097 Hansard
Whitehorse, Yukon
Monday, May 5, 2008 – 1:00 p.m.
Speaker: I will now call the House to order. At this time, we will proceed with prayers.
Prayers
DAILY ROUTINE
Speaker: We will proceed with the Order Paper.
Are there any tributes?
TRIBUTES
In recognition of Emergency Preparedness Week
Hon. Mr. Hart: I rise this afternoon to acknowledge this national week devoted to keeping Canadians safe. It is the annual Emergency Preparedness Week, and it has two primary functions. The first purpose is to remind our citizens that they can take a leadership role in protecting themselves, their families and their property during emergency situations.
The second purpose is to pay tribute to the many men and women who stand ready to help their fellow Canadians during a time of crisis. Each year Canadians are encouraged to make plans and set aside some provisions in the event of an emergency situation befalling them or their community.
These emergency situations may come in a number of forms, and while they may not all be significant events such as an earthquake or forest fire, they can all have devastating impacts on individuals, their homes and their communities.
As in previous years, Yukoners will have received in the mail an emergency preparedness brochure with a bold “72 hours” on the cover. Seventy-two hours has been adopted as the recommended amount of time that people should prepare to fend for themselves following an emergency event.
In an emergency situation, the emergency responders will first focus on the people who have suffered the greatest impact from the emergency. There are a limited number of responders, and it can take time for them to respond in a safe manner to everyone’s needs.
Yukoners, like citizens, parents and homeowners across Canada, need to be prepared to take care of themselves and their families for a minimum of 72 hours until the emergency responders arrive on the scene.
By planning ahead of time what you and your family will do in the event of an emergency, you do not have to make up your plan on the spot; you will already know what your family and you need to get through the challenges associated with whatever crisis a situation may be.
Emergency events also bring communities closer together, as neighbours look out for each other to ensure they remain safe. There are a number of examples of how rural communities have worked together to endure the destruction caused by an emergency situation. Community centres become a gathering place with elders and seniors alongside of young children in a safe and comforting location, until the situation is resolved and the people can once again return to their homes.
I encourage all Yukoners to create a family emergency plan and put together an emergency kit. It is not a huge project. In fact, planning what you will need to keep safe and comfortable for 72 hours is very similar to planning for a long weekend camping trip. The main difference is you may be camping in your home, rather than in a campsite or a wilderness location.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to acknowledge the many people who work and volunteer in emergency-response roles, including structural firefighters, volunteer and municipal fire departments, emergency medical service personnel, search and rescue teams and our wildland fire organization.
These people demonstrated how their valuable skills benefit our communities during the Southern Lakes flood last year, as did the people in the emergency health and social services community emergency measures office, the Salvation Army and the many caring individuals who show up to lend a hand when a crisis threatens the welfare of our communities and the people who live within them.
In closing, I encourage all Yukoners to create an emergency plan for themselves and their families, build an emergency kit to sustain themselves for 72 hours and consider becoming involved in the local neighbourhood planning group to aid each other in the event of an emergency in your area.
Plan ahead and stay safe.
Speaker: Are there further tributes?
Introduction of visitors.
TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS
Speaker: Under tabling returns and documents, the Chair has for tabling a report of the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly on travel expenses of Members of the Legislative Assembly during the 2007-08 fiscal year.
The Chair also has for tabling the report of the Chief Electoral Officer of Yukon on political contributions in 2007, which is submitted pursuant to section 398 of the Elections Act.
Are there any further returns or documents for tabling?
Mr. Hardy: I have for tabling a memo to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources.
Mr. Mitchell: I have a letter to the Prime Minister of Canada regarding drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, written last Friday.
Speaker: Are there any further documents for tabling?
Reports of committees.
Petitions.
PETITIONS
Petition No. 5 — received
Clerk: Mr. Speaker and honourable members of the Assembly, I have had the honour to review a petition, being Petition No. 5 of the First Session of the 32nd Legislative Assembly, as presented by the Member for Klondike on May 1, 2008.
This petition was found to be comprised of two different versions. The model petition, which is appended to the Standing Orders, indicates that to meet the requirements as to form, a petition must be addressed to the Legislative Assembly and must ask the Legislative Assembly to take an action.
One version of the petition meets the requirements as to form of the Standing Orders of the Yukon Legislative Assembly and will be retained in the working papers of the Legislative Assembly. The Executive Council response, made pursuant to Standing Order 67, should be to this version of Petition No. 5.
The other version of Petition No. 5 does not meet the requirements as to form of the Standing Orders and will be returned to the Member for Klondike.
Speaker: Petition No. 5 is accordingly deemed to be read and received.
Are there any other petitions to be presented?
Are there bills to be introduced?
Notices of motion.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr. Nordick: I give notice of the following motion:
THAT this House urges the Government of Yukon to work with the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Nunavut to lobby the Government of Canada to remove GST on home heating fuel and power generation north of 60.
Mr. Fairclough: I give notice of the following motion:
THAT this House urges the Yukon government to adopt a fairness principle in its tendering procedures so that all Yukoners and Yukon businesses will be treated equally and fairly in all aspects of public tendering.
Mr. Hardy: I give notice of the following motion:
THAT this House urges the Minister of Environment to live up to his obligations under the Environment Act by immediately tabling a 2005 state of the environment report and directing the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment to fulfill its legislative mandate to review the report, as spelled out in section 49 of the act.
I also give notice of the following motion:
THAT it is the opinion of this House that according to the 2004 interim report on the state of the environment, 65 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Yukon come from transportation; and
THAT this House urges the Yukon government to work with the City of Whitehorse to identify ways to expand the Whitehorse transit service so that more people take the bus to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to specifically explore offering free transit to senior, youth, Yukon college students and low-income Yukoners to protect them from increased fuel costs.
I also give notice of the following motion:
THAT it is the opinion of this House that according to the 2004 interim report on the state of the environment, 65 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Yukon come from transportation; and
THAT this House urges the Yukon government to fund a commuter busing pilot project from a community outside of Whitehorse such as Marsh Lake, Tagish, Carcross, Mendenhall or Lake Laberge as one concrete action to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by getting private vehicles off the road.
I also give notice of the following motion:
THAT it is the opinion of this House that according to the 2004 interim report on the state of the environment, 65 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Yukon come from transportation; and
THAT this House urges the Yukon government to mount an aggressive social marketing campaign to encourage Yukoners to carpool, as one concrete action to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by getting more private vehicles off the road.
I also give notice of the following motion:
THAT it is the opinion of this House that according to a 2004 interim report on the state of the environment, 65 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Yukon come from transportation; and
THAT this House urges the Yukon government to create a rebate program for Yukoners purchasing bicycles as one concrete action to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote physical activity.
Speaker: Are there any further notices of motion?
Statements by ministers.
This then brings us to Question Period.
QUESTION PERIOD
Question re: Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Mr. Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, I have some questions for the Premier.
Last week, President Bush announced that he would once again be pushing Congress to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas exploration and drilling due to the soaring costs of gasoline. The Alaskan congressional delegation and the Alaskan Governor are all onside with the President’s position. My colleague, the Member for Vuntut Gwitchin, and I are very concerned that the Premier has not made one single public announcement opposing this renewed threat to disrupt the calving grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd or taken any public action to ensure it remains protected.
In the past, the Premier has touted how much he supports the protection for this area; yet he has been totally silent since President Bush’s announcement last week. When will the Premier take a public stand against the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and take it beyond these walls, where it needs to be heard?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Once again, the Leader of the Official Opposition is taking out of context all the work that this government does in conjunction with the Vuntut Gwitchin government to ensure that protection of the critical habitat for the Porcupine caribou herd is maintained. We are also very consistent in our position that the two federal governments, both in Ottawa and Washington, adhere to the agreement for the conservation of the herd that was reached in 1987. We have publicly, on many many many occasions, stated that very consistent position. We have brought this up with the President of the United States in a face-to-face discussion. Furthermore, we are pursuing, with the Porcupine Caribou Management Board, impacted First Nations and the State of Alaska, a harvest management plan for the Porcupine caribou herd. We will continue to work with the State of Alaska to get an updated count of the herd, which is critical to an ongoing conservation initiative to understand what its numbers are and what impacts we are experiencing with respect to the herd.
Mr. Mitchell: The Premier’s voice is very loud in this Assembly, but seems to diminish to a whisper outside of this House and beyond Yukon’s borders.
The Premier should be speaking on behalf of all Yukoners in showing Yukoners’ opposition to the opening up of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.
Why then is the Premier leaving it to the Chief of the Vuntut Gwitchin, the MLA for Vuntut Gwitchin, the Member of Parliament for Yukon and all the other voices to make Yukon’s position clear in Washington? All Yukoners, including the Gwitchin, need the territory’s public government leader to be speaking and acting on their behalf on this crucial issue.
Can the Premier tell us when he plans to head to Washington on behalf of all Yukoners and present our opposition to the opening of ANWR to Congress?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: We’re not leaving this matter to anyone, but we are respectful in terms of requests from the government of Gwitchin, and we will continue to respect those requests and continue to support that government in its efforts in this regard.
Secondly, we aren’t silent on this issue and never have been. Today, obviously the member has some new issue on his mind. I would remind the member that the outgoing President of the United States is somewhere in the 20-percent level of popularity. The dynamics of Congress and the Senate are dramatically different from what the member is representing here in an all-out push to drill in ANWR.
The position is consistent. As I understand it nationally, the Vuntut Gwitchin’s position, Yukoners’ position and this government’s position is that protection of the critical habitat is absolute.
Mr. Mitchell: Just last week I wrote a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper to ask him to take action in response to the President’s most recent announcement. The Government of Canada is also in opposition to the opening of ANWR and I have asked them to once again voice Canada’s opposition with the President.
This Legislative Assembly has passed several unanimous motions over the years in support of keeping the refuge free from drilling.
The Premier needs to step up to the plate and take action on this renewed threat. If costs are an issue, the Liberal caucus will provide the funding for his airfare.
Affirmative action and ensuring his voice is clearly heard by the President, the Alaska congressional delegation and the Governor of Alaska all need to be done on the ANWR issue. Will the Premier please speak up for all Yukoners and tell us when he plans to take action on the renewed threat to the Porcupine caribou herd?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: The government side is very encouraged by the fact that the Leader of the Official Opposition has decided to come forward with a constructive measure in writing the Prime Minister in regard to the protection of the critical habitat for the Porcupine caribou herd.
We are very pleased that the Leader of the Official Opposition has joined the cause, and it’s more important, Mr. Speaker, to deal with those who support drilling, versus simply going to Washington to talk to those who already oppose drilling in ANWR. That’s what this government is doing.
Finally, the member opposite has seen the light and chosen to join — in conjunction with the government and Yukoners and the Vuntut Gwitchin — forces and ensure that all concerned are made aware of the fact that Yukoners’ position is clear: protection of the critical habitat.
Question re: Education standards
Mr. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, last week the Council of Ministers of Education released test scores in literacy, mathematics and science for all 10 provinces and Yukon.
Yukon did not fare well. In fact, we are below the Canadian average in all three categories. What is really alarming is that we are just one point out of last place in mathematics and in last place in science. We need to do better.
I want to be very clear on this, Mr. Speaker: we are not blaming the teachers; we are not blaming the minister. We want to know what the minister has in mind to address this problem. Obviously, there is a problem. The problem is not the lack of available funds; the problem is not class size; the problem is not the professional staff. My question is simply: what plan does the minister propose to address this situation?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I’m very proud of the work that the Department of Education and our teachers are doing to ensure that we have a very responsive educational system: one that meets the needs of individual learners in our system and one that meets the needs in our community.
We’ll continue to review and take into account and consideration the results from the pan-Canadian assessment test, which looked at the performance of some 13-year-olds across Canada. We’ll also use the other indicators that we have, things like the Yukon achievement test, the results from the provincial exams and other assessment tools, whether they’re formal assessment tools or informal assessment tools — things like the participation rate in post-secondary school. Currently, we have over 1,000 Yukon students accessing the student grant to continue on in post-secondary education, and Statistics Canada indicated that Yukon has the highest rate of post-secondary education of any jurisdiction in Canada.
There are some very good results and very good indicators about Yukon’s educational performance. We also recognize that there are other issues and other challenges, and we will be making efforts to work with all involved to ensure that we close the gap in performance rates and that we increase the bar, so to speak, of the performance level of all Yukon students. We’ll do this for all students in Whitehorse and the communities.
Mr. Fairclough: Well, this test was very accurate and I’m disappointed to hear it being attacked as being too small a sample group out in the public. The test was not a problem. The results were the problem. There were 370 eligible students in the Yukon — 278 of them took the test; 33 were absent; 20 were exempt because of low academic abilities; two were exempt because of parental objection and 37 because of other reasons. That leaves 75 percent of students taking the test, and 75 percent is extremely high for any survey.
The minister need not be so defensive on this. No one is blaming him personally, but what Yukoners will do is blame him if no action is taken, so again I’ll ask the minister: what does he plan to do and when can we expect to see action on these low achievement tests?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Mr. Speaker, we are going to use the results of this test, which the member should be aware is in all provinces and the Yukon; there are some jurisdictions in Canada that don’t participate in this test and they have their reasons for doing so.
We are going to use the results from the interprovincial exams, the Yukon achievement tests, the results of Outside organizations — such as the IALS report, the international adult literacy survey. We will look at results from Statistics Canada, we will look at results from organizations, from the Fraser Institute, and we will look at the performance of all of our students.
It is important that we get good information about what our students are doing, where they are performing, and where we need to make changes. The member opposite, I believe, knows about initiatives like full-day kindergarten, the Wilson Reading program, the Reading Recovery program, the First Nations programs and partnership unit, the changes to curriculum, the home tutor program, and our ratio of teachers to students.
We will continue to invest in the future of our students; we will continue to make increases in investment in education. The member opposite has already said that we have the highest per capita investment in students anywhere in Canada, and we will continue to invest wisely in education.
Mr. Fairclough: The minister ducked the media last Thursday. This doesn’t help the issue at all. I think the minister needs to be up front on this issue because it is a big one with the general public.
This was a study commissioned by ministers of education across the country and this minister is a member of that council. He can’t simply ignore it and he can’t sweep it under the rug. It is too big an issue. This is not the leadership we expect and need. Many parents have been coming to us and talking about this very issue and are very concerned. It is time to become more proactive and forward-thinking.
We want to know what the minister is doing. He said a few things — the top-down model simply doesn’t work. What we need is a bottom-up model, which is in the governance education reform structure. Is the minister now saying he is accepting the governance model, as pointed out in the education reform project?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I’m amazed at how the member opposite sees spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars on a new bureaucratic model will help our kids learn. I don’t agree with that. What I do agree with is working with our students to ensure they have the right tools, that the teachers are working with the right learning styles for our students, that we have the right curriculum. One only has to take a look at the school planning process and the evolution that is going through right now of bringing people from the community into the school to be part of the school planning process.
If the member opposite wants to see grassroots involvement, he should go to a school council meeting and one of these planning sessions to see how parents can get involved and set the priorities and issues for their school. We’ll continue to do that; we’ll continue to make investments to help our teachers teach and help our learners learn.
Question re: School catchment areas
Mr. Hardy: The Minister of Education has been reassuring us recently what a great school system we have. Meanwhile, the management of infrastructure and staffing for schools is frustrating parents, teachers and school councils. The minister hasn’t assured anyone that they are being heard.
The government uses words like “staffing realignment” when it often really means staff cuts. The cancellation of the school bus contract provides an ideal opportunity to realign catchment areas so that schools, such as Golden Horn Elementary, may not have to lose teaching staff. Instead of launching a lengthy review of enrolment at Golden Horn and Elijah Smith elementaries, will the minister agree to fast-track this project and revise the catchment areas, if necessary, in time for the 2008-09 school year?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I recognize that not all members participate in the budget debate, but it was committed to on the floor of this Assembly — all of the processes necessary to be gone through for the realignment of the catchment area would be done prior to the next school year.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we are going to continue to work with the Department of Education and the fine staff there, with our teachers, with our contractors and others involved in education, to ensure that we have the best education system possible. We are doing this in an environment in which the number of students in our schools is declining and where the numbers of teachers and educational assistants is increasing. We are continuing to make investments in schools. We just saw a new one officially open a couple of weeks ago, as well as the opening of the Individual Learning Centre and the School of Visual Arts in recent years. We will continue to work with all our partners in education to ensure that we have an education system that is responsive to the needs of Yukoners.
Mr. Hardy: Well, we know the record of the Yukon Party in building schools — overbudget and one in five years. Isn’t that something to be proud of?
When teaching positions are cut, often the first things to go are programs such as music, art, language, physical education and special education. Many of us remember the Yukon Party’s history regarding their attitude toward these programs. When a school loses some of these programs because a teaching position is cut, the students pay.
Regarding the pan-Canadian assessment program, indicating 13-year-olds in the Yukon were doing poorly compared to the rest of Canada, my concern in this regard is — and this is the question here — if this minister will assure us that he will not use this report to cut programs such as music, art, language, physical education and special education. Frankly, from my perspective, one report does not justify making changes.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: As I mentioned, the government will continue to use the results of the Yukon achievement test, provincial exams, indicators from other organizations — some of them the member opposite likes and some he might not always agree with. I’m in the same boat, Mr. Speaker. Sometimes we get information and we’re happy with the methodology and other times we do have to stop and scratch our heads over it.
The member opposite also didn’t recognize the opening of the Individual Learning Centre or the School of Visual Arts. I can’t make a much stronger commitment to the arts and arts education in the territory other than having been part of the Yukon Party government that opened the School of Visual Arts in Dawson City.
We recognize it is important for children to have a broad, well-rounded education. Frankly, I don’t want to see our system turn into one where we just teach to one test. It’s too easy to do that, and other jurisdictions have.
But in order to maintain a community of healthy, well-balanced people who have the ability to participate fully in our economy and in our society, we recognize we have to have a broad range of courses. We’ll also work with our school councils in determining how to address the situations in the schools.
Mr. Hardy: I agree with the minister opposite on this. I was at the graduation of the students of SOVA in Dawson City, and I was very proud at that moment, proud of the NDP history in being at the beginning of it, as well as the Liberals who were supportive of it when they were in government and the Yukon Party continuing that — so kudos for everybody in that area.
But I also agree with the minister that one test doesn’t justify changing the whole system; we must take these tests and balance them out on what our students are achieving — and they’re achieving a lot.
I don’t like to see one test put down our students, because I have great faith in them, as well as the staff who teach them.
But in the rural communities — since we’re starting to talk about that — experiential education doesn’t really get out there. Many of the rural communities do not have what Whitehorse has and the education reform report says that communities outside of Whitehorse need to take steps to integrate experiential learning.
What is the minister doing to guarantee that all Yukon students will have the best education experience possible, regardless of where they live?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I will endorse this budget, for one thing, Mr. Speaker, which includes funds for experiential education and vocational training. We expanded that last year; we are continuing it this year.
I’ll vote for this budget, which includes initiatives like the artist in the school program, an increase from $25,000 to $100,000. I’ll support this budget, which continues to invest in Yukoners and to maintain one of the lowest student/teacher ratios in Canada.
What else will I do? I will also endorse this budget, which provides cultural training to teachers and cultural dollars to the schools, so that they can put on relevant programming for their students. I’ll support this budget, which also includes working with the Yukon First Nations programs and partnership unit to ensure that we have curriculum that is meeting the needs of our students and meeting the needs in the community.
I’ll continue to ensure that this government, as well as my colleagues, continues to invest in education. We recognize the importance that it plays in our community and our future and will continue to work with our partners in education to ensure that we have responsive ways of addressing the issues that our students and our communities have.
Question re: Environment report
Mr. Hardy: It’s always tough not to be able to respond to the last one.
In the last sitting, we asked the Minister of Environment repeatedly when he would release the latest state of the environment report.
Finally, in the last days of the sitting, he produced the interim reports for 2003 and 2004. There was no sign of the full report for 2005 — three years. It was still being written, according to the minister. History seems to be repeating itself: why is the minister still sitting on the 2005 state of the environment report, and will he table it immediately, so that MLAs have a chance to review it and question the minister about his findings during this sitting?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, I was just checking to see if I was sitting on the report. No, I’m not.
Great progress is being made toward the completion of the report. I can tell the member opposite that a special Cabinet meeting was held today to give sanction to the report. I would ask the member to indulge me in considering some patience. The report will be tabled in the immediate future.
Mr. Hardy: I’ve heard this one before, Mr. Speaker. This is three years. This is from 2005. Where is the work? Where is it, if it’s not underneath his —? Anyway, the state of the environment report is like the canary in the mineshaft. It is intended to tell Yukoners how our environment is doing and what changes we need to make to prevent future problems. If there are any problems brewing, how can we respond appropriately if these reports are three or four years out of date before we see them?
When the minister lets them sit on his desk or wherever, it makes me very suspicious about what he doesn’t want Yukoners to see. When did the minister receive the 2005 final report, since he obviously has it? What changes did he ask to be made and why hasn’t he lived up to his legal requirement to table it in this House?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Well, Mr. Speaker, we placed a great priority on developing our climate change strategy. We placed great priority on developing the climate change action plan. We placed a lot of priority and emphasis and investment on modernizing our biophysical database. Along with that, we placed a great emphasis and priority on making sure that reports, like the state of the environment report, are being done and tabled in this House, and it will be.
The member opposite, as I understand it, places all the third party’s eggs in one basket. Without the report, there can be no environmental protection, conservation or management. This government does not agree with that approach. We think that there are multiple measures and initiatives that we must undertake to ensure the protection and conservation of our environment. It’s very precious to Yukoners and indeed it has a huge bearing on our future. We are therefore doing all this work in conjunction with ensuring that a state of the environment report will be tabled, as I said, in the immediate future.
Mr. Hardy: I really hope to see 2006-07 tabled at the same time.
With his Finance hat on, the Premier wasn’t too worried about the Financial Administration Act being breached. With his Environment hat on, he’s obviously not concerned about what the Environment Act says either. The act requires the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment to review every state of the environment report. It can’t do that, because for all practical purposes the council doesn’t exist any more.
A few weeks ago, a government member tabled a motion that both the Environment Act and Economic Development Act be reviewed in relation to the council’s mandated membership. In plain language, the Premier wants to do away with the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment altogether, Mr. Speaker.
Until a public review takes place and the two acts are amended, what steps has the minister taken to live up to the law and ensure that the Yukon Council on the Economy and the Environment can perform its legally mandated job?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: We are very concerned about such statutes as the Financial Administration Act. That is why this government provided full disclosure to the Auditor General in regard to the investments and brought forward a policy to ensure that this kind of problem cannot arise again. It is this government that brought forward the policy to deal with that.
Secondly, I must remind the Leader of the Third Party that this whole initiative was conceived in the 1980s. Much has changed in today’s Yukon here in 2008. That is the reason for the review: to ensure that we are consistent here in the territory with all these measures with what is happening in the Yukon. As I said, much has changed, much is happening, and there is an approach by this government for environmental protection and conservation second to none when we compare ourselves to past governments.
Question re: Whitehorse Correctional Centre rebuild
Mr. Inverarity: Six years ago, this government made a political decision to stop construction on a new corrections centre. At that time, the facility was going to cost about $24 million. Today, in 2008, we are looking at a minimum cost of $32 million. This represents an increase of $8 million to construct the same facility, in the same location, using the same architect.
That decision will cost Yukoners more than $1 million a year. Add a few million for the cost of renovating the old jail over the past six years and then add a few more million for the six years of study and review that has been done. Does this Minister of Justice have any idea how much extra this political decision and the six-year delay is really going to cost Yukoners?
Hon. Mr. Lang: In response to the member opposite, it certainly isn’t the same building that was planned by the Liberal Party of the day. It’s not the same concept. It’s a modern facility for today and tomorrow in our justice system. It has nothing to do with what the Liberals had planned on any level.
Question re: Housing for single parents
Mr. Inverarity: I have some questions for the Minister responsible for the Yukon Housing Corporation.
Earlier this year, the minister announced a residence for single parents. The government originally pegged the cost of this development at between $9 million and $11 million. Documents released this last week regarding the construction of the new corrections facility also referred to this project. It was described in the tender documents as a women’s housing project.
The price attached to it was $13 million — that’s $2 million more than the high end of the estimate that has already been made public.
Will the minister confirm the cost to the project has gone up by $2 million and we haven’t even started construction yet?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: I am very glad that the member opposite asks questions about the single parent project.
The last social housing anything like this was built in 1994 under the previous Yukon Party government, and the NDP in the latter 1990s. The Liberals, in 2000 and 2002 didn’t build any social housing, of course, but they did have an excuse. They managed to drive themselves out of office before they had a chance to do much of anything on that.
We have so far built 48 units of affordable housing: 24 for the college student families; a sixplex for seniors in Haines Junction, and we are adding another three units in that complex as we speak. We have certainly led the charge in terms of affordable housing.
The project that the member opposite is referring to at the moment is scheduled to build seventeen 2-bedroom, thirteen 3-bedroom and three 4-bedroom units. We are out in consultation with people to see what they want. Because of the nature of the building, there will be a higher grade of standard. The project now is projected to exceed the green home standards, well beyond what much of construction is doing now.
The cost depends on what is going in it. We are asking people what they want, not simply building something.
Mr. Inverarity: The documents clearly say “women’s housing project”. We are under the understanding that it will be for both men and women. I wish the minister would make it clear for whom it is for. We would like to see it for everyone.
The project that was announced a few months ago said that the price tag was going to be between $9 million and $11 million. Only two months later, it is now up to $13 million. This is starting to resemble the Watson Lake Health Centre, which started at $5 million and is now over $11 million. For this extra $2 million, are we going to get more units? It doesn’t sound like it. I suspect that this answer is no. Now the cost per unit has gone up to $435,000 per unit. These are all kinds of condos. We can buy one across the street for $360,000. Why are the costs of these units so high, compared to other buildings that are being built right now?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: The single parent facility that the member opposite refers to — the private sector currently is building condos and such. They are 2-bedroom units at a cost that ranges between $199,000 and well over $250,000. The cost estimates for our construction of 2-bedroom units at 900 square feet is approximately $250 per square foot or $225,000, well within the current range of the private sector.
We are also building to accommodating home standards and guidelines. This involves barrier-free access to accommodate people with mobility limitations, and larger doors, hallways and space to manoeuvre in rooms. It also involves larger parking spots, lower windows, accommodating bathroom and kitchen fixtures, low profile door thresholds and floor transitions, and multi-storey, multi-residential facilities that will include an elevator, of course.
I thank the member opposite for giving me the opportunity to point out that this is a very different building. The Yukon Party government is the only government since 1994 that has built any such housing.
Mr. Inverarity: I was talking to someone the other day and they said that the price of lumber is now at 1980 prices. The price of this thing should be going down, not up.
New information released this week says that the minister’s new single parent residence is ballooning in price and we have not even seen a selection for the location yet. It has gone from $9 million to $11 million, and now on to $13 million. So much for good fiscal management. The Yukon Party has obviously not learned anything from a recent report from the Auditor General about their spending habits.
We think this is a good project; however, it is obvious that no one in the government has a good handle on the budget, which is spiralling. The new units are going to come in at around $435,000 per unit. It would be cheaper to simply purchase the entire building going up across the street.
Why are there no cost controls on this project?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: The Liberal mathematics are sometimes astounding, but I will put them in the perspective of the Mayo-Dawson run, which ran from $17 million to $42 million and rising, as we are still in court. I understand that the Liberals do have some difficulties with mathematics there.
I do understand the price of lumber may have gone down to 1980 levels but I think that the Member for Porter Creek South would agree with me that most workmen would not want to go back to 1980 wages. The common spaces on this complex are all part of that. That includes the probability and possibility, depending on consultation, of a daycare, library study areas, meeting areas, indoor activity and outdoor activities for children.
The final determination for these things has not been made, of course, because we are consulting. We are talking to the people involved who have made clear some of the things that they want and are refining other things that they want.
We recognize that the facility will have a large number of very active children, so we are going to increase wear and tear. Certain features, such as rough-duty hallway walls, will be built in to assure durability and low-cost maintenance; we are building something very different.
I thank the member opposite for allowing me to get that information out to the Yukon population, as the Yukon Party continues to build social affordable housing, much more than any previous government.
Speaker: The time for Question Period has now elapsed. We’ll proceed to Orders of the Day.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Hon. Mr. Cathers: I move that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Speaker: It has been moved by the Government House Leader that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve into Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to
Speaker leaves the Chair
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Chair (Mr. Nordick): Order please. Committee of the Whole will now come to order. The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 11, First Appropriation Act, 2008-09, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.
Do members wish to take a brief recess?
All Hon. Members: Agreed.
Chair: Committee of the Whole will recess for 15 minutes.
Recess
Chair: Order please. Committee of the Whole will now come to order.
Bill No. 11 — First Appropriation Act, 2008-09 — continued
Chair: The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 11, First Appropriation Act, 2008-09, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.
Department of Energy, Mines and Resources — continued
Hon. Mr. Lang: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In opening I would like to say, as we move through the department, that we in Energy, Mines and Resources — “we” meaning me and those hardworking individuals who work in the department — would like to present the budget here today.
On the last day we had a discussion on it, mostly about the oil and gas segment of the department. We all understand that Energy, Mines and Resources covers many very important branches in the government. We’re a regulatory department that works very hard with agriculture; there’s the abandoned mine process; energy is very important in the territory; mineral resources; the land issue is always high on our priority list; and of course oil and gas.
Some of the discussion the last time we were together was on the Mackenzie Valley project and that is high again on our radar screen because of the many things that are going on in the Mackenzie Valley with the National Energy Board and all of the other hearings going on at the moment.
I reviewed what we were doing with this and, as we all know, the National Energy Board is in the middle of its hearing. There is the Joint Review Panel, a subset of the National Energy Board hearings, so in essence there are two hearings going on. We have been involved in both of them.
There were some questions about economics and what this government resourced and when they resourced it. Understand the size of the Mackenzie project, which at this moment is targeted at $16.2 billion, is a massive project that will have ramifications not only in the Mackenzie Valley but it will certainly open up our resources to market and have impacts on our work force, the companies and it will provide access to jobs and contracting and other things that will be opened up to Yukoners.
Yukon has been participating for a long time in these hearings, on and off, since the year 2004. Over those years, we spent approximately $1.1 million on these hearings. Of course, that involves the individual department and also, Mr. Chair, we hire expertise to do some of the work, because we don’t have in-house expertise on some of these issues. A lot of the work is done in-house, and certainly we have a very tight department with a lot of very capable individuals working in it, but when they need assistance or they need some expertise, we certainly don’t deny them that, and that kind of expertise has a dollar value.
As I said, on the last day here in the House, this will be a twofold situation. There is the Mackenzie gas project for $16.2 billion, which will go ahead first, and then of course there is always the Alaska Highway pipeline, which, as I explained last time we were together, was on the horizon too.
The department is working on conceptual plans and looking at maximizing Yukoners’ benefits, understanding that the Mackenzie Valley pipeline will give us the expertise, when and if it goes forward, to confront the Alaska Highway pipeline project. Of course, that is going to be approximately twice as much money — $30 billion — which again is a lot of money in investments in the territory. Three-quarters of that line will be going through the territory. I am here to answer questions from the members opposite. I look forward to doing that.
Mr. Hardy: Well, let’s start with that. Very quickly, I have a very simple question. With the recent announcements from Alaska, a pipeline through the Yukon may actually materialize. That has been 30-some years of discussion. I also really do have to question what the minister said just recently, that the Mackenzie Valley pipeline is going to go first. I would not say that there are any assurances whatsoever that it would go first. My question is very simple. It is a standard question that I think has been asked before. Once again, I would like to know what the department is doing to maximize the benefits for Yukoners specifically on the Alaska Highway pipeline.
Hon. Mr. Lang: I agree with the member opposite. This government is not going to be the government that is going to pick what pipeline goes first. It might very well be the Alaska Highway pipeline.
I’m old enough to remember where I was the day it was announced in 1978 that the pipeline was going ahead. It has been a very long process in the territory. How are we maximizing the benefits to Yukoners? It is very important for all Yukoners that we work with the federal government on this issue. We have the NEB to work with. We have to ask the questions regarding the overview of the environmental question. All of these questions have to be answered.
I remind everyone in the House and Yukoners that if and when a pipeline is announced in Alaska we will certainly have a window of opportunity to grow into it. The announcement will come and after that there will be a period of time when all of these questions will have to be addressed. As with any government, whether it is us or a new government, we are going to be very aware of maximizing our benefits because the benefits to Yukoners are very important. This pipeline is huge; if it goes ahead, it will be the largest contract ever entered into in North America.
What are we going to do as a government? We have the Aboriginal Pipeline Coalition up and funded and doing their work. They are moving forward with their internal issues. We are looking forward to the hearings that will be held, and there will certainly be extensive hearings held on the Alaska Highway Pipeline.
Implementing a pipeline strategy with our neighbours — British Columbia and Alberta — those kinds of things are a work-in-progress and we are keeping very much aware of it.
For the member opposite, what are we doing? We’re keeping aware of what’s happening in the State of Alaska, which is very important because again, I would remind everyone, we’re not the ones who are going to pull the trigger on the Alaska Highway pipeline. At this point, they are working very hard with the producers who own the product. TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. is one of the players, so that’s optimistic for the Alaska Highway pipeline. We are funding the Alaska Highway Aboriginal Pipeline Coalition. We’re working with B.C. and Alberta on a pipeline strategy — a work-in-progress — and we look forward to making some announcements on that.
We’re doing the hard work it takes in the Mackenzie Valley project. So, in answering the member opposite, that’s a very short overview of what is happening internally here in the government. We certainly look forward to an expanding pipeline, if and when any one of these pipelines is announced to be a reality. That would mean we would have to upgrade our work internally and work with all the agencies that are going to be involved after the decision is made on how this thing will unfold in our territory.
Mr. Hardy: I look forward to sending the minister some correspondence requesting more information over the next while, as we anticipate any kind of movement from the Alaska side regarding this pipeline.
Next question — I’m going to keep moving right through these: a few weeks ago, British Columbia placed a moratorium on uranium exploration and development in that province. Will the government consider placing a moratorium on uranium exploration and development in the Yukon and open up consultation so that people can decide if they want this kind of development?
Hon. Mr. Lang: That was an announcement that B.C. made. I am not sure what background they had to make that kind of a decision. We certainly are very aware of the uranium question, not only here but across Canada. We have exploration going on, but most of it is not directed at uranium. Most of it is looking at other minerals. If in fact we were to look at uranium mining, which would be a long way off, we certainly would look at Saskatchewan and how uranium projects are managed in their province.
There is a lot of overview for anything nuclear. We have the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, which is involved in any nuclear mining. If we were exploring for it and we uncovered a uranium deposit, any of those that have been uncovered have not fallen under the umbrella of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, because they don’t meet the minimum standard of overview. It’s something that we’re aware of. The option is always there, if we found as a government or as a jurisdiction that we wanted to question the uranium part of it.
At the moment, we trust in the YESA process, which we have internally. We respect the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, which we would have to fall under, whether it’s for exploration or an actual mine. Before we did anything, we would go to Saskatchewan to see how they manage the mines they have in existence. Saskatchewan produces more uranium than any other jurisdiction in the world. I think they produce 27 percent of the world’s uranium. They have been doing this for many, many years, so they are producing uranium and their mines are active. We would look to them for guidance and overview if, in fact, we were to move forward in any uranium mine concept. As far as I know, as minister, I have not seen that on the horizon.
Mr. Hardy: I appreciate the minister for staying focused on the question and trying to give me some information without long explanations that don’t often lead anywhere. I’ll try to keep my questions in the same manner as well, with very little preamble.
My next question: what concrete action will the department be taking to expand alternative energy production in use in the territory, specifically solar, wind, biomass and geothermal?
People see signs of wind generation every time they drive to Porter Creek along the Alaska Highway, up on Haeckel Hill, I believe.
Can the minister just give me some indication of what areas they are looking at, and what they are exploring?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Certainly, we do have the wind turbines on Haeckel Hill, and the production is one thing that comes from the wind turbines on Haeckel Hill, but also, Mr. Chair, it’s very nice to see how much notice people take of that facility. I have had kids come up to me, as young as four or five years old, and ask me why the propellers aren’t going around.
So it serves two purposes: it does supply a small amount of energy, and it certainly has improved over the years, and it also is a great tool through which we can be aware of that kind of energy program.
What is this government doing? This government is working on many levels. We are looking at the Yukon College fluidized bed gasifier. The study was done in 2004, and we certainly are working with the gasifier to see what we can do to move ahead and commission it to produce syngas.
All sorts of things come out of that project. There’s a heating potential for the actual college and then there is also the education component. We are also looking at the college hybrid energy system, the installation of a monitoring display kiosk to demonstrate the effectiveness of the hybrid wind solar system installed and recently refurbished at the Yukon College. That is one thing we are working on.
We are looking at air source heat pumps and examining the feasibility of using air source heat pumps in the territory. That again has some potential.
Earth tubes — designing and piloting the use of earth tubes in Yukon. Earth tubes involve the passive preheating of air for combustion or ventilation in homes, so that again is something that could be utilized in the territory.
Steam turbines — conducting a pilot study to examine the feasibility of using a steam turbine in low-speed, low-head-river situations is another thing that could bode well for the territory.
Biomass heating — we are conducting a pilot study on the environmental and economic feasibility of commissioning a small-scale wood fuel heating system in the forest management branch building. That is another thing we are looking at.
Biomass small-scale district heating — we are conducting a feasibility study for a small community-scale biomass district heating system. Case study will be completed in Faro, Teslin and Dawson City.
Forest industry task group — Energy, Mines and Resources are working with the Department of Economic Development as well as key members of the forest industry to identify market opportunities for forest products. The economic and environmental potential of obtaining local wood to produce energy is being assessed by this working group. A number of projects are currently anticipated including piloting the conversion of a fuel-oil heated building to a clean technology wood or pellet-heating system. That is another thing we are looking at.
District heating in Whitehorse — conducting a feasibility study on a district heating system in the downtown core of Whitehorse. The department is working with us, Property Management Agency, and the City of Whitehorse to explore options.
Wood and geothermal are being considered as a fuel source.
Wind monitoring program — working with the Yukon Development Corporation and Yukon Energy Corporation to provide wind monitoring towers to assess wind regimes for Yukoners — has been an ongoing thing over the last five or six years.
Clean technology rebates — exploring the possibility of providing another phase of rebates on energy-efficient consumer appliances and potentially on certain renewable household energy technology.
Mr. Chair, those are some of the things we’re doing. We certainly are aware of the cost of energy and we are where we’re at in Canada. Hopefully, over a period of time, we will be less dependent on products from the south which, by the way, are growing in cost by the day. We’re working with our communities to make them more financially viable on the energy side of the ledger.
In Watson Lake, Yukon Electrical Company did an overview of the energy coming off their new generating units that are being used now to heat the high school and the recreation complex. We are looking at other ways we could utilize that heat.
The interesting thing about the Yukon Electrical study was when they did the study on the temperature of the water as it moved through those two complexes — which meant it crossed the Campbell Highway, moved into the high school and then moved to the recreation complex — they actually lost only five percent of their heat in the process. There is a lot more heat out of that generator that could be used in the community of Watson Lake to minimize some of those costs.
It would be very beneficial for us as a government and the Town of Watson Lake to look at the new hospital complex and the potential of a seniors complex that would again use some of that heat that’s available there to heat those complexes. Those are certainly on the horizon.
Mr. Hardy: I will shift away from alternative energy, although we all know that energy is just going to continue to cost more, if we continue the way we are going.
I will move directly into agriculture, since the minister mentioned products from the south. We sure can understand the costs, every time we go shopping, and how things are continuing to increase. It takes energy to get the food up here. My question is very simple and a local one: because of the distance food travels to reach Yukon tables, and given the reality of climate change and the vital importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and the costs, what plans will the department undertake to stimulate local agricultural production, as well as the sale and consumption of Yukon food?
Hon. Mr. Lang: It is an interesting question, as our energy becomes more and more expensive and also as we become more health conscious. That’s not just in the territory. I was talking to my sister in Calgary about some issue regarding diet. She said that she follows the 100-mile rule. She eats what can be grown in her area within 100 miles. I think Yukoners are becoming more aware of this all the time.
We, in government, are undertaking different things, but we’re looking at getting land to our farming community so that we can grow more products. By the way, Mr. Chair, we just have to go down to the Fireweed Market to see just exactly what kinds of products are available in the territory. If we go back 20 years, it is a completely different market today. Of course it is in season.
We do have potatoes that are available almost year-round from our local farmers, but the other vegetables are seasonal. We’ve gone to work with the federal government to make sure they recognize us as part of that agricultural group across Canada — and they have done that. That opens up opportunities for the farmers to access a business risk management suite of programs to provide agricultural income stabilization for farmers. We recognize the environmental stewardship of the agricultural industry. 20 percent of the industry has enrolled in the environmental farm plan process, so we’re working with them on that.
We’re working on research and we are working with farmers on soil enhancement, variety evaluation, technology transfer, production management and the economics of all that. Last December, the new multi-year development plan for the agricultural industry was released. The plan outlines a series of recommendations and targets to increase and sustain production, sales and profitability in the Yukon agricultural and agri-food industry. They will set up a meat-processing working group to address the future meat processing needs of the territory.
We have the mobile abattoir, which continues the red-meat inspection and slaughter services. We look at poultry processing and equipment, which was purchased last year.
We’re doing a lot to help the industry, understanding it’s a very small industry, and we look forward to working with them in the future. They are a very dynamic group of individuals. Through this government, we made it possible for older farmers to stay on their farm, but also to sell some part of the farm so we keep it in production. Those kinds of things all bode well for the industry.
We’re looking forward to expanding a lot of the things we do to make sure this industry grows. If you were to go to their meetings and listen to their concerns and look around the table, there are younger people there now and it’s interesting to be a part of that dynamic. It is a big question for all Canadians: where do we get our food? How do they grow our food? People want to eat locally.
And that will bode well for all of us.
Mr. Hardy: Thank you to the minister opposite for recognizing the importance of food in our life and, ideally, the ability to grow it within the region you live in as much as you possibly can.
I recommend to people whenever they sit down to eat to try to identify how many types of foods they are eating that actually can be grown in the Yukon. It is a good lesson.
Land availability? Of course it is connected to agriculture and, if the minister can give this to me or, if he doesn’t have the information at his fingertips but can supply it to my office at some time in the future, what is the status of land availability in rural Yukon communities as well as the Whitehorse area? Also, how many service, residential or commercial lots are currently available by community — and rural lots as well as agricultural lots that have been identified in communities and in the Whitehorse area.
Finally, I have noticed over the last bit that the City of Whitehorse is developing lots, some private developers are developing lots, and First Nations are developing lots. Has this government done an assessment of how many lots are coming on stream in the next three to five years, and what kind of impact that could have, if we are looking at anywhere from 500 to 800 lots all of a sudden, in a very short period of time? If they have not done that assessment, would they do it so that people understand what is coming down the pike?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I will try to answer this with a couple of hats on. Part of this is in Community Services. They are working with the city through the protocol we have internally with the city. The City of Whitehorse is the lead, and we work with them to develop the land within their official city plan.
If we were to look at 2007, they sold 47 lots in Whitehorse Copper, 19 in Mount Sima, 56 in the Copper Ridge residential area and six lots in the Hot Springs rural residential area. The upcoming projects in the Whitehorse area are Whitehorse Copper country residential, phase 2, with 58 lots. Community Services is managing all aspects related to the development and legal survey. The Burns Road commercial area will release up to eight lots. Arkell development is being considered by the city and that will open up a number of other lots. Takhini North is another potential. That is all part and parcel of the city’s decision. There is also the Stan McCowan arena area.
Outside of Whitehorse, in 10 communities there are 170 lots. Beaver Creek has an inventory of three; Carmacks has a total of 20. There are 16 residential and four commercial lots available. Dawson City has an inventory of 20 residential lots. Faro has five country residential lots in Tintina and one industrial. In Haines Junction, there are five country residential, six residential, one mobile home, seven tourist/commercial and agricultural land in the Champagne-Aishihik traditional territory. I think there is something like 16 parcels of agricultural land that will be phased in. I think four were sold last year and there are a number to be sold this year. Mayo has 18 country residential lots. Ross River has three industrial lots. Teslin has 37 residential airport lots and two commercial lots. In Watson Lake, they have an inventory of three residential lots, 12 mobile home lots, 13 country residential lots and 11 industrial lots. Then there is the Whitehorse area.
That covers the 10 communities in and around the territory. I will send you some communication on that. It is pretty straightforward.
Mr. Hardy: Thank you to the minister for that and also for his offer to supply us with that information. I really appreciate that.
Moving along, I only have a few more questions. These are a little tougher in some ways and are more difficult to answer. I am going to do a tiny preamble just to set this up, and then hopefully just get the questions out.
The Environment Act recognizes that the resources of the Yukon are the common heritage of the people of the Yukon, including generations yet to come, that long-term economic prosperity is dependent on wise management of the environment, that a healthy environment is indispensable to human life and health, that every individual in the Yukon has a right to a healthy environment. The act states that the Government of Yukon is the trustee of public trust and is therefore responsible for the protection of the collective interests of the people of Yukon regarding the quality of the natural environment.
The Umbrella Final Agreement is authorized to ensure that social, cultural, economic and environmental policies are applied to the management, protection and use of land, water and resources in an integrated and coordinated manner so as to ensure sustainable development, which is part of the Energy, Mines and Resources mandate.
The Umbrella Final Agreement also indicates that any regional land use planning process in Yukon shall provide for public participation in the development of land use plans. Once a claim is staked, the land is alienated from the Crown and no other value can be recognized. The person or company staking the land has a right to mine the land and to sell the claim with no profit to Yukoners in that regard.
I’m sure the minister recognizes that I am talking about the old system that is very unique to Canada; it is called the free entry mining system and it has been around for a long time. Many people consider it a sacred cow — definitely people in the mining industry. However, many other countries around the world do not, and have not, and yet mining continues in those countries as well.
My question: what plans does the government have to adapt free-entry staking in order to harmonize it with the Umbrella Final Agreement and the Environment Act principles and policies?
Hon. Mr. Lang: To be short on that, that’s the Quartz Mining Act; there is free entry in the territory. Certainly, all of these acts in time, will be reviewed through the UFA, and those kinds of questions can be asked when they are reviewed.
It won’t be my decision here today when they are reviewed, but over time, Yukon has committed — not this government — we’ve committed to look at this with our partners, the First Nations, and review all of these acts that the public government has.
Mr. Hardy: I really do look forward to having a chance to actually work on something like this. They are very ancient, and times have changed, especially with the Umbrella Final Agreement and recognition of lands, and the impact it has on the socio-environmental consequences of the usage and what is the priority. I do look forward to that; I hope the process starts fairly soon.
The minister is right that it is of course the Quartz Mining Act. My question again: has this government considered changing the Quartz Mining Act to base royalties on net smelter return? In other words, production mining-specific expenses rather than on net profit where all sorts of expenses are deducted, including their CEO pay and benefits? This, unfortunately, often means that there are no profits, so there are no expenses, because they can write off a lot.
Hon. Mr. Lang: The short answer to that: I guess we are looking at options on that. Those are options that are out there and we certainly as a government are looking at all options.
Mr. Hardy: I won’t go down this road much longer — or at all, actually.
I’m going to wrap this up. There are many other departments that need to be debated. I do appreciate the minister’s attempt — and willingness — to try to answer the questions I asked. Ones that don’t get answered — I’ve sent the minister the list of some of the questions I was concerned about — he will have them and he can reflect on them over the next while and maybe we’ll revisit a lot of them in the fall.
However, the last question is a very simple one. Will the department’s energy strategy include introducing a carbon tax similar to B.C.’s? Are any other measures aimed at making consumers pay for carbon emissions?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I’d like to thank the member opposite for his questions here this afternoon.
We’re looking at all sorts of options, Mr. Chair. That’s one option in understanding our small jurisdiction and, of course, the cost of petroleum today, but it’s not something we’re looking at.
Chair: Is there any further general debate? Seeing none, we will proceed line by line.
Mr. Hardy: I request the unanimous consent of the Committee to deem all lines in Vote 53, Energy, Mines and Resources, cleared or carried, as required.
Unanimous consent re deeming all lines in Vote 53, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, cleared or carried
Chair: Mr. Hardy has requested the unanimous consent of the Committee to deem all lines in Vote 53, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, cleared or carried, as required. Are you agreed?
All Hon. Members: Agreed.
Chair: Unanimous consent has been granted.
On Operation and Maintenance Expenditures
Total Operation and Maintenance Expenditures in the amount of $36,921,000 agreed to
On Capital Expenditures
Total Capital Expenditures in the amount of $3,640,000 agreed to
Department of Energy, Mines and Resources agreed to
Chair: We will now proceed to the Department of Health and Social Services. Do members wish to take a brief recess for officials?
All Hon. Members: Agreed.
Chair: Committee of the Whole will recess for five minutes.
Recess
Chair: I will now call Committee of the Whole to order.
The matter before the Committee is Bill No. 11, First Appropriation Act, 2008-09. We will now proceed with Vote 15, Department of Health and Social Services.
Department of Health and Social Services
Hon. Mr. Cathers: It’s a pleasure to rise in the House during Committee of the Whole to debate the Department of Health and Social Services. As members will recall, earlier in second reading I referred to a number of the areas under the department, so I will not go on extensively at this point in time. They include much of the good work officials have done over the past years, including social assistance reform. As members will recall, this had five key components. There is the increase in rates. There is the change to the earned income exemption, whereby the three-month waiting period is eliminated and the earned income rises to 50 percent for a maximum of three years. This provides incentive and the enhanced ability for people to move into the workforce and to build their personal resources while they are there. Of course, the three-year timeline was based on the fact that a review of case files has demonstrated that once individuals were off social assistance for a period of two years, they typically never return to the system.
It is time limited for the purpose of preventing misuse of that system. As well, changes include the disabled persons assistance program that will provide increased ability for the department to assist those who have a long-term disability, and that will also reduce the administrative burden on departmental staff and on individuals with respect to the requirement for filling out such information rather than submitting reports on a monthly basis, as is the case with social assistance recipients. It will move to a yearly review for those who have, by virtue of a doctor’s diagnosis, a long-term disability.
As well, u the reform project identified two key areas for increase within other parts of the system that have been acted on with a significant increase to the child care subsidy of 25 percent, an increase in the maximum eligibility limit, and the increase to the Yukon child benefit — a significant increase again from a previous level of $37.50 per month to a new level of $57.50 per month per child.
Effective April 1, the department launched the services to children with disabilities program. $418,000 is allocated for this purpose. This builds on previous existing resources and is a program aimed at providing increased ability for parents who have a disabled child, particularly those with severe disabilities. It provides an increased ability for that parent to care for that child in their home and to support the child’s development, ultimate potential and ability to function effectively in society and live a fruitful life.
This includes additions to the health human resources strategy carried forward in this year, including the family physician incentive program, the medical education bursary, the health profession education bursary, the nurse mentoring program, the increase to the previously existing nurse bursary, and the expansion of existing physician practices through funding available as long as the practice meets the eligibility for that.
They must create space for at least one additional physician, and work with the Department of Education and Yukon College on developing the licensed practical nurse program, which will be up and running this fall at Yukon College.
As members will be aware, this government is the first one in Yukon history to move forward with a comprehensive health human resources strategy and we will continue to work, as we are right now, with health professionals on evaluating the work that has been done to date, the success of those programs and determining ways in which the program should continue to evolve to support recruitment, retention and training of health care professionals for the Yukon.
As well in this year, as members will recall, in January we announced the expansion of the telehealth network which, through a partner, with Canada Health Infoway, has resulted in the Yukon being the second jurisdiction in Canada to have telehealth services available in all communities, and are available through all of our nursing stations at this point in time, effective earlier this year.
As well, work is ongoing to develop the nurse line partnership with the Province of British Columbia. We anticipate that service being up and running sometime later this year, likely during the summer. That will allow people to dial 811 and receive access to counselling from a nurse who provides information by telephone. As members will likely be aware, at one point in time it was possible in a simpler time to receive that service from the hospital or from doctors or nurses over the phone — but in recent years, due to changes in liability requirements, that fell by the wayside.
This will provide an enhanced level of service that will allow access to nurses who are dealing with a wide range of issues and have experience in assisting people with assessing their own symptoms and choosing what services they may wish to access, what would be appropriate, and provide advice to them on whether they need to see a health professional such as a doctor or a nurse in their community, rapidly or whether it may be something that they could deal with themselves.
It will be counselling to assist them in taking increased control and be involved in their own health at home.
Work has been ongoing in improving support for mental health services, which I will touch on later. As a result of these financial increases, the overall financial overview is that planned O&M expenditures in the department are expected to increase, for a total of $209,209,000. This reflects an increase from last year’s record budget.
We are very sensitive and aware of the many current and future processes that will impact health spending. That is why we have announced the health care review and appointment of a committee to look at the sustainability of our health care system over the longer term. We look forward to this committee doing its work and reporting later this year.
This is complementary to work that has been launched, both in the department and in the Yukon Housing Corporation, of long-term strategic planning, which had taken place in the past in a less formal context. This new process in both entities is aimed at getting more involvement from all staff who are affected in bringing a comprehensive strategy and approach to long-term strategic planning of the health care system as a whole. Those two strategic planning processes will feed into the health care review being done by the panel and will continue beyond the completion of that panel’s final report.
Revenues are anticipated to increase by a further one percent and comprise 14 percent of the total expenditure for the department. Capital expenditures for the coming year for the department are estimated at $11,131,000.
Highlights of operation and maintenance funding include the Canada Northwest FASD Partnership. As of April 1, the Yukon took over the lead of the Canada Northwest Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Partnership with me as chair of the ministers council. We’ve been a member of this partnership for the past nine years. It is formed of the western provinces and the three northern territories, as well as clinicians and a significant network of technical people who are connected through this partnership, in sharing studies and the results of initiatives that have been done by each jurisdiction to try to reduce FASD and to diagnose it as well.
Although the Yukon has hosted an international conference and a symposium of the Canada Northwest FASD Partnership, this is the first time we have taken on the role of lead and chaired this group. We have, of course, been very actively involved in the Canada Northwest FASD Partnership research network since its inception. Members will be aware that our government’s five-step FASD action plan was a significant part of our plan during the last mandate. We have carried that forward, delivered on all areas and have worked both internally and with non-governmental organizations to deliver various components, as well as worked with the hospital and doctors to do such things as the meconium-testing project to identify the level of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and fetal alcohol effects that are seen in babies in the Yukon.
Of course, as I noted before, this enables us to connect with work being done in other jurisdictions. I look forward to sharing further information with members, following the conference that will take place — the annual meeting of ministers and the annual conference that will be taking place later next month in Banff. We look forward to announcing further results from the meeting at that point in time.
Another initiative that has been ongoing in the last fiscal year and will continue in this fiscal year is the expansion of the chronic disease collaborative management program. This program began in May 2005 with a focus on diabetes. The program focuses on supporting health professionals to improve the quality of care for people with a chronic condition and supporting those health professionals working together to that end. The program provides education and training sessions, clinical support from chronic disease management, a nurse, and facilitates support.
Participants are health care providers working in Yukon communities. Together, they provide care and support to over 700 Yukoners with diabetes.
Health providers in the program have demonstrated significant improvements in patient care, consistent with Canadian Diabetes Association clinical practice guidelines. In addition, innovative changes and collaborative work has been implemented, such as patient group visits.
Future steps for this program include a rollout to all Yukon communities and medical practitioners, and expansion to other chronic conditions. Along with diabetes, the program will support improving the clinical management of hypertension, heart failure, pulmonary disease and kidney disease.
Other initiatives under the territorial health access fund, in addition to the health human resources strategy initiatives I outlined, include emergency preparedness planning. The department is undertaking a number of activities to better prepare for its responsibilities during major emergency and disaster events, including updating departmental emergency health and emergency social services plans, completing contingency plans for specific events, and updating branch business continuity plans.
Other activities include training events, participation in national planning activities, managing resources under the national emergency stockpile program and inter-agency and intergovernmental coordination and agreements. These types of activities — emergency preparedness — would apply to situations such as the flood last year, which fortunately saw a limited need for services. However, the staff and working groups of emergency health and emergency social services were ready and did assist in, fortunately, a limited number of situations — but they were prepared for a larger scale demand on services, which fortunately was not needed. Of course, I’m referring particularly to the flooding situation in Marsh Lake, Tagish and Lake Laberge.
Other activities that could occur would be things such as the SARS epidemic that was seen in Ontario, the possibility which epidemiologists tell us will occur at some point in time that is impossible to predict — an influenza pandemic that occurred in the past and will occur in the future. Such activities, particularly in these days of modern travel and with the increased speed of travel of the virus in early stages, will require the ability to respond quickly and appropriately.
That is one example, when I refer to the branch business continuity plans, where such events as health emergencies could have some impact on the level of staff available and, therefore, all branches of the government need to be prepared to operate in a coordinated fashion in such challenging sessions. We are connected of course to national activities in this area as we do that.
Another area that is funded under the territorial health access fund includes the risk management and quality assurance office, which is leading and directing the development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of quality assurance, quality improvement and risk management activities throughout the department, with these activities expected to lead to increased client satisfaction through improved service provision, increased value to the taxpayers and increased staff morale, as well as program sustainability, through better management of risk. This includes, of course, reviewing situations where our front-line staff are exposed to potential risks, including violent situations and exposure to diseases and other hazardous situations that could affect their health. A comprehensive review is being done to ensure that our policies, procedures and activities meet the best possible level they can.
Additionally, dental health enhancements at the community level will increase rural Yukoners’ access to dental services by recruiting, orienting and equipping dentists to provide service in rural communities. Services to children will be enhanced by increasing access to specialized pediatric dentists and sustaining the Yukon children’s dental program to increase recruitment and retention activities for dental therapists and attract young Yukoners to the field of dental therapy.
I also mentioned the area of mental health. Improved mental health support at the community level is an area we will be moving further forward on. This will build on the enhancement I previously referred to of a rural clinician being based out of Dawson City, with access through the telehealth network to other areas of the territory and the services based out of Whitehorse, the youth clinician based out of Whitehorse and the contracting of a second full-time psychiatrist. This is in the process of being expanded to contract a second rural clinician for the southern regions of the Yukon.
These clinicians provide training consultation and professional support to health care providers, engage in public education and awareness activities and conduct assessments and develop treatment plans for individuals with known or suspected serious mental health problems.
Additionally, a new program — early psychosis intervention — will increase awareness, diagnosis, management, treatment and support for young people with early psychosis, including increased referrals, assessments and treatment plans for young people with potential psychotic disorder and increased services for clients, families and caregivers. It will also include an increased capacity of clinical staff to be up to date with knowledge, policy development and clinical interventions, and increased capacity for clients and families to engage in mutual aid and support.
Mr. Chair, I believe you’re about to tell me that my time has expired, so I look forward to continuing my remarks later and hearing questions from members opposite.
Mr. Mitchell: I want to start by thanking the minister for the overview he has presented this afternoon, and which he has indicated he will continue to present at his next opportunity. I want to thank the officials for being here today, as well as for the briefing that they provided to us earlier in the sitting. It’s much appreciated having that information. I want to put on the record how much I, our caucus and all Yukoners appreciate the health care providers across the Yukon, be they doctors, nurses, LPNs, administrators, radiologist technicians or physiotherapists who do their best to keep us in the best possible health on a daily basis. They deal very frequently with people who are experiencing discomfort and anguish. In my experience, they do an amazing job at trying to alleviate people’s fears and concerns and assist people toward recovery at the earliest possible opportunity.
As the minister said, we are planning on spending over $209 million in the current fiscal year just in operation and maintenance funds, and another $11.131 million in capital funds. It’s the largest area of our budget. I know that the minister takes his responsibilities very seriously. I know that he recognizes that probably the two portfolios that touch Yukon families in the most ongoing and intimate basis are health and education. It is not an easy portfolio, because there are always going to be competing demands for the money. We do appreciate that.
Last year, in general debate on Health, I indicated to the minister that one of the advantages of general debate as opposed to Question Period is the opportunity to elicit more information in a more collegial and less confrontational atmosphere. I indicated to the minister at that time that, due to the limited time available for debate, I would look forward to asking more specific questions and getting more specific answers and going back and forth that way, hopefully avoiding too many of the 20-minute intervals when either the minister or I are on our feet.
It’s easier for the officials to follow forward. Perhaps we’ll be able to do that this year as well — I hope so.
In his opening remarks, the minister spoke about the change — not only to social assistance rates — but to the whole structure and approach of providing social assistance to the clients who need it, including the change in the 50-percent level of being able to earn income and maintain social assistance, up to three years of being able to work while continuing to receive some social assistance. I do think these are good ideas, good approaches and good programs.
I have one question I would ask the minister. In the budget under social services, we see $23,131,000 compared to $22,710,000 in the 2007-08 forecast — an increase of some two percent — I think that works out to $421,000. We haven’t actually ever heard any sort of barometer or standard of how this will translate for individual recipients. I don’t know the minister wants to provide that, because I recognize that every situation is different. You have single people, you have families and the numbers in families differ. So I don’t know what yardstick the minister wants to use, but I’m confident he will be fair in choosing one that’s readily understandable.
We’re just wondering if there is some amount of average increase per recipient, based on recipients without children, families with one child, two children, et cetera. Whichever way the minister wants to break it down would be helpful, but could he give us an idea of what those increases will be. I do recognize — as I’m sure the minister will point out — that there’s a great deal of variation, depending on individual circumstances.
We have known for many years that people are struggling in an era of increasing food costs, fuel costs, housing costs, to make do. We have heard, and there have been many public demonstrations that we have all attended — members of all caucuses, including the government side — where people are stating that they have to cut into their food amounts to supplement housing costs in order to find decent enough housing to house their family.
If the minister could just answer that — I think I’ll just leave it on this one issue. If the minister could refrain from just reading another 20-minute section of his notes, maybe we could do it sort of issue by issue; if not, well, we’ll get back to other issues later.
Hon. Mr. Cathers: I don’t have the rate breakdown in front of me here. I can undertake to look into that for the member opposite.
Suffice it to say — and let me remind the member opposite of the work that officials did on the recommendations to the rate increase for social assistance — the most significant increase was for the food portion of that, based on the market-basket approach. I believe it is Agriculture Canada that comes up with that number, but it’s the federal market-basket approach to calculating a nutritional food basket. While that reflects more than a bare-bones ability to live on what is allocated for food, it is the best assessment that we have that includes local calculation to allow nutritional food costs — including the appropriate mix of fruits, vegetables, et cetera — and some additional room to ensure that those who are on such a calculation have the appropriate resources to have a good healthy diet.
That was the most significant increase in the social assistance reform that was identified. As well, there were rates identified across the board, and I believe we announced this back when the proposed structure was first indicated.
I will, however, undertake to look into that for the member. I don’t have the information at my fingertips.
However, there are increases to rent, facilities and all rate categories, based on the work done by officials in assessing the cost-of-living increase in this area. Secondly, and more importantly, it is in identifying the actual cost that is necessary to achieve such services in the Yukon.
As the member is likely aware, the key objective of the review was focusing on the nearly 70 percent of social assistance recipients who have been on social assistance on more than one occasion. It determined that these recipients often end up back on assistance because the program structure encouraged dependency by clawing back every employment dollar an individual made for a period of three months after entering the program, and then allowed them to retain only one dollar out of every four as they entered the workforce. This created a situation whereby if someone faced an unexpected car breakdown, furnace problem or other unexpected costs they couldn’t personally deal with, they went in to social assistance for assistance. For a three-month period, they would then have every dollar they made in the workforce clawed back, so they would see no benefit from going to work.
In fact, due to the costs of travelling to work and the various little expenses we all face when coming to a place of employment, they would probably be worse off working during that three-month period than if they had stayed at home and not worked. This resulted in a structure that encouraged despondency among those individuals and made it very difficult for them to gain those personal financial resources and enter the workforce.
Secondly, the key objective of the three-year period where they receive the enhanced earned income exemption is to help them build those personal savings, so that when they see the increased cost of a car breaking down or a furnace, and so on, they would not be forced to return to social assistance, because that in itself is a very demoralizing experience. Our objective in this structure is to assist people to enter the workforce and build their personal savings and resources for themselves and their families.
Nearly 70 percent of the caseload that showed they had entered to workforce and attempted to make it go demonstrates that they have the willingness to work, the ability to be hired, and were making an attempt to get off the system. The key and most important objective of social assistance reform is targeting those individuals in particular and helping them break dependency on the system and become fully self-sufficient.
Other areas that I would like to touch on in resuming my comments from before — I recognize that the member is eager to proceed with further questions and I am eager to give further answers — but there are a few areas that I think would be helpful in avoiding needless back and forth in debate by me providing that information now, which I did not have the ability to do in my first comments.
Further enhancement in the mental health area includes support for persons with serious mental health problems, and a mental health social worker has been hired to provide case management services to persons with complex mental health problems including concurrent mental health and addiction problems. That is what is often referred to as dual-diagnosed clients and of course those are individuals who have both a mental health challenge and an addiction to either alcohol or another substance. These situations have become very complex and very difficult to treat. It is increasingly difficult for them to break their addiction and to engage in healthier behaviours.
The social worker will also work with clients, landlords, educators and employers to optimize housing, education, training and work opportunities for these clients.
Another enhancement that is related to our disease management program includes improved supports for tuberculosis. The goal of this program is to reduce the incidence and spread of tuberculosis through effectively and timely case-finding, screening, contact-tracing and treatment of infected and at-risk individuals.
TB nurses work with community health nurses and TB workers to enhance monitoring, surveillance and ensure clinical practice guidelines on the treatment and management of tuberculosis are followed.
Public information materials, TB worker manuals and protocols are developed to guide the identification, treatment and management of tuberculosis.
Another area that I’d like to make members aware of is the advanced directives implementation. A full-time coordinator is now in place to enhance services and build the capacity of individuals and health care and other professionals to increase the number of advanced directives put in place. This will be done by increasing awareness and knowledge, training and coordination, promoting and working with all levels of the health care system to ensure forms are completed, on file and accessible when needed.
Another area that we’re pleased about is palliative care. The official launch of the program in the new building