better job outside the territory, or even a job at all.

I know from communities in my riding, people I’ve talked to have moved out and are in the process of moving to places like Fort McMurray and the oil patch in search of that job and that better paying job.

Even highway construction workers have moved out in the past few months because of the lack of news about Shakwak funding. We know that there was some funding announced for Shakwak that amounted to about half the normal year’s funding, and combined with leftovers in the account, we might have a close-to-normal expected year. That should employ several dozen Yukoners, but the news was slow coming out. This should be a concern to this department, because it deals with the job stats and the employment figures. And indeed, if it is tasked with the immense job of rebuilding the territory’s economy, then certainly certainty and hope are all part of the mix. It was disappointing to not have the Premier nudge the Highways minister to come out and announce something a little sooner to help people stay in our territory. You may recall, instead, the announcement came from the leader of the third party. So obviously this department isn’t fine tuned yet, and that’s understandable, since it’s new. But at the same time, the political level must assume the leadership necessary to provide a level of confidence to Yukoners to keep them here. There are a number of other issues and so on to do with this department, and we’ll get into some questions and answers very quickly.

I’d like to start with the pan-northern economic development agreement. Can the minister update us on that, please?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I will certainly update the Member for Kluane but, first, I want to point out some of the faulty and flawed determinations that the member is making. First off, when it comes to the Shakwak, he should well know that the Department of Economic Development does not construct highways. We have a Department of Highways and Public Works. That’s issue number one. Secondly, we don’t build highways in the wintertime. They’re done in the spring, summer and fall. Thirdly, a great deal of work was done on that because the previous government had failed to address the Shakwak issue at all. This government got an extra $7.8 million U.S. to top up the remaining monies in the Shakwak fund for the coming construction season, to some $18 million plus Canadian that will be available.

The member should also know that, given the fact they had an embargoed briefing on the budget in the very first couple of days of the sitting and have had weeks to critique and go over the budget, they would see throughout the budget the monies that are being expended on highway engineering to increase our ability to enhance road construction in this territory. That’s all in the budget.

Mr. Chair, the member also made mention of trade and investment. Again given the fact that the member has had for weeks, beginning with an embargoed copy of the budget and a briefing on the budget during that period — he should by now have picked up the fact that the Department of Economic Development has allocated $1,236,000 toward the investment trade and business development section of the department.

The member also made mention that nothing has been happening. Well, I beg to differ, Mr. Chair. All you have to do is look at structure and the processes that have taken place, at the amount of work that the department has been doing already through the community development fund and the approval of applications — some $3.3 million in circulation in this territory — and then the amount of work that was contributed to the business case, which is much about what the pan-northern economic development arrangement is all about.

We do not control processes in Ottawa. They have changed the Prime Minister and they’ve changed Cabinet; however, we have talked about this earlier in the sitting — the extensive work and detail that has gone into the business case.

So, to answer the member’s question, clearly it’s in the business case — the need for an economic development arrangement. As was mentioned on the floor of this House earlier this sitting, not only are we doing this Yukon-specific, we are also working in conjunction with our partners to the east, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, so that we make a collaborative presentation to Ottawa, because much of the challenges and the issues that we must deal with in the Yukon are very similar to the other territories north of 60.

So a great deal of work has been done. I am very pleased with the business case. I think it is certainly going to assist us in delivering to the federal government a clear understanding of the situation we are in. Unlike other regions in this country, Yukon does not have the benefit of an economic arrangement with Ottawa, so we will continue to pursue that. There has been a great deal of work already done by the department and we will carry on from there.

Mr. McRobb:   Well, I should have known. The Premier, through all that, failed to answer the question, which was about the pan-northern economic development agreement and, instead, chose to argue some points on other matters.

Mr. Chair, as I pointed out, there’s no time for such arguments, but I will respond briefly to a couple of matters. One, Shakwak: I acknowledged it was in the Department of Highways and Public Works; however, I connected it to this department through the need for government to bring some certainty to Yukoners, some confidence to Yukoners that there was a job at the end of the winter waiting for them and so on. Obviously he wasn’t listening. He also added that highways aren’t built in the winter. Mr. Chair, what’s the relevance of that?

The announcement was needed at the end of this summer to keep people here throughout the winter in order for them to be here during next year’s construction season. And finally, on Shakwak, he pointed out again that the Liberals did nothing to lobby for Shakwak. I’ve heard the Premier say that a few times in the media and probably in here, too. It’s well on the record. But at a briefing in the spring, I asked department officials for all correspondence on lobby efforts and I was provided with letters that were authored by the previous government as well as letters that were authored by this government at the time. And you know what? The letters were virtually identical, except for the signatures at the bottom.

So let’s be fair about what actually happened. Let’s not try to rewrite history. The fact is this government did about the same as the previous government.

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

Speaker:   Order please. Mr. Cathers, on a point of order.

Mr. Cathers:   I believe the term "rewriting history" has already been ruled out of order.

Chair:   Order please. It’s important to remember that the Standing Orders must be taken in the context of the situation. On occasion, there have been words or phrases that have been ruled out of order that would be appropriate to use. It depends on the context of the situation and how it is delivered.

Mr. McRobb:   Obviously we touch a nerve when this government is exposed to the truth. I believe that is still in order, in that context. When the government is exposed to the truth, obviously it touches a nerve. And to be fair to the previous government, I have seen the letters, and if the Premier wants, I will table the letters. Obviously I can’t do it in any additional date of this sitting, but I will send them to the minister if he wants. Just let me know, and I will send you the letters from the previous governments, which are virtually identical to the ones sent by this government. Let’s end the rhetoric about blaming the previous government. It’s time for this government to stand up on its own record and do the responsible thing and start to produce, instead of pointing the finger at governments past.

The Premier argues against our need for the briefing by saying we had the embargoed budget and so on and so forth. Well, so what? The embargoed budget for this department contains three pages of numbers, and it’s full of white space, so there is very little information, and it doesn’t answer key questions that we would pose to officials from the department in a briefing. And the Premier knows that, Mr. Chair.

I would urge him to take the high road on this matter and every other matter.

Finally, he questioned my concern about the trade and investment fund that I highlighted in my response, by indicating the funds available in the department for investment, trade and business development.

However, there is a difference, Mr. Chair. I asked about the trade and investment fund, not about the line item as worded. They are two completely different things.

Now, I know the Premier knows what I am talking about because it has been an issue in years past. The previous government cancelled the trade and investment fund and sat on a report that proved its viability and worth to Yukoners, and I know that it motivated the opposition members of the day to ask the government to reintroduce it. It is rather disappointing to see that the government hasn’t reintroduced the trade and investment fund or a similar program with similar objectives in the one year plus that it has been in government. This is wasting time. Had this fund been in force, it presumably would have helped Yukoners to either establish or expand their businesses. That’s what the territory needs to grow the economy. We have to think about people with their business ideas and how to help them get established or expand.

So let’s try one more time on the pan-northern economic development agreement, asking for an update to see if we get an answer this time.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, Mr. Chair, I can see this will be a debate of pure nonsense. I did answer the question. I informed the member opposite that the Department of Economic Development has contributed a great deal to the business case being brought forward to Ottawa, which is inclusive of the need for an economic development arrangement with the federal government. Unlike every other jurisdiction in the country, the Yukon does not have one. That was the answer. Unfortunately, what we’re doing here is somewhat mystic, in my estimation. Furthermore, Mr. Chair, I don’t see much point in debating with the Member for Kluane on the economy, because it’s obviously not going to go anywhere. There has to be a fundamental understanding of what an economy is, what’s required to address the problems in it. You can’t be a proponent of protected areas strategies and burning more diesel to keep the level of a lake higher under an existing licence, opposing a forest industry in a region, attacking the mining industry, as the Member for Kluane has done when it comes to a mining company that has just recently entered into a partnership in the Yukon — vehemently opposing and attacking the private sector as an unwelcome component of our economy in this territory. And the list goes on and on and on. It’s impossible to be able to try to engage with the Member for Kluane in the debate on the economy because of the member’s position. It’s all anti-economic development. It’s not for economic development; it doesn’t support economic development. It’s against economic development.

It’s a vision and a view of the Yukon: total dependency on government and on the southern taxpayer contributing 100 percent to the survival of this territory. It’s about dealing with areas that have absolutely no potential for economic development. It’s about much bluster and talk but very little action; unlike this government, which has already shown clearly that it is action-oriented by making moves and decisions in a timely manner that have already helped the situation we’re in.

It’s no small feat to stand up and say to the public that the Yukon protected areas strategy was flawed, that it was an impediment to investment. In doing so, we have strengthened our relationship with the mining industry — an industry that the Member for Kluane does not like and does not want in the territory and has made no bones about saying publicly and in this House and everywhere else that he has no use whatsoever for the mining industry . And the member’s party does not want the mining industry here in this territory. They’ll do everything possible to chase them away; recent attacks, as I pointed out, are certainly part of that.

As far as investment, trade and business development, there is $1,236,000 in the budget now, the supplementary budget, and it covers a wide range, including the microloan program which, by the way, before the member gets up and says I thought the government was out of the loans business, I will inform the member that the money is booked in Dana Naye Ventures. It’s not booked in the government, so it’s a financial institution. It’s for industry research, technology and innovation, technology partnerships, community access, film incentive — a growing sector of our economy — infrastructure fund, promotion program, and the list goes on and on.

Look at the regional economic development and the $4 million in the community development fund — that is stimulus that in the short term is so desperately needed, especially in communities.

When you think about it, we are here to debate a supplementary budget on the structure of the Department of Economic Development. The member opposite takes issue with the fact that it took a year. For years, the Yukon’s economy has been dismantled and the previous government did, as part of dismantling the economy, eradicate the Department of Economic Development out of government. We had a lot of work to do to go through this whole process and evolve to the point where we could recoup much of what was dispersed among other government departments and restructure this department, give it a new structure, a new vision, a new focus, and away we go.

Nothing here that I can say is going to be accepted by the Member for Kluane. It’s quite simple: the Member for Kluane does not support economic development; we on this side of the House are pro-economic development; therefore, we will have a failure to communicate. That’s probably what this debate is going to be about.

Mr. McRobb:   Well, isn’t that interesting that the Premier stands up and refuses to focus his answers and instead wastes more time in this Legislature contriving personal attacks that are completely wrong in his assessment both of me and my party. This is the Premier of the territory who chooses to launch personal attacks rather than answer the questions. That is a disgrace and we are getting absolutely nowhere with him or his government and I am embarrassed to be in here, to be subjected to this. It’s not right, it’s not fair and it’s not accountable.

What we have to do is do something about these rules of fixed sitting days, because things in here have deteriorated from bad to worse.

With that, I have no further questions, because it won’t do any good.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I just have a couple of questions for the minister responsible for the Department of Economic Development. I’d like to start by addressing the community development fund. The fund was transferred to Economic Development and I would just like to ask if there was a rationale paper developed for this or if it was straightforward that the granting institutions were to be transferred to Economic Development. What was the rationale, is the short question; was there one prepared?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Mr. Chair, as I pointed out and as the Member for Kluane verified, there is no economic vision or even desire with the official opposition. As far as the community development fund, the rationale was that the community development fund is a vehicle or a mechanism to provide a short-term stimulus, which is much more of a focus for economic development, especially when it comes to the regional needs that we want to try to address out there in the Yukon. I think the member and I can agree that across this territory there are a number of differences and diversities in regions that have different capacities. Let’s just look at the urban centre of Whitehorse, what it can generate in stimuli, short-, medium- and long-term, and then other communities outside of Whitehorse. So it had a focus in that area, which provided the rationale to move the fund itself into the Department of Economic Development under the regional development section of the department.

Ms. Duncan:   I’d like to address two issues concerning the community development fund with the minister — one that has been brought to his attention in writing and one that I have brought to the attention of the Member for Pelly-Nisutlin. That is the difficulty around a community development fund application being filed and contracts or tenders being let and then the tenders are completed by businesses to fulfill the group’s community development fund application and then, lo and behold, the tenders come in far above what the applications have been approved for.

So it’s a tendering issue, but it’s not. It’s a contract administration issue, but it’s not. It’s a community development fund issue, in part, and it’s not. It’s one of the wrinkles, if you will, in the community development fund. So I’d like to ask the minister: is he aware? Not every piece of correspondence may have been brought to his attention. Is he aware that there are contractors out there who are experiencing difficulties with the application of the community development fund, and is there any move or appetite on the part of the government to look at this particular issue?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, Mr. Chair, we do have a process in place — which doesn’t include me — that reviews applications and advances the applications accordingly. It’s a technical review committee. I do not sit on it. Of course I am aware that there are probably always problems in government initiatives and mechanisms and so on and so forth. However, the community development fund has a clear set of eligibility requirements. These requirements are followed. When it comes to the issue of contractors, I would assume that this kind of thing can happen. The applications themselves are approved according to the budget submitted. Given that fact, it would be difficult for the government to anticipate that there may be some problem ahead, though I would share in the member’s view that this can become quite difficult. The one thing that I see here — should this be happening in more than just isolated cases — is that it is creating a problem in getting stimulus out into the public, which obviously is one of the number one purposes of the community development fund — to get stimulus or money flowing out into the public, especially the communities.

I’m sure that the department officials are listening and will look into this matter if it’s becoming a situation that is more than, as I said, just an isolated incident but is starting to become the norm. That’s about all I can do for the member today.

Ms. Duncan:   Perhaps when the minister stands on his feet again what he could commit to is that there is some kind of an appeal process for groups to deal with. It’s not unheard of for a CDF group — and I can think of an instance where this happened — to get the funding, finish the project and find there was an overexpenditure. So they came back to the CDF committee and said, "Look, this went over what we thought it was going to, can we have the additional money?" It’s kind of like an enhanced application. So if there is a way to do that, perhaps that would bring some comfort. I do believe it is more than one isolated incident.

The other question I have for the minister with respect to the CDF is, although the minister stated there is a technical review committee, perhaps he could start by answering this: is there still a member of the public involved in that technical review committee? Is that appointment still valid?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Yes, there is a member involved. And on the other point the member made, any applicant can reapply. So there is a way to address this from an applicant’s side of the equation. For example, if a tendering process shows that the budget submitted is short of what it would be in terms of the cost of the overall contract, then an applicant can just reapply, albeit there would be a requirement to meet the next intake dates. As I understand, they are set up on a regular basis throughout the year. There are intake dates that are, I guess, a closure point to where all applications up to that point are then addressed.

Beyond that, Mr. Chair, there is the public person involved in the technical review committee.

Ms. Duncan:   Would the minister explain why some groups seem to be transferred to the head of the line automatically for community development fund? For example, there was the letter during the election campaign for the Dawson City Arts Society and, just recently, the Minister of Health said that an application from a particular group would be well-received by the community development fund. Rather than one line, one door for everyone and equal treatment before the technical review committee, there seems to be a special lineup. Would the minister explain that, please?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, I’d explain it if it was the case, but it’s not. There is no special lineup. It’s not like The Price is Right, where you pick a door. There’s one door.

Some Hon. Member:   (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, at least we have friends. The member opposite said, "Pick your friends." Sorry, I had to say that.

We’re not picking our friends at all. There’s a technical review committee that will review all applications and weigh them based on eligibility.

Ms. Duncan:   That’s rather hollow, in light of the evidence. The fact is that there is a group that had a written commitment for community development fund money prior to the election. The fact is the Minister of Health’s comments are on the public record: "I’m sure an application from this group would be well-received." Special lineup for special friends.

The Film Commission has been transferred, taken rather summarily from the Department of Tourism and transferred into Economic Development; however, a commissioner has not been appointed. Would the minister explain what the holdup is? Why is there no film commissioner in place?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   First, I am going to apologize for the statement I made to the member opposite. It was inappropriate and I extend my apologies to the leader of the third party. I want to put on the record: there is no special treatment for anyone when it comes to the process in weighing and reviewing applications for the community development fund. I don’t know how else I can put this for the member. The member may not agree with or believe that, but that is the case. There are criteria and everything is weighed based on that.

As far as the film section of this department goes, we all know that the industry itself applauded the recognition by government that the film industry is an economic lever for this territory. In transferring it into the Department of Economic Development, we have given it a position in government that focuses on that aspect. We have provided it monies now for incentives to hopefully build industry in the Yukon. As far as a commissioner, we are working with a steering committee on this issue, and there will be a process that results in the appointment, if you will, of a commissioner, at the end of that process.

Ms. Duncan:   Am I to gather from what the minister just said that we are not looking, then, at a Public Service Commission type of staffing, but we are looking at more like the deputy minister type of staffing where there was a private sector panel and so on, which other governments — I think most, if not all other governments — have employed that process for staffing deputy ministers? Is he looking at that kind of a process, or is it a Public Service Commission process? I am not sure by his answer what type of process he is talking about.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   First off, Mr. Chair, the steering committee, which is comprised of film, sound, arts — those representatives, those stakeholders. And its process that it will undertake is similar to that of a DM, choosing a deputy minister.

Ms. Duncan:   I appreciate that clarification from the minister. Has this process started? Have we advertised for the position? Are we conducting interviews? What I’m looking for from the minister is a date when he anticipates this appointment might be made.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Mr. Chair, the job description has been approved. The advertisements will start January 1.

Ms. Duncan:   Outside of the territory?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Both internally and nationally.

Ms. Duncan:   I appreciate that information. So we may be looking at a potential start date, interview date, in the early spring?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I would anticipate, Mr. Chair, if all goes well and we have acceptable applicants come forward, that we could see, in the early spring, a commissioner in place.

Ms. Duncan:   Just at this point, there isn’t a film commissioner in place, but other provinces — and chiefly the provinces and our territory — have done some innovative work with film commissions. It has been certainly an economic generator, usually housed with the Department of Tourism and Culture in other provinces. Are there any specific projects anticipated at this time for the Film Commission — i.e., a sound stage such as in Saskatchewan or studio facilities? Are there any of these ideas that are in the works already, or are we going to await the arrival and appointment of a film commissioner before examining any other specific initiatives?

Hon. Mr. Fentie: I think that the duties and responsibilities of the commissioner would be to look at all of these areas. Our purpose right now is to provide resources to the industry as it exists today in the Yukon to try to attract more investment. We’ve been successful in some areas and we’re pleased with things like the National Film Board and other connections now, and we want to build on that but obviously we need a commissioner. We’re going to go through the process, put that person in place and they would be looking into all of these different areas and ideas. Most importantly, much of this will come from the stakeholders themselves, who have had a great deal of input to date and who will always be very much involved in building the film industry in the Yukon.

Ms. Duncan:   The specific directed question is: are there any specific projects on the table right now? Yes or no would suffice.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:  Yes, there are, and in a year we’ve had over a dozen projects in the Yukon specific to the film industry.

Ms. Duncan:   Okay. Thank you. That wasn’t quite the answer I was looking for but I will leave that for now. The economic development strategy was similar to the taking action committee that was in place when the government took office. The government has talked about reactivating the committee, calling it something else, with new appointments. Have any meetings been held and would the minister provide copies of the minutes of those meetings?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   The economic strategy development consultation process is comprised of 13 stakeholders who are involved to a great degree in planning the strategy for the department and the development of the economy in this territory.

As far as the minutes or information, because in many cases these are private sector individuals and other representatives, such as labour and the Association of Yukon Communities, I would urge the member to contact those groups. If they decide that they want to release information, that’s up to them. We would have to discuss that with them before we would release any information because of the third party interests here.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, it is the government-struck committee, if you will, so I wonder if the minister would indicate who the chair of the committee is so I may seek the information from that individual.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I think the member certainly has the option of contacting any one of the 13 stakeholders, but we will be publicly providing a report on the work done by this group in its strategic focus and planning. The public report will be made available.

Ms. Duncan:   I’ll await the report. How many meetings have been held to date, and when is the report anticipated?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   To date, there have been 25 meetings. If the Member for Kluane is paying attention, the Department of Economic Development, in just this one area, has conducted 25 meetings with the stakeholders on strategic planning.

Ms. Duncan:   I am sorry, I didn’t hear the minister answer when he anticipates the public report.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Probably early in the new year, sometime around the end of January.

Ms. Duncan:   I don’t want to get into the political speeches, but I have a straightforward question. There are two numbered companies to deal with the immigrant investor fund. One dealt with the Connect Yukon project and the other is a very small — I think it has $2 million or $3 million left in it. I would like to know from the Minister of Economic Development who is currently on the board of those two companies, and how much money is left in the smaller fund and what is its anticipated use?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   There has been $10.5 million expended through the one project, which is the numbered company that handled Connect Yukon. There is $700,000 that still sits in the other fund. The makeup of the board of directors is Economic Development, Finance and the third one we believe is Executive Council Office, but we will check that out and provide that to the member.

Ms. Duncan:   I can send this in a written letter to the minister, but my understanding when we left office is that the smaller fund was at something like $2 million to $3 million, and it’s now at $700,000. Where did that money get spent?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, yes, maybe write the letter so that we can get the appropriate people to look into this. As far as the department knows or is aware of, there was $700,000. That’s something that we had better look into. I would urge the member to write the letter and we will provide the answer.

Ms. Duncan:   I appreciate that, and I particularly appreciate the minister’s commitment for an answer. The Yukon venture loan guarantee program is part of this department. Would the minister just briefly outline what the plans are for this particular program?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   It continues to operate as it always has. This is not something that the government books. Again, this is banks. Financial institutions approve a loan application, with the connection that the government provides a certain level of security. I think the maximum security for government to hold is $200,000 — somewhere in that vicinity. So it is something that has to go through a financial institution.

Ms. Duncan:   And this is different from the microloan program and Dana Naye Ventures. Are there any plans to increase that microloan program, which has been quite successful at Dana Naye Ventures?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Yes, there is some research going on right now to see if it can be extended to other clients, those types of things, and it’s booked in Dana Naye Ventures.

Ms. Duncan:   And the contribution was booked out of Economic Development previously. Are there any plans for an increased contribution in the next budget cycle?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   That’s based on the research. If there is an extended client base, then in all likelihood that would dictate an increase in the level of the fund.

Ms. Duncan:   My last question is a general one for the minister. In light of the time, I would ask for a very straightforward, short answer. He has said continually with respect to Economic Development and the Yukon Party government, "Judge us on our record." Has the minister set a specific goal for the unemployment rate six months from now and a year from now?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I don’t set specific goals in those types of statistics because we have to look at the full equation. In some cases, an unemployment rate does not reflect the entire picture of an economy. It could also reflect that more and more people are starting to stay in the Yukon because there is something ahead of them.

We look at all the factors and all the indicators, but certainly the beginning of this whole process is to reduce that dependence on government and get the private sector more heavily involved in the economy of the Yukon, specifically in investment.

Chair:   Is there any further general debate?

On Corporate Services

Total Operation and Maintenance Expenditures for the Department of Economic Development in the amount of $2,844,000 agreed to

Recoveries cleared

On Office Furniture, Equipment, Systems and Space

Mr. Hardy:   How much of that was purchased locally?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   The total amount was purchased right from suppliers here in the Yukon, in Whitehorse.

Mr. Hardy:   Could the minister send over a breakdown of furniture, computers, stuff like that, to set up the offices, in the future?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Is the member serious, Mr. Chair? We are creating a department here. Obviously we are not going to sit on cushions and work off the floor. We are putting together a department. I can have an official provide serial numbers and colours — what else would the member like?

Mr. Hardy:   I think the minister knows exactly what I’m asking.

Where possible, was furniture that is made locally purchased? Where was it not? That is the difference here. If there were computers bought, were they bought through a local supplier or were they bought from Outside?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   All combined, it was all purchased here, either through retail outlets or local manufacturers. Every effort was made to purchase locally.

Mr. Hardy:   So the answer is that the furniture used was made by the local cabinet shops, which have been making it for years and years from the government.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Where applicable.

Mr. Hardy:   Could the minister supply me a breakdown on the purchase of that equipment?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Mr. Chair, it would be something not of a high priority for the department to be working on. They’re very focused on economic development. I’ve made the statement in the House that this particular purchase was done locally either from manufacturers or retail outlets. The total focus was on making sure there was local involvement, and that’s the answer.

Mr. Hardy:   Far be it from me to remind the minister that employing and using local shops is about the economics of the Yukon. It’s about employment. It’s about developing and supporting a basis of manufacturing. If there seems to be a lack of understanding, maybe we have a problem with the minister in understanding all aspects of the economy. I have a very simple question: can the minister supply a breakdown of the local shops that were used to manufacture the furniture?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:  Well, Mr. Chair, $291,000 has been expended on office furniture, equipment, systems and so on. I’ve gave the answer to the member opposite that it included local retailers and manufacturers for the whole expenditure. I don’t know what else we can do. I’m certainly not going to have officials running around here and trying to find out what store they bought that chair from and where they got that box of pencils from and all the rest of it. And for the member to stand up on this floor and say that there’s a lack of understanding of the economy here, I would caution the member not to go down this road. Some of us have a great deal of history in understanding of the economy, and it goes back decades.

We’re not here to argue that kind of stuff. The total of $291,000 was expended locally.

Mr. Hardy:   I don’t quake in my boots over the caution that this minister is sending out. Maybe he should realize that we all contribute to this economy; we’ve all had our own businesses. We all work and we all contribute. So he can caution as much as he wants, it doesn’t shake my boots. If he won’t supply that, which he is saying he won’t, then I will go to the offices and I’ll look.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I say to the member opposite, "Be my guest." Maybe bring some donuts from Tim Horton’s or something, but I have to point out something else. There is a distinct difference between this side of the House and that side of the House when it comes to the economy. We don’t attack the mining industry. We do not totally skew the balance of economic development toward protection, like the Yukon protected areas strategy. We do not have a problem with the private sector investing in making a profit in the territory, like the member opposite does. Those things are very much against the member’s view and vision of the Yukon economy.

Chair:   Is there any further debate on the line office furniture, equipment, systems and space?

On Industry Research

Chair:   Order please. Committee of the Whole will come to order.

We will continue on with Bill No. 7, Second Appropriation Act, 2003-04, in Vote 2, the Executive Council Office.

Ms. Duncan:   I just have four questions remaining that I’d like to ask the minister in this particular department. The business incentive policy that governments have worked diligently on over the years with the Northwest Territories — and it was the BIP of the N.W.T. Finally there was some resolution and then, of course, it was shut down. Premier Kakfwi was unable to get the revisions that are necessary to include Yukon businesses through the House.

Has the minister responsible for the Executive Council Office spoken with Premier Handley about the business incentive policy, and is there any appetite to bring this once again before the N.W.T. Legislature to see some resolution in favour of Yukon businesses?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I have spoken with Mr. Handley on two occasions since he was appointed Premier of the Northwest Territories. Of course, as we are well aware from yesterday’s news, Mr. Handley was busy selecting his Cabinet and going through all those processes. We discussed in general terms our firm and undying commitment to our cooperative intergovernmental protocol. Obviously this is one area that we will be working on.

I think there are a number of other areas that have shown improvement and that’s exactly what our commitment is all about in our relationship and our intergovernmental accord.

Ms. Duncan:   So there’s no firm commitment at this point to bring it back before the N.W.T. Legislature.

The Premier, as head of the Yukon Party, committed to set up a committee to study electoral reform. When is that going to be established, and are they prepared to include recall, as I brought forward in a motion, as a subject of discussion for electoral reform?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   On the latter part, let’s debate the motion and we can determine what the Assembly’s position is on that particular issue.

As far as electoral reform, that’s something that was certainly committed to in the election, it’s part of our platform and we are looking into what the best approach and process is in dealing with this issue.

But as far as the latter, I would like to engage in a debate on the member’s position on recall.

Ms. Duncan:   In other words, there’s an acknowledged commitment in the Yukon Party platform but there’s no start date for this committee.

Does the government have any plans to decentralize workers or services? Previous governments have done this in an effort to work with Yukon communities and there have been commitments by other governments. Are there any plans for the Government of Yukon — the Yukon Party government — to do this — to decentralize workers or services?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Mr. Chair, the upheaval for government through renewal is still being dealt with. Although there may be some areas where services are going to be delivered in communities and may prove beneficial, we certainly aren’t focused in any way right now on any massive decentralization of government. What we are looking at is how to better serve all the public in this territory with existing departments and programs and the delivery of those programs and services to Yukoners.

Ms. Duncan:   Once again, not an unequivocal answer from the Premier.

The budget speech said that there would be an establishment of an all-party standing committee on appointments made to government boards and committees. The budget speech said that is one such example. The creation of an all-party committee to make recommendations for FireSmart and community development fund applications could be another.

The Premier also said in the budget speech, "We will also be seeking an all-party agreement on a code of conduct and decorum for members of this House." That was in the budget speech. There has been no approach to me as leader of the third party in the Legislature. When does the minister responsible for Executive Council Office intend to fulfill this commitment?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   There have been approaches, and they have been met with little receptiveness from the members opposite. Frankly, at House leaders’ there is much more that could be done in these areas but that doesn’t seem to be working either.

I have here, based on our last debate in this department, a number of documents that I can provide to the House in relation to intergovernmental protocols and bilateral agreements and those types of things, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Duncan:   I regret to advise the Premier that he has been misinformed if he has been advised that there have been approaches to me with respect to seeking an all-party agreement on code of conduct and decorum. This has not happened. I don’t like to be the bearer of bad news; however, that initiative has not happened. It’s a commitment that was made in the budget speech, so what I was looking for is a date when it might happen.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   I think the member opposite is ignoring the good job that the Speaker is doing in terms of conduct and decorum in this House. I think that should be reflected in the member’s statements, that the Speaker is certainly contributing a great deal to improving that in this Legislative Assembly, especially in trying to raise the level of debate.

Ms. Duncan:   This certainly is no disrespect to the Speaker. The Speaker is an officer of the House and the budget speech said "we will" — the Premier would be, as minister responsible for that budget, seeking an all-party agreement on a code of conduct and decorum. I was just asking when that initiative might be started. I was just looking forward to a letter in the new year from the Premier. However, he hasn’t indicated when that may start, so I’ve asked the question and unfortunately he has chosen not to answer.

Mrs. Peter:   I have a few questions for the minister in regard to the Youth Directorate. As the minister responsible, I would like to hear any response from the Premier in regard to solutions to the high rate of alcohol and drug abuse among Yukon youth.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Obviously this is a very deep-rooted problem in this territory. And there are a number of areas and agencies and departments that all must focus their attention on this issue. The Youth Directorate itself is doing a lot of work, especially out there in the street, in funding and resourcing youth centres and providing assistance in those areas to at least give youth a gathering place where positive activities take place.

But there is much more that has to be done here and that would include the Department of Health, the Department of Education, the Department of Justice, and the list goes on. The Youth Directorate itself can only do so much. What is really going to take place here to address that problem begins with dealing with the root cause of the problem.

Mrs. Peter:   The minister said that there is a long list of programs to address this issue. Can the minister give me a few examples of the programs that are directly addressing youth addictions to alcohol or drugs or gambling, et cetera?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   That is certainly not in the purview of the Executive Council Office. There is the Department of Health, the Department of Justice and the Department of Education, which are all responsible in this area. My responsibility, as far as the Youth Directorate, is done in a way that we distribute the resources of the Youth Directorate out to those in the community who are doing good works during the year. The Youth Directorate hosts and gathers youth from across the Yukon into other communities for activities. We cannot forget that the Youth Directorate spends a great deal of time looking into how to better serve the youth of the territory.

Some of the areas that the Youth Directorate contributes to are community youth activities for the town of Faro, the Village of Mayo, Kluane First Nation, the White River First Nation, the Dawson City recreation department, the BYTE society, the Whitehorse Youth Centre, the Youth of Today Society, for Crime Prevention Yukon winter activities and Whitehorse Youth Centre rent. All of these areas are contributions by the Youth Directorate. But, for further information, the member should contact the departments of Health, Education and Justice.

Mrs. Peter:   I have one more question for the minister. I’ve asked this question several times before: will the minister consider funding the Whitehorse Youth Centre to assist them to buy a permanent location?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   We are giving full consideration to the issues of youth as a whole. There is that particular issue. There are other requirements out in communities. But we will give full consideration to the issues of youth in this territory with what we have available to us to address those issues.

Ms. Duncan:   Mr. Chair, I have no further questions. However, pursuant to section 14.3 of the Standing Orders, I would seek unanimous consent to deem all lines in Vote 2, Executive Council Office, cleared or carried as required.

Chair:   Prior to putting forward the request, the Chair will just check to see if there is any further general debate.

Chair:  Hearing none, Ms. Duncan has requested the unanimous consent of the Committee to deem all lines in Vote No. 2, Department of Executive Council Office, cleared or carried as required. Are you agreed?

All Hon. Members:  Agreed.

Chair:   There is unanimous consent. We will clear that department.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Mr. Chair, it’s a well-known fact that the government of the day, our government, moved rapidly to reinstate the Women’s Directorate within the corporate structure of government, and with this supplementary there is an expenditure that is specific to women prevention initiatives. It’s to deal with violence in the family, specifically with aboriginal women. This is spawned from a recent Status of Women’s conference in Edmonton, where it was unanimously supported when the three territories, Yukon-led by the Women’s Directorate, took a position that it’s high time that we dealt with looking into how we can implement action in this area, considering aboriginal women are likely to experience three times the rate of violence as others in this country.

With this supplementary budget there’s an increase of $100,000 for that specific initiative, and we look forward to the Women’s Directorate representing Yukon on behalf of women in this territory and aboriginal women specifically on this issue when the working group gets together.

Mrs. Peter:   The Women’s Directorate is mandated with a responsibility on behalf of all Yukon women. I was happy when I heard the minister responsible make the announcement of the $100,000 to address the violence against aboriginal women.

The statistics for the Yukon can speak for themselves. This issue has touched every community in the Yukon and there are many families in Yukon communities who are still silent about this issue. There are resources in Whitehorse that address some of these issues, and we are grateful for that.

I agree with the minister that there’s a lot more that can be done in this area.

With regard to the $100,000, I’d like to hear from the minister if there is going to be consultation with First Nation women across this territory.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Yes, Mr. Chair, I can assure the Member for Vuntut Gwitchin that there will be consultation with the First Nation women of this territory through the Yukon Aboriginal Women’s Council. Obviously our focus here is to thoroughly engage them so we can make representation on behalf of them at the working group as we move forward to try to address this very, very difficult issue that our society faces.

Mrs. Peter:   Just to clarify for the record, did I hear the minister correctly when he said that they are going to consult with the Yukon Aboriginal Women’s Council?

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Yes, they are members at the annual general meeting.

Mrs. Peter:   I would like to hear from the minister if they plan to visit each community within the territory.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   We do to a certain degree now, but we want to get the advice of aboriginal women on this issue, on how best to address that particular area, and then move forward from there.

Mrs. Peter:   I would just like to hear from the minister if every community is represented on that Yukon Aboriginal Women’s Council.

Hon. Mr. Fentie:   Well, I can’t speak for the Yukon Aboriginal Women’s Council but I can tell you that, when it comes to the Women’s Directorate, it is their duty, responsibility and obligation to address the issues of all Yukon women in every community throughout the territory. But the member should probably direct that question to the council itself.