Mr. Cardiff: Today I’d like to ask the Minister of Health and Social Services to think about a young man called, Joey. He’s a First Nation youth from Dawson City, but he spent the last four years in Whitehorse since he quit school at 15.
The first few years, Joey was able to live with relatives, but basically they got tired of feeding him. There weren’t any jobs for youth his age and lack of experience, so a friend showed him how to get involved in the drug scene and how to sell drugs to other youngsters. It helped to pay his way and he and four other youths rented an apartment. At first it was fun. There were lots of parties, lots of girls. Then, at the coldest time of winter, they were all evicted. What would the minister advise young Joey to do?
Hon. Mr. Hart: Young Joey should have looked at our Individual Learning Centre when he was out of that process to look at assisting him in developing his skills for future employment — future gainful employment so he could avoid the situation the member opposite just referred to.
Mr. Cardiff: Some nights, Joey found friends who had a spare couch to let him sleep on and sometimes they would even feed him. Those were the times when he had drugs and alcohol to share. Other nights, he slept with two other boys in a structure made of old boxes and tin that was hidden in the trees off a road in Porter Creek. It had some blankets that someone had found in a dump. When an older relative bumped into him and ask him why he didn’t look for work, he laughed.
His clothes were dirty, his hair was matted, his eyes were blotchy and he was sleepy all the time. No employer would take him seriously, he knew. One night at 10 p.m., it got to minus 30 and Joey knew he couldn’t stay outdoors any longer. If the minister had seen Joey, what advice would he have?
Hon. Mr. Hart: There are several programs available for individuals such as the member opposite indicated. We have a situation where we could provide assistance to enable the individual to get emergency shelter for the evening, as the member opposite indicated on the one night of minus 30 below. We could provide service through Skookum Jim and then also provide emergency shelter for that individual. We also have services available for individuals through social assistance that can be provided on an emergency basis to assist those individuals. We also have services available under the drug addiction process to assist individuals, that ensure treatment for those individuals.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, it just so happens that a taxi driver Joey knew said, “All you have to do is phone Skookies, and they find you a warm place to sleep and maybe even something to eat.” But he didn’t have a phone. So he stopped a few people and asked to use their cellphones. When he finally did get through to Skookies, he was told to meet the outreach worker at the Sarah Steele Building at the detox doorway.
When he got there, a woman who was very drunk was throwing up and being carried to the door by the RCMP. He was told by detox staff at the door that he had to stay outdoors and wait for the outreach worker.
The next 15 minutes were the coldest Joey had ever felt in his life. When he got inside, the workers searched through his jacket and his pants pockets and then gave him a breathalyzer test. He was finally warm.
Will the minister tell us if he thinks what Joey experienced is the best practice for treating homeless youth?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I find it surprising that the member opposite would come through with this questioning, especially after we provided the member opposite a view of the whole process. He’s just utilizing all that information as per what he just demonstrated here in the House.
I believe this gentleman should have a look at all the services that are available for all the individuals in the Yukon who are homeless, not just the individual he’s purporting to make out here in the House — this theoretical individual — and I look forward to providing the member opposite with a very good strategy in the future with regard to homelessness in Yukon.
Mr. Cardiff: What is the state of the Earth today? The global economy is in shambles; the promise of financial reform in the wake of the meltdown has been empty. There has been little movement globally to stave off catastrophic climate change. Our economies are as oil-addicted as ever as we race toward peak oil. Without change, without a massive transition toward a new economy in harmony with Mother Earth, our future on our planet will be truly grim.
This is the defining challenge that confronts all Earth’s people, whether it’s in Carmacks, Cairo or Canberra. We must transition to an economic system that is in harmony with our planet. How will the people of the Yukon be a part of that great transition, Mr. Premier?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: I think all individuals in the world are experiencing and sharing some of the very difficult challenges that we face today globally. As far as the member’s question, it has been for some time now — I can say with great confidence — that the Yukon has been focused on the issues specific to climate change. The member asked how.
Well, obviously, one of the areas that’s very important for the Yukon is the climate change strategy, the Climate Change Action Plan, the cold climate innovation cluster, the emerging of the green economy, using our very fine institution — the Yukon College — in ways that we can further enhance those things.
Let me remind the member also that the economies around the world struggle regardless if they are emerging into addressing the member’s question as he relayed it, or just trying to survive economically as they are today. The one thing that we can say here in Canada is that we’ve managed to fare reasonably well during this major global economic downturn and the Yukon, specifically, fared even better. It’s one of the bright spots in North America.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, that may be, but sooner or later the roosters come home to roost, and we will see just how well we are doing.
The great transition requires that we build a truly local, low-carbon, sustainable economy and we’re very far from achieving this. Yesterday the government announced more junkets to China in order to attract more foreign capital for the mining sector. This government wants to see more of our raw materials shipped halfway across the world to feed the industrial processes of the world’s largest polluter.
We are giving our resources away so cheaply. We are not looking at how we manage these resources sustainably and with maximum local benefits, which ironically is what China does when foreign investors come knocking at its door. How will we transition toward managing our mineral wealth in a truly sustainable way?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: The Third Party member should be very careful about talking about Yukon’s resources, because if you follow the logic of the NDP’s policies and their vision for the Yukon, you couldn’t even give them away, never mind attract investment to develop them. We’ve come a long way in addressing the economic problems that we faced as recently as 2002. We want to continue that very positive trend. It’s a well-managed growth.
As far as the member opposite’s view of how we regulate and manage this type of economic investment and growth, let’s look to things like YESAA. Let’s look to devolution and what we’ve taken on in terms of the Quartz Mining Act, the land use act, the Waters Act. There is a litany of mechanisms — legal, regulatory and policy-wise — that ensure that we are managing and developing our resources in a very, very responsible way.
That’s why the Yukon today is such an attractive place. It is consistent in its application of policies. It has a treasure trove of resource wealth. It has a government that believes in responsible development, and we are certainly making our headway in the world global economy.
Mr. Cardiff: How about we look at the fact that there are skilled Yukoners out there who can’t get jobs on some of these megaprojects that the government is touting. The greatest source of carbon emissions in the Yukon is the transportation industry. Much of this comes from trucking food from down south.
Our food system is built on wasting huge amounts of fossil fuels and catering to individual customer desires to eat whatever, whenever. Yesterday we celebrated Yukon’s farmer of the year. We all need to be farmers in the future, and we should all be farmers of the year. Local food security for the Yukon is a far and distant goal, but we must get there, because the status quo is not an option.
We must work toward a future when all the food we consume in the Yukon will be grown or raised in the Yukon in our backyards, in our forests, in our community greenhouses, and in our pothole lakes. How will we transition toward creating the local food security and food self-sufficiency that the planetary crisis demands?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Yesterday we saw a shining example of what the member opposite is speaking. Yesterday in our Assembly, and earlier last weekend, the Yukon Agricultural Association honoured a Yukoner for her work in the agricultural industry. We’re seeing people establishing greenhouses in communities, not just in Whitehorse, but also in the community of Old Crow, as we discussed yesterday.
The Government of Yukon, through the Growing Forward initiative, is working with Yukon’s farmers and people in the agriculture industry to support, grow, develop and nurture this industry.
Yes, it’s great to see people find organic strawberries in their grocery store in February, but we really do need to increase the amount of locally grown products we have here in the territory. I know people enjoyed shopping at the Fireweed Market this past summer, where they had the opportunity to buy locally grown potatoes, produce and cheeses. Through the work with the mobile abattoir, we’re also working at expanding the poultry and beef industries here in the territory.
We take seriously the issue of agriculture in the territory. We’re taking steps and working with our farmers and people in the industry to continue to grow it, to increase Yukon’s own home-grown food resources.
Mr. Cardiff: The Cancun round of negotiations on a global agreement to reduce carbon emissions is scheduled to kick off at the end of this month. There is a virtual consensus that we must prevent a global temperature rise of two degrees to stave off a major environmental catastrophe, but the pessimism leading up to Cancun is palpable.
Given recent U.S. election results, we can’t expect much from the world’s second largest polluter, and given Harper government’s unwillingness to move on the climate change file without a U.S. deal means that Canada could be repeat winner of the “Fossil of the Year” award. In the absence of leadership at a national level, we need leadership at a local level.
What is the Yukon’s official position at Cancun, and how prepared is the Yukon to meet the long-term challenges of climate change?
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: The Climate Change Secretariat and Yukon government departments are actively involved in addressing the top climate change priorities for the territory as identified in the Climate Change Action Plan.
Mr. Cardiff: That was not very well done, to me. Climate change is just one of the major challenges that Yukon and all of humanity face. The issues of peak oil and depletion of other resources and the inherent flaws in our financial and economic system — these, with climate change, are the major planetary challenges we face.
Our energies must be focused on how we meet these challenges and make the transition and build resilient communities that have a future. This is our challenge over the next 10, 20 or 50 years and yet our political system is fixated on the short term — the next scandal, the next project, the next budget, the next election.
When will the Premier change his political focus to think more long term and be better equipped to respond to these major challenges?
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: The Yukon is concerned about climate change, as are all other countries across the world. The Yukon government is committed to working with all its partners to effectively respond to a changing climate by developing and implementing both immediate and long-term solutions, such as the Tombstone Interpretive Centre that was opened in the spring of 2010 and is the first Yukon government building to be built to LEED standards, including high energy efficiency.
The Yukon has secured $585,000 in federal funding to undertake adaptation projects across the Yukon. Those are just a couple examples that show the Yukon is doing something and what it can with regard to climate change.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, there’s no value in pointing fingers and there’s no value in boasting when all governments around the world are guilty of carrying on like it’s business as usual. These challenges are really difficult to wrap one’s head around, but it’s clear that humanity needs a massive retooling if we’re going to have a future. The undertaking can seem overwhelming. This isn’t productive, after all. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
The Climate Change Action Plan is a single step, but we’re asking, what’s the next step? I have a suggestion. There’s a non-partisan, ad hoc citizens group looking at these interrelated issues. They held a meeting called “Training for Transitions”, and it looked at the long-term planning and communities’ need to be resilient and have a future. It’s about the economy and the environment. Will the Government of Yukon support these citizens and be an active participant?
Hon. Mr. Edzerza: All the luxuries of the world that the population is so intent on having and living by do come at a cost. Manufacturing of vehicles — manufacturing of all things that are in common use every day, comes at a cost. So, yes, there is a problem with climate, with all the pollution that goes into the air and what it contributes to climate change.
In the Yukon, the fourth annual Youth Engagement Forum on Climate Change was successfully hosted in 2010. The 150 units under construction are planned for 2010 by the Yukon Housing Corporation and are being built to the SuperGreen home standards. $300,000 has been budgeted by the Department of Highways and Public Works for energy management in Yukon government buildings, including lighting and retrofits to reduce electricity use. So the Yukon government is actively trying to address issues of climate change within the territory.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, the Premier still seems a little somewhat confused about the need for lobbying legislation in the Yukon. The people have a right to know who’s trying to influence their elected officials and bureaucrats in setting their government’s policy priorities.
Professional lobbying in Canada is a $100-million-a-year industry, and to deny lobbying is happening here, or that there is no need to regulate it, flies in the face of common sense and good governance. Any jurisdiction without clear rules around lobbying and lobbyists is not acting in the best interests of its citizens.
Will the Premier tell us why he is so resistant to having lobbying rules here in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: I don’t know where the member from the Third Party comes up with this so-called “resistance” to it. I think we have been fairly clear in the Legislature. We don’t dispute the fact that these are areas that, certainly in many cases, have become problematic with other governments. What I did say to the member opposite is that I have no knowledge and this government has no knowledge of paid lobbyists influencing policy. That’s not happening in today’s Yukon.
I also pointed out to the member of the Third Party that we meet continually with corporations, with Yukoners and with NGOs. In some cases, they bring forward proposals.
Is the member suggesting that a NGO like Kaushee’s Place that brings forward a proposal is a paid lobbyist and influencing policy? Does the member suggest that when we make investments in areas of social need, such as substance abuse action — because proposals come forward from individuals and NGOs in our territory — is that paid lobbying? Is that influencing policy? When we make investments in hydro-infrastructure by presentations from our Energy Corporation, is that paid lobbying and influencing policy?
Mr. Cardiff: Well, the Premier obviously doesn’t understand it. Whether lobbying is done by the private sector or the non-profit sector, all meetings and correspondence with politicians and their senior officials should be tracked and publicly disclosed. The public needs to know that any contact between paid lobbyists and the government is conducted in accordance with current public expectations of transparency, integrity and honesty.
Thanks to federal lobbying legislation, we know that the Prime Minister and his ministers met with registered lobbyists almost 600 times this year. We know that Government House Leader John Baird met with Suncor Energy on June, 26, Union Gas on June 3 and SNC-Lavalin on April 28. I’ll file copies of The Hill Times where the Premier can find that out.
Unfortunately, we don’t know, because there is no corresponding Yukon legislation, who is trying to influence decisions of the Yukon government. So in the spirit of transparency and openness, will the Premier table a list of individuals and groups—
Speaker: Thank you.
Hon. Mr. Fentie: The government side does not dispute the fact that this is an area that requires scrutiny. We never said that. What we take offence to is the inference that, in some cases, we would be influenced by those who are being paid as lobbyists — in policy-making or any other decision. That’s an inference of wrongdoing. The government side was trying to be cooperative in responding to this question by trying to point out to the member opposite that we don’t take issue with his views and opinion, but the inference of matters such as lobbyists that could lead to wrongdoing is a problem.
If the member is so keen on Yukon having legislation, then why doesn’t the member go out publicly and inform the Yukon public that the NDP would certainly bring forward an act or a regulatory process that would govern all meetings. What this government has done in the context of scrutiny and openness and accountability is dramatically enhance the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, and that’s a lot more than we have ever gotten out of past governments of the NDP or the Liberals.
Mr. Cardiff: There are no inferences; I am not accusing the government of doing anything wrong or illegal. What I am saying is that there is a need for this legislation. Groups like Democracy Watch are calling for even tougher federal lobbying legislation to put an end to backroom deals and to bring lobbyists out from the shadows and into the open. I’ll file a copy of that report as well.
Among other things, it wants lobbyists to disclose past or current work with governments, political parties or candidates for public office. It wants lobbyists to disclose how much they and their clients are spending on their campaigns and it wants them prohibited from doing work with government departments that they are lobbying. Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and British Columbia all have lobbying legislation, while the Yukon has none.
Why does this government refuse to bring forward lobbying legislation? What is it trying to hide?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: The first part of the member’s question was really quite constructive and relevant and, by the way, the government hasn’t refused at any occasion or at any time to bring forward legislation.
But the suggestion that the government is trying to hide something is an inference and as far as I’m concerned, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is the one confused. This territory has conflict-of-interest legislation. This territory has very modern access to information legislation.
This territory is a small jurisdiction where contact with Yukoners, Yukon businesses, NGOs, First Nations and others happens on a daily basis. I’m looking forward to hearing suggestions from the member opposite of what so-called “lobbyist legislation” or “regulatory processes” would look like in the Yukon. I have no interest in hearing from him that the government is trying to hide something; that’s just nonsense.
Mr. Cardiff: I’d like to turn to some of the New Democrat Party’s constructive proposals about improving our democracy. One thing we must guard against in order to protect our democracy is private interests having undue influence and access.
I’m talking about ensuring there is transparency and disclosure when it comes to paid lobbying. Every jurisdiction in Canada has or is addressing this issue through lobbying rules and registration. The Yukon’s Conflicts Commissioner has said the Yukon should do that too.
Is this piece of improving our democracy a priority for this government?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, the priority for the Yukon Party government is always to ensure we are improving governance in the Yukon and, of course, that’s very much part of the democratic process.
I certainly don’t take issue with the Third Party’s position on the issue of paid lobbyists and his inferences that that may cause influence of government in a manner that would be inappropriate.
Our concern as a government, however, with those inferences is that it leaves the perception that is indeed happening in today’s Yukon, and I emphatically inform the member that is not the case. Government and ministers meet with all kinds of Yukoners — individuals, corporations and NGOs. Many of these meetings and discussions are based on the premise of proposal of ideas and suggestion.
We certainly have never, ever experienced an issue of a paid lobbyist trying to influence the government, Mr. Speaker. In fact, I think we are a shining example of good governance in this territory. We are close to our citizens.
I see the members opposite find it humorous that good government includes being in close contact with our citizens. Unfortunately, it’s obvious the Liberals aren’t.
Mr. Cardiff: I’m not sure if the Premier gets it, but we are going to talk about another area of democracy in our community. In 1998, the then minister responsible for municipal affairs had this to say, “The new Municipal Act replaces ministerial control and approvals with a system that empowers voters to provide direction to municipal governments. The provisions for petitioning and public votes put the checks and balances into the hands of the electorate.”
But, Mr. Speaker, court rulings have weakened these provisions and have stripped Yukon citizens of their democratic rights under the Municipal Act to organize referenda on any matter of importance. We have raised this issue many times during this sitting and in previous sittings.
We want to see the intent of the legislation respected. We don’t want to see Yukoners’ democratic rights just thrown away. How will this government ensure that the checks and balances through petitioning and referenda remain a key piece of local democracy at the municipal level?
Hon. Mr. Lang: In addressing the member opposite on the floor here this afternoon, we certainly work with the Municipal Act. We have made amendments to it over the years. But also, I remind the member opposite, the court is always available to all citizens and the courts do make decisions and we’re obliged to live with those decisions.
Mr. Cardiff: Another example of how the government doesn’t get democracy. So I’m going to talk about some other ways to improve democracy. During this government’s two terms, New Democrats have consistently brought forward serious proposals about improving democracy. There was the Democratic Reform Act, there was the Electoral Reform Act, and there was the Legislative Renewal Act, which has led to the creation of a select committee.
We’re optimistic that this committee will put forward some key recommendations, and we await the government to appoint a member. Today we will debate Bill No. 111, a small piece of legislation that would shorten the time frame for the public to have representation, even when a seat becomes vacant.
Will the government be supporting what is arguably a small improvement for our democracy, but an improvement nonetheless?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: First off, one must question the Third Party’s reference to “the government doesn’t get democracy” because, frankly, if any government doesn’t get democracy, they won’t be a government for eight years.
Furthermore, the member talked about all the constructive input from the New Democrats, and now the member of the Third Party is referencing the bill that’s tabled before this House on amending the Elections Act. Let me remind the member of the Third Party who brought the existing Elections Act in, as it is today. It was the New Democrats of this territory.
Furthermore, in voting in this Assembly on those amendments and the act that references, for example, that by-elections must be called within 180 days of a vacancy in this Assembly, even the former Member of Whitehorse Centre voted in agreement of that and furthermore, so did the Member for Mayo-Tatchun, who now sits with Liberals and so did the Member for Kluane, who now sits as a Liberal. It appears that the opposite benches are changing their minds. That’s not practising democracy or good government.
Mr. Cardiff: The Minister of Education is fond of saying that Yukon has the highest rate of adult literacy in the country, but the 2005 study he bases that on did not produce reliable statistics. It did not include rural and aboriginal Yukoners, and the large population in Whitehorse with its high concentration of the highly educated sector distorts the picture even more.
A truer analysis done by the Yukon Literacy Coalition shows that there is a huge disparity between the literacy levels of rural Yukon and Whitehorse. Census Canada reports that rural and First Nation communities and Yukon-born people have much lower literacy rates than average.
Does the minister plan to research the rate of rural adult literacy, and what does he propose to do to raise the adult literacy rate in rural Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the perspectives coming from the member opposite. Statistics have also been produced by the Canadian census that indicate that Yukon has the highest rate of participation in post-secondary education across Canada. We do take seriously the education statistics. We do value education, especially in rural Yukon.
Mr. Speaker, this is the government that has recently built a new school in the community of Carmacks. This is the government that is now building two new Yukon College campuses in rural Yukon. We put our money where our mouth is on these things. We have made the investments. We are working with the college; we’re working with local NGOs and we are working to identify solutions to address these issues, to make changes to our public school education in the long term, so that many of these issues don’t happen again.
We’ve certainly taken these issues seriously. One just has to look at the programs going on in Yukon communities to see.
Mr. Cardiff: That’s one of the problems, Mr. Speaker. One of the organizations that is attempting to bring literacy to Yukoners is Yukon Learn. They work with volunteer tutors who require training and support. The budget of Yukon Learn has not changed substantially in years.
It is dependent on a contribution agreement with this government and on fundraising. They are not able to work in communities in rural Yukon because of the costs, yet that is where it’s most needed, Mr. Speaker.
How is the department supporting Yukon Learn to expand its programs into rural Yukon and how does it partner with First Nations?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Mr. Speaker, we’ve seen the contributions to Yukon Learn significantly increase in recent years. When Yukon Learn moved into their new Main Street address, there was an increase in funds made available to them. Recently, we have been working with Yukon Learn on enhancing their computer programs. Department of Education officials are working with Yukon Learn on that issue. We’re also working with other organizations, such as the Yukon Literacy Coalition, on some of their outreach programs. Funds have been provided through the northern strategy to address many of these initiatives. As well, we have the introduction of things like full-day kindergarten, early literacy testing in our schools, the Wilson Reading program and Reading Recovery program.
Mr. Speaker, there are a number of different initiatives that are going on in Yukon schools. One only has to look at the increase of funding to Yukon College to see the substantial amount of investment this government — the Yukon Party government — is making to post-secondary education and lifelong learning opportunities for all Yukoners.
Mr. Cardiff: It’s unfortunate that the minister misses the point. He starts talking about full-day kindergarten and Wilson Reading but the question is about adult literacy in rural Yukon. A 2007 final report reviewed the Yukon government’s literacy strategy.
Some of the recommendations from the literacy summit that was held for this report included: to research the possibility of ongoing funding for literacy, especially community initiatives; to create a literacy partnerships and coordinator position within Advanced Education; to research the design and provision of literacy programming; and to build a model for a First Nation literacy strategy.
When will the minister be responding to these recommendations from three years ago?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I would ask the member to look at the record over the last couple of years and see the changes that have been made in literacy programming across the territory. These certainly aren’t recommendations that gather dust on a shelf. I’m proud to say the Yukon Party government has been implementing them. We’ve been working with rural Yukon on program initiatives and working with non-government organizations on the provision and expansion of services.
We have been working with Yukon College to increase the programming opportunities to bring up some of the basic skill levels; we have been working on increasing post-secondary education. One only has to take a look at the new programs that are offered throughout the territory; one only has to take a look at the construction going on in Pelly and Dawson on Yukon College campuses and their facilities.
This government has taken very seriously this issue of working toward making life-long learning a reality. We put tremendous investments into early childhood learning, into full-day kindergarten, into early literacy initiatives, and as well substantive resources have gone into providing others the support to engage in literacy and to develop their skills and to develop the skills necessary to participate and to compete in today’s economy.
Mr. Cardiff: The Prime Minister and his Cabinet ministers met with registered lobbyists almost 600 times this year, according to The Hill Times newspaper. Industry Minister Tony Clement topped the list as the most lobbied minister, with 62 meetings with registered lobbyists. We only know this because Canada has a lobbying act and the Prime Minister and his ministers are required to publicly disclose their meetings with paid lobbyists.
Can the Premier tell us how many paid lobbyists he and his ministers met with this year?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: It is the case that the federal government is very conscious about lobbying in Ottawa. One only has to refer to even recent news reports about what all that means.
Now as far as lobbyists — and I would assume the member means those who are certified or have the credentials that define them as lobbyists — I can tell you that I am not aware of any such lobbyists with whom I have ever met. I certainly can’t speak for other ministers. We do meet with all kinds of Yukoners. We meet with members of the corporate community. That is our job, but if there are some insinuations here, I can only caution the member for the Third Party: be careful.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, in the preamble of the federal lobbying legislation, it says that “free and open access to government is an important matter of public interest.” It also says that “it is desirable that public office holders and the public be able to know who is engaged in lobbying activities.”
Many jurisdictions have a registry of lobbyists, as well as a code of conduct for lobbyists to ensure that contact between lobbyists and politicians is conducted in accordance with public expectations of transparency, integrity and honesty.
Currently, lobby legislation exists in many Canadian provinces, as lobbying now touches nearly every aspect of public policy. Does the Premier agree that having lobbying legislation would ensure lobbying activities are carried out ethically, honestly and transparently?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: First off, I find it interesting that — as the member proceeds with his question, I’m just wondering out loud whether or not the member includes NGOs in that. Does the member include NGOs like Kaushee’s Place, like the northern housing society, like many other front-line workers and groups in Yukon who do a great service for Yukon, who meet with government on a regular basis, who bring forward proposals? I’m just wondering if the member also considers them to be lobbyists.
Now, further to that, the member knows full well that we are guided by the Conflicts Commissioner on matters that pertain to perceived or real conflict. So, if we have questions — I’m talking about the government ministers, we will refer those to the Conflicts Commissioner.
By the way, all Cabinet members are required to meet with the Conflicts Commissioner immediately upon being appointed to the Executive Council. Whether or not lobbying legislation can help clearly define in a better way how that interaction between government and lobbyists occurs, I don’t dispute that, but I think right now in the Yukon we have a very clear process that determines exactly that.
Mr. Cardiff: Well it’s interesting that the Premier brings up the Conflicts Commissioner and the Conflicts Commission. Maybe that’s a report they didn’t read either because the Yukon’s Conflicts Commissioner says in his latest annual report that our laws and rules on conflict of interest lag behind what’s happening in other jurisdictions.
Among other things, he says in his report that the time has come to create a system for registering lobbyists to reduce the potential for real and perceived conflicts of interest. Because there are no rules in place here, we have no way of knowing which paid lobbyists the Premier and his ministers are meeting with, but we should.
When will the Premier take the advice of our Conflicts Commissioner and table legislation creating a system for registering paid lobbyists?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: As I’ve stated already, Mr. Speaker, of course we readily accept what the Conflicts Commissioner is providing in terms of advice and other matters and will continue to do so.
At the very moment, are we preparing to develop legislation in this particular area? No, but we will take the time to review what the Conflicts Commissioner is suggesting, as we always do, and then go from there. That may even include discussions, or further discussions, with the Conflicts Commissioner. I would hope that the member is not suggesting that, given the circumstances in the Yukon and the policies and regulatory framework within which government works, there are issues that the member maybe knows about and we don’t that he believes are inappropriate.
The government is very careful about these matters, and I think the Liberals have learned that lesson time and time again in the inferences that they make. When you look at the evidence and the facts, the Liberals were simply completely off base and I would hope the Third Party is not in a similar situation.
Mr. Cardiff: Although the Yukon economy is booming, unemployment in the territory remains disturbingly high. The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in the Yukon as of September 2010 was 7.1 percent; however, the jobless rate in rural Yukon is off the charts at 22.6 percent.
One of our local papers recently quoted a union official as saying that he thinks that 95 to 100 percent of the tradespeople currently working at the Wolverine mine are from Outside. Will the Minister of Economic Development tell us if this figure is correct?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: I certainly don’t have employment statistics at the Wolverine mine, but he is right in the fact that there are challenges in rural Yukon, and this is something that our regional economic development office is continually looking at. There will be challenges in the future for other mines as they open — the Bellekeno mine, for instance, and possibly Victoria Gold and others. This is certainly a challenge for the future to put that employment rate out over a wider spectrum of the Yukon. However, people have to remember that, as population goes up and the number of jobs goes up, sometimes the percentages may remain the same.
Mr. Cardiff: If the government had done a better job of planning for the mining boom and the building boom we are witnessing, perhaps more Yukoners could be directly benefiting. If the government had staggered some of its infrastructure projects, perhaps more Yukoners would be directly benefiting. If the government had done a better job of training people to take advantage of the boom, perhaps more Yukoners would be directly benefiting.
Last week I had the opportunity to tour the $67 million Whitehorse Correctional Centre currently under construction in Whitehorse. I was impressed with the scale and the scope of the project, but I have heard that a lot of the concrete block work and a lot of the drywalling was done by workers from outside Yukon.
Can the Minister of Justice tell us what percentage of the workforce at the Whitehorse Correctional Centre is from Outside?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: It’s with both my hat as Energy, Mines and Resources minister and Education minister that I’d like to address this question, because it is an important one and one that recognizes the growing economy in the territory, the growing faith that companies are having in the territory, the explosion of building going on around us — whether it’s condominium facilities, infrastructure like the correctional facility, whether it’s the Wolverine mine or the Capstone mine — some of these projects are employing hundreds of people.
Indeed, we’re seeing literally hundreds of people employed in some of these areas and, yes, we want to ensure that Yukoners are prepared for these opportunities.
That’s why we’re preparing and investing in vehicles like the Yukon Mine Training Association, which is bringing industry and First Nations together to identify the opportunities that are out there and identify the people that need the training and to create those kinds of bridges. That’s why we’re building college campuses in Pelly and Dawson to enhance those training opportunities for Yukoners. That’s why we’re investing in programs literally across the territory and providing additional post-secondary education opportunities for Yukoners. We’re taking the steps to ensure that Yukoners are prepared for Yukon opportunities.
Mr. Cardiff: Everyone in this House, including members on this side of the House, want to see the Yukon economy booming and doing well, but no boom lasts forever. So while it lasts we need to make sure it provides maximum benefits to Yukoners because they’re the ones to whom we are responsible.
The government needs to put greater effort into planning and staggering projects so that the boom and the local benefits last as long as possible. But when a government like the current one fails to take the long view and plan accordingly, the economic benefits of a mining and building boom will be short-lived and shallow.
Will the Premier tell us what percentage of the workforce at the Mayo B project, the doctors and nurses residence in Whitehorse, the hospitals in Watson Lake and Dawson City and other projects currently in the Yukon — how many workers are coming from Outside?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Well, I see the NDP still has a great aversion for the broader Canadian public and the world at large and indeed the mining sector, from what I’m hearing today.
Let me make a point, Mr. Speaker. The member states that we should have done a better job in planning. Has the member of the Third Party looked at the budget? There’s a multi-year capital plan in the budget. It is all about staggering capital projects.
Secondly, the member is referencing people working in the Yukon. Well, we all know what past Liberal and NDP governments did — to create a lower unemployment rate, they drove the population out of the territory, down to some 29,000 people.
In today’s Yukon, we are over 34,000 in population. Does the member not recognize that these are people who are working in the Yukon and are part of Yukon’s social fabric and society?
The government did do a better job. The government has increased the population. The government has increased jobs and benefits for Yukoners. The government has actually created an economy. The government has doubled the fiscal capacity of the Yukon. The government has invested in quality of life. The government has done a much better job than past governments and we intend to keep on doing so.
Mr. Cardiff: I want to revisit some of what we were talking about yesterday in Question Period as well.
In the City of Whitehorse v. Darragh, the B.C. Court of Appeal decided that an official community plan, or OCP, trumped the citizens’ right to hold a referendum on any matter as written in the extremely democratic Municipal Act. In December 2009, the minister wrote Ms. Darragh saying, and I quote: “I appreciate the time and energy you have personally invested to seek clarity on this issue.”
The time and energy was months in court. The court costs were thousands of dollars just for Ms. Darragh and even more for the city, or rather, Mr. Speaker, the taxpayers. She sent the minister a bill for the legal advice that she received as he sat on the sidelines.
I’d like to know if the minister has paid the bill yet and why — when he had the power to get involved in the discussion and to act as the minister and stand up for the Municipal Act’s democratic revisions — he sat out and let the court decide?
Hon. Mr. Lang: In addressing the member opposite’s question on a court case, that was decided in the highest court in this part of the land. They made a decision and this government will stand by that decision.
Mr. Cardiff: This is a consistent answer that we have heard from the minister and he won’t stand up for the Municipal Act and the provisions in it. He would blindly follow the decisions of the courts and would lead one to believe that if the courts ordered him to jump of a cliff, he might even do it.
Now, another court action recently ended up in the B.C. Court of Appeal — the Town of Faro v. Knapp. This dealt with land issues, zoning and rules under the Municipal Act. The cost to the citizen of a protracted eight-year-long battle was over $100,000. The municipal government spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars on fighting this issue in the courts. Again, the minister and his predecessor did nothing.
What I’d like to know is, is this a deliberate strategy or just plain indifference? Should Yukoners who have a complaint with their municipal government expect lengthy court battles as the norm under this minister’s watch?
Hon. Mr. Lang: This government will recognize the courts in our land. Everybody has the right to go to court, but part of the right of going to court is that they make decisions. By the way, it costs money to go to court, but everybody in the land has the right to go to court to resolve the issue of the day if they feel wronged in any way. I’m not going to pick winners and losers in that, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Cardiff: Yukoners also have rights under the Municipal Act. The minister should stand up for those rights. We’re all Yukoners; we’re all neighbours. The courts are necessary and some disagreement inevitably must be settled in court, but there has to be better ways to resolve disputes than going to court. That’s what the government thinks.
The minister has presided over the decay of local democracy, where citizens’ complaints will feel the full weight of the legal system against them, and that will have a chilling effect on our communities. There’s an alternative dispute mechanism that was and is available to the minister, and that is the Yukon Municipal Board. The act gives the board an important role in resolving issues.
Why has the minister not called on this board, as it is within his power to resolve issues before they spiral out of control and land in the courts, at huge expense to citizens and to municipal taxpayers?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Again, I repeat: every taxpayer, every citizen in our communities has the right to go to court. That’s a right I’m not about to debate on the floor of this House. That is a democracy; that is part of the right of being a citizen of the Yukon, and I’m not going to pick winners in that. That’s why we have courts.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, procurement — the buying of goods and services — is a key element in the tool kit of government. Procurement policies can be set to stimulate key industries, create jobs or help achieve valid environmental, social or community economic goals.
Currently, the Government of Canada and the European Union are quietly negotiating a trade deal called CETA. The Europeans’ biggest demand is access to procurement by municipal and subnational governments.
Has the minister responsible for municipal affairs and the current Our Towns, Our Future review done any analysis of the potential impacts this proposed trade deal could have on the long-term financial sustainability of Yukon’s municipalities?
Hon. Mr. Lang: We certainly are aware of the question the member opposite put on the floor here this afternoon. We’re monitoring it to make sure that ramifications aren’t negative to us in our jurisdiction, but we are certainly aware of the negotiations and, as they move through the negotiations, our department will be in contact with the federal government to make sure that we are represented at those talks on a level that is appropriate for our government.
Mr. Cardiff: I have some information to assist the minister, so I’ll file a legal opinion on the issue. I hope that he pays attention to it and will look into the matter and also put government lawyers to work on this issue. As per usual, these trade negotiations are very secretive, though a copy was leaked from another round of negotiations that indicates procurement, hiring, and contracting by municipalities are being negotiated away by Canada in exchange for access to Canadian pork, beef, and grain producers by the European markets.
Talk about hindering long-term municipal sustainability. This trade deal could mean municipal governments will not be allowed to prefer local procurement or local hire. As well, municipal contracts could be challenged granting EU-based corporations the right to sue municipalities over contracts.
The EU is home to the largest private water corporations in the world, so we can expect this trade deal to have implications in the provision of water and waste management. How is the Our Towns, Our Future review, which is looking at the long-term financial stability of our municipalities looking at—
Speaker: Thank you.
Hon. Mr. Lang: I’m sure there are many lawyers involved in these negotiations, and I’m sure all these lawyers would have a point of view and would have an answer to all our questions. What I’m committing to do on the floor here today is represent our jurisdiction as well as we can through the Government of Canada, if we see anything that would be detrimental to the territory. That’s what I’m committing to do this afternoon.
There will be many, many lawyers involved, at many, many levels, in negotiations of this size, and I’m sure the Canadian government has a fleet of lawyers working on it as we speak.
I would say to the member opposite, we as a government, internally, will monitor whatever goes on with these agreements to make sure they don’t marginalize our municipalities or the jurisdiction of the Yukon.
Mr. Cardiff: I want one more commitment from the minister. From the minister’s responses it’s safe to say that at least he’s aware of the deal. I can tell the minister there are concerns coming from the Association of Yukon Communities and from the Union of British Columbia Municipalities. The Union of British Columbia Municipalities recently passed a resolution, which I will also file and which calls on the Government of Canada to prevent the European Union access to municipal and subnational procurement. They’re also calling on their provincial government to negotiate a clear and permanent exemption for local governments from CETA.
Will this minister be negotiating a clear and permanent exemption for local government from CETA, or is he willing to accept that anything that comes out of the current review of long-term municipal financing could be invalidated by corporate-friendly international trade deals?
Hon. Mr. Lang: No final deal has been made, so for the member opposite to insinuate there is a deal made — they are just in the negotiating stages at this point. No final deal has been made and there are negotiations going on as we speak, I imagine. As the government of the territory, we will monitor what goes on at these hearings and we will keep our internal department working on monitoring it.
I’m sure that, as we get further into this, there will be questions asked and we’ll answer those questions when they’re asked.
Mr. Cardiff: We were pleased to hear yesterday that Yukon citizens will have opportunities to participate in the municipal review. We ask whether or not the review would address the sustainability of local democracy and citizen participation. “Yes,” said the minister. We asked whether the review would look at the court case that has weakened referendum provisions. “Yes, the review,” he said, “has to do with all aspects of municipal government.”
Add to this the public musings about municipalities getting in on independent power production and this looks like a review that will take far longer than six weeks. We thought the review was essentially about funding and financial matters.
Can the minister clarify the scope of the review, the issues that are on the table and the dates of the public meetings? And we would most appreciate any documents that are at the heart of the review.
Hon. Mr. Lang: Certainly, the review is going ahead. The panel has been struck. The meetings will be scheduled as fit into the schedule of that committee. We’re looking forward to the recommendations that come out of that committee’s travels through the territory and we certainly look forward to being able to address some of the issues. I remind the member opposite that it’s not all about the economics of municipalities. That’s one of the issues, and it’s a fairly large issue. It’s about municipalities — how they are run and how the municipalities navigate within our system. All the issues will hopefully be brought forward and there will be a public part to these discussions.
By the way, Mr. Speaker, we’re addressing any First Nation government that would like to hear from the panel. That will be addressed too.
It’s all-encompassing. I’m not going to stand here and state on the floor what is going to come out the other end. That’s not my job. The actions have been triggered. Now it’s up to the committee. It’s up to municipalities to come forward with their ideas — bring them back to us, the government, and we will work with them to see how we can address them.
Mr. Cardiff: New Democrats are glad to see that the long-term financial sustainability issues will be addressed. We think this issue is big enough for the current review. We are also glad the minister has opened the door to discuss other problems with the Municipal Act, particularly the democratic deficit in part created by the Darragh case.
The B.C. Court of Appeal ruled that a citizen can’t organize a referendum on municipal planning issues, and the City of Whitehorse applied that court ruling to deny a referendum on Riverdale in-fills. The petitioner thought she was within her democratic rights to gather signatures for a petition, but found that the act has no provisions to protect her from legal action. After years of effort, the petitioner was ordered to pay $14,000 in court costs. The minister should know about that, as she sent him the bill.
Another case recently concluded in the B.C. Court of Appeal around the Municipal Act. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent in years of litigation to hear Knapp v. Town of Faro.
Does the minister have any solutions for addressing the increasing litigiousness around the Municipal Act?
Hon. Mr. Lang: I’m certainly not going to debate the court decisions that are made, on whatever level the court decision came from.
But as far as the Municipal Act is concerned, we of the government have addressed it in some of the changes. These are some of the questions and issues that will come out of this review, hopefully, that we, the municipalities and AYC are putting out there. I’m not going to second-guess what comes out of these discussions which are going on over the next six to eight weeks, but I look forward to looking at them when they come back to my desk, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Cardiff: I hope the minister will stand up for the legislation for which he is responsible. We think there must be alternative dispute mechanisms that allow for redress by citizens without lengthy and costly court action that the taxpayer ultimately pays. Under the Municipal Act, the minister has the discretion to ask the Municipal Board to perform any duties delegated to it — that would be the minister who does that. But he has rejected letting the board hear disputes before they get to court.
We raised the issue of expanding the scope of the Ombudsman to hear complaints from citizens. The minister rejected this lower cost alternative option as well. There is a real problem when we rely on courts to interpret our legislation. We are the ones who make the laws and the minister should stand up for it.
Why has the minister not used the alternative dispute options available to him instead of forcing private citizens and municipal governments to slug it out in the courts at huge expense to the taxpayer?
Hon. Mr. Lang: Mr. Speaker, I’m not going to stand here and argue about decisions that come out of courts. Everybody in the land has the right to go to court. Individuals have the right to go to court; municipalities have the right to go to court. That is one of the rights we have as Canadian citizens. Mr. Speaker, once those are decisions made by the court, so we as a government have to live with those decisions, and, by the way, as citizens in this country.
Mr. Cardiff: Last Friday, mayors and municipal councils from across the Yukon gathered in Whitehorse for the official launch of the Our Towns, Our Future review which will look into financial management and funding issues for municipalities.
The minister responsible for the Municipal Act said this review would: “get to the heart of long-term municipal sustainability in the Yukon.” He goes on to say: “I would consider this to be one of the most important initiatives in recent years for municipalities.”
Will the minister outline how Yukon citizens will be allowed to participate in this review?
Hon. Mr. Lang: In addressing the member opposite, certainly the committee that has been set up with territorial government representation and the Association of Yukon Communities representation will be going around our municipalities and not only meeting with the municipalities, but meeting with the public. There is going to be a public component to the consultation. That will start on the first of November, and I look forward to the results of that consultation.
Mr. Cardiff: What the minister is saying is that, yet again, this government mostly consults with municipal politicians and consults but not necessarily with the people. That’s sadly par for the course with this government. When the Municipal Act was last reviewed in 2008, citizens were essentially cut out of the process, and the end result was a limited discussion about issues like four-year terms, and the more fundamental issues about municipal democracy were avoided.
Now the minister launches another review process which will look for innovative and cost-effective ways to support strong and sustainable municipalities, focused on things like infrastructure and funding.
There are clearly other issues with the Municipal Act that are not exclusively of a financial nature.
When will this government start a dialogue with the public on the long-term sustainability of not just the financing of municipal governments, but the sustainability of our local democracy and citizen participation?
Hon. Mr. Lang: That’s what we’re going to do. We’re going out to talk to our municipalities. We’re going to work with the municipalities, the general public. We’re also going to meet with First Nations. We’re going to do a whole review here in the next six weeks and that will be part of it.
There will be consultation with the general public. There’s more to it than finances. It has to do with the sustainability of our municipalities. I look forward to the results and to the new year, where we can address some of these issues.
Mr. Cardiff: Maybe the minister would like to send over the terms of reference for the review. The preamble of the Municipal Act says that Yukon municipal governments are created by the Government of Yukon and are responsible and accountable to the citizens they serve and to the Government of Yukon and that public participation is fundamental to local good government.
One way our act creates accountability and participation is through the public vote section, which spells out the rights of citizens to organize a referendum on any matter within the jurisdiction of the council, but the City of Whitehorse v. Darragh and the B.C. Court of Appeal basically struck down this right in that ruling that anything within the city’s official community plan is not subject to a referendum. This ruling is a major alteration of the intent of the legislation, which was to provide mechanisms for citizens to challenge the decisions of municipal government.
What is the minister’s plan to ensure that the public vote section of the Municipal Act meets the needs it was originally intended for?
Hon. Mr. Lang: The decision by the Supreme Court is a decision made by one of the highest courts in the land, so I’m not going to debate that on the floor here this afternoon.
This is exactly why we’re going out into the communities, into the municipalities, and also talking to the general population — or the community members and certainly looking at all aspects of municipal government in our communities. It’s not all about the resources that the community has at hand to manage its issues. It’s many, many other issues. That’s exactly why this was triggered: to get to the bottom of some of these questions.
I was at the meetings on Friday. This plan was well-received by the municipalities, and I look forward to the results of the meetings as they unfold. It has to do with all aspects of municipal governance and also meeting with the general public to see what input they can have. Everybody has an opportunity to have a discussion here over the next period of time.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, two years ago, the Yukon New Democrats brought forward the Young Worker Protection Act. Our act looked at general minimum working age and age restrictions — particularly in hazardous industries — and at mandatory supervision and training requirements.
The government took a different approach on this issue than we would have.
Last year, the CEO of the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board said that proposed regulations on minimum working ages in certain industries would be ready for legislative review before the end of 2010 with implementation slated for January 1, 2011.
Are we on schedule and can the minister provide some details about what age restrictions will be and in what occupations?
Hon. Mr. Hart: As I have stated previously in this House on matters and questions of similar processes, this government takes the issue of young worker safety very seriously. We take all worker safety very seriously. With the actual implementation of the occupational health and safety regulations in 2006, we are looking after all our workers here in the Yukon. In regard to the member opposite’s question, we are on schedule. We will be implementing our new process early in January of 2011.
We are currently working with Community Services and its board to break down just exactly what particular industries and what ages will be utilized, based on the consultation that we received from the Yukon public on those issues.
Mr. Cardiff: When the minister can answer the question, I’d appreciate receiving it. Between 2005 and 2009, there were almost 700 injury claims accepted by the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board, filed by young workers under the age of 25.
We’ve also witnessed the deaths of two young men at the Wolverine mine. The NDP has been raising this issue of improving how we train, supervise and protect young workers from injury for many years.
What concrete measures have Yukoners received — a code of practice? Can the minister provide some details about whether or not the code of practice is working in terms of reducing injuries to young workers and how it’s being evaluated?
Hon. Mr. Hart: The code of practice in this orientation was put into effect January 1 of this year, 2010. We’re pleased to say we have seen results from that process taking place. We’re also very happy with the employers, who are taking the necessary time to provide training and supervision to their new staff, especially those young workers.
Mr. Cardiff: The minister would do well to actually answer the question. When it comes to protecting young workers, we’ll admit there has been some movement, like the code of practice, but we’re not sure how it’s being evaluated and what the results are. We don’t believe we’ve done enough.
When this government takes an interest in an issue, proverbial mountains can be moved. Look at the speed at which this government brought in cellphone legislation or the Act to Amend the Business Corporations Act or the Securities Transfer Act. Look how quickly they drafted and tabled civil forfeiture legislation, and look at the number of amendments to various pieces of legislation caused by the Agreement on Internal Trade and the staff resources that were devoted to that.
Why is the issue of protecting young workers so low on this government’s priority list?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I’ve stated it many times in this House. This government is very concerned with the safety of our young workers out there and we have shown that in a substantial number of ways. We’ve gone out to consultation. I’ll remind the member opposite that we went out based on a motion put forth in this Legislative Assembly, but I will also remind the member opposite there was a substantial amount of opposition to many of the items that were out for consultation with regard to what the government should interfere in with regard to young workers.
We went forward on many options we had agreement on and, as I stated previously, and as I mentioned to the member opposite previously, we are working on options with the Employment Standards Board to deal with the ages for the appropriate type of retail and other industries that young workers are working in today.
That is underway. We are working with the Employment Standards Act through Community Services to get that thing in place. They are currently working on those particular items. We have one sticky situation, in particular, we’re working on, and we intend to work through that and we intend to meet our deadline of January 2011.
Mr. Cardiff: Information from the Yukon Bureau of Statistics, Statistics Canada and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation indicate that 44 percent of the housing stock in Yukon is in need of repair; 1,230 houses in the Yukon are considered uninhabitable. In 2009, there were just 116 new housing starts in the Yukon, and there are currently just 14 vacant rental units in the entire Yukon.
Does the Minister of Health and Social Services and the minister responsible for the Housing Corporation find these figures as deplorable as I do?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: Just to correct one comment on there — the statistics look at apartment buildings of four units or more; they do not include all of the in-home rental units, et cetera, just to correct that record. But yes, it is deplorable; I agree. Housing was turned over, and so many programs were turned over to territorial governments a number of years ago and then the funding made available for that slowly dropped, and actually, in the next couple of years, it does more than slowly drop, it will go down exponentially; until about 2030 they expect the Yukon to be completely on its own.
With such a massive amount of funding loss, the housing stock isn’t getting the attention that it desperately needs. We know that; we work within the budget and with the money that we have and the programs that we have. But again, the federal programs are being reduced and when we do get money, it’s earmarked for very specific uses. It can’t be utilized where our staff and the Yukon Housing Corporation staff know that it should be, so I agree completely.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, it’s good that the minister agrees with me, but he can’t go on blaming the federal government forever.
Now, the current situation is partially due to a lack of affordable serviced lots. It’s due to a lack of creativity and flexibility by this government and not working with its partners — First Nations, municipalities and non-government organizations. It’s also due to a lack of political will.
The Minister of Health and Social Services was quoted in the media recently as saying he cannot address the issue of homelessness until he has the data. Well, the data has been compiled. When will he release it?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: Again, I have to correct the record when the member opposite talks about partnership and mentions First Nations. Again, I have to point out that First Nation housing is a federal responsibility. Most of the federal responsibility has been in terms of on-reserve or off-reserve programs. Yukon has neither.
Yukon is unique in Canada in our structure, historically we have been unable to access any of that funding. In earlier program, the territorial government was given $50 million to address housing needs. I do have to point out to the member opposite that I think it was something like $32 million that was turned over to First Nation governments directly. The decision is theirs of how they want to use it — whether they want to repair existing housing, whether they want to build new housing or whether they want to buy a hotel. It’s their responsibility.
When we look at other projects that we have been involved in through the Abbeyfield project, through Habitat for Humanity, et cetera, for the member opposite to say that we’re not partnering and extrapolating or putting out and leveraging those funds, I think is very misguided.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, he can’t go on blaming the federal government and he can’t abrogate the government’s responsibility to all Yukoners. Now the government has been sitting on two reports containing detailed statistical information about the local housing situations. These reports could help it develop the proper policy responses to address the various and serious housing needs here in the Yukon.
The housing adequacy survey and a housing and poverty indicators report were supposed to be released this spring, but it didn’t happen. They were supposed to be released during Poverty and Homelessness Action Week. That didn’t happen. I believe these reports may be embarrassing to the government.
I believe they say the government is not doing enough to provide adequate, affordable and safe housing and that’s why it has been sitting on these reports. Is that true?
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: Again for the member opposite, we are aware of the problems as a government. I think the Yukon Housing Corporation as a Crown corporation is well aware of it, but let’s look at what actually happened.
$34.4 million built a 48-unit seniors housing complex and a 36-unit student housing complex at Yukon College. We had participation in the innovative Falcon Ridge affordable housing project; $10.5 million into the 32-unit Whitehorse affordable housing project; $2.2 million for a nine-unit seniors project in Haines Junction; $3 million for an eight-unit seniors housing project in Teslin; $4.5 million for a 12-unit seniors housing project in Watson Lake; $2 million for a six-unit project in Faro; the Habitat for Humanity project at 810 Wheeler; $2.5 million for the Abbeyfield project, et cetera.
I would suggest that the member opposite re-check his facts and learn what this government has done. The previous Liberal government, in their short tenure — zero; they built nothing.
Mr. Cardiff: A year ago this November 4, the House unanimously passed a motion to create a Select Committee on Bill No. 108, the New Democratic Party’s Legislative Renewal Act. This bill was near and dear to my late colleague, the Member for Whitehorse Centre. He felt passionately that there are many things we can do as legislators to make our political system more accountable, more transparent, and more democratic.
Does the Premier remain committed to seeing this important initiative completed by the 2011 fall sitting of the Legislature?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Mr. Speaker, I, too, share the view of the member of the Third Party in what has transpired in regard to a private member’s bill. Of course, we also have to look at the amount of work that is being undertaken now by all-party committees in terms of the Landlord and Tenant Act, the issues of safe use of ATVs, possible policy development in the Yukon, and of course, electoral reform, as Bill No. 108 speaks to. That is, indeed, another undertaking.
We remain committed, but I must submit to the House and to the member of the Third Party that, under the workload that we are all dealing with — especially those all-party committees — and given the time we have between now and the fall sitting, given the many challenges we face in encouraging the Liberal members of these committees to actually participate, we can only hope that we can meet the timelines as envisioned by our past colleague, the former Member for Whitehorse Centre.
Mr. Cardiff: Let’s not imagine what can’t be done; let’s imagine what can be done and roll up our sleeves and get to it. There’s a prime example right there of why we need legislative renewal, not electoral reform, as the Premier has it mixed up.
Much of the work of this committee is about restoring the public’s trust in our political system. It’s about making changes to address the feelings of cynicism and skepticism we see growing among members of the public. The deadline is fast approaching so let’s imagine what we can do. There is a lot of work to be done and it will take a great deal of effort, so let’s get started. It’s a major initiative and the clock is ticking.
When will the Premier name a government member to this committee, as the members on this side of the House have done?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: I couldn’t agree more with the member of the Third Party. I apologize to the House if I referred to electoral reform when I meant legislative renewal. We certainly are experiencing many reasons why. Mr. Speaker, we have incidents where we have experienced the Leader of the Liberal Party accuse members of the Workers’ Compensation Health and Safety Board of breaking the law in referring to the correspondence from the Ombudsman, conveniently omitting the section from the Ombudsman in said correspondence that referred to the fact that it was not the case.
In fact, the citizen involved on the board was so irate, he accosted the Leader of the Liberal Party right outside the doors of this Legislature.
We’ve experienced where the Member for Kluane Googled a public servant because that public servant chose to exercise his right of freedom of speech. I’m citing examples on why legislative reform is a must, but it has to start right here with the members of the House. I can only encourage the Liberal members, as we continue to work on establishing this all-party committee, to act accordingly and live up to the elements of their so-called contract with Yukoners and ethical standards.
Mr. Cardiff: The Premier didn’t answer the question. It’s another example of why we really need legislative renewal. Select committees are working hard to modernize the Landlord and Tenant Act and prepare recommendations on the safe operation and use of off-road vehicles. I’m hoping the Select Committee on Whistle-blower Protection, which was created three and a half years ago, will report its findings and recommendations to the House during this sitting. Yukoners want to see us practise good governance.
They want to see us working together, not pointing fingers back and forth at each other. They want to see less confrontation. They want to see more collaboration.
When will the Premier appoint a member of his caucus to this committee so it can begin the important work on behalf of Yukoners and report on time?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Of course, Mr. Speaker, as soon as possible, but as I referenced for the member of the Third Party, the all-party committees are doing a tremendous amount of work, and we are also sensitive to the fact that the member is alone and we will make every effort to work with the member opposite, as we did the other day with their suggestion and request when they came to my office. We worked very closely with the Third Party on that motion. That’s the type of work we intend to continue to do, but that includes all of us in the House.
I can hear a lot of comments and kibitzing off microphone. That is another example of legislative renewal requirements. The Liberals like to talk a lot off microphone, because they are not held accountable and are not answerable to the public when they do so.
Mr. Speaker, I can cite many examples here of the need for legislative renewal, and it starts with the Liberal Party, of course. The Yukon Party government makes every effort to live up to its requirement of the station of office. In all likelihood, Mr. Speaker, that’s why we were the first government returned to office in this territory in 17 years.
It is about ethical standards and trust in getting the job done by living up to the commitment you make to the public.
Mr. Cardiff: What would a strong regulatory regime around mining and other resource industries look like? Projects would have good designs and be well-inspected. Permits would be in place and they would be well-enforced. This regime would need to be progressive, constantly looking for improvement, looking at best practices, analyzing current- and long-term data.
The EMR minister frequently raises Yukon’s strong regulatory regime as proof of this government’s competent management of the current resource boom.
Will the minister share with Yukoners the areas of our regulatory regime that are in need of improvement and provide some time frames for when that would happen?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Mr. Speaker, Yukoners can rest assured that there are strong regulatory regimes, laws, policies and regulations in place. They can rest assured that Yukon’s professional public servants are out there doing appropriate inspections, providing appropriate advice and appropriate enforcement where it’s appropriate.
The NDP seems to have an issue with having an Energy, Mines and Resources official out doing water quality inspections. I am thinking that, in their world, they would rather see two people in white hardhats and two people in two different pickup trucks show up to do tests. Well, we have the faith in one person — that they are able to go out and do all of the appropriate testing. We have the faith in the officials to go out and do the work and we have the legislation in place. There are a growing number of Yukon contractors and companies that are operating within this regime, and that’s certainly contributing to the positive economic climate here in the territory.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, the minister didn’t answer the question, so now he has two questions to answer. Reclamation policies are a key part of the regulatory regime. Basically, a project is assessed at the real cost of cleanup and security — like a bond or cheque for that amount — is given to the government to hold. The bill for reclamation of Faro mine is now projected to be close to $600 million, and thankfully the cleanup bill is not the responsibility of the Yukon government, but in a post-devolution landscape, we are now on the hook for any further projects.
The government currently holds $28 million in security deposits from mining companies. The Selwyn Resources Ltd. project, a 39-kilometre-long ore deposit, which the proponent says could be mined for 50 years, is being compared to Faro in size.
This part of our regulatory regime needs further scrutiny. Are deposits reflecting the true cleanup costs? We need to do more—
Speaker: Order please. Ask the question.
Mr. Cardiff: Does the minister agree that the best way forward is an independent assessment—
Speaker: Thank you. Minister responsible please.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: The member opposite is correct that there are strong regulatory processes in place; there are strong processes in place to provide security, whether that’s through the Quartz Mining Act or the Waters Act. Through the mine land use plan, there are processes in place to put security in place. There are also processes under the Waters Act and the water licence to put security in place. It wasn’t that long ago that I sent out a letter increasing the amount of security required on an additional project as the level of activity had grown.
The member opposite is making reference to the Selwyn project which, right now, is an exploration project. There are no tailings from that. It’s an exploration project. As we go through the appropriate steps — through the YESAA review, through the mining application, through the different evolutions as to the size and scope of the project — then, yes, we will be responsive and ensure there are appropriate amounts of security put in place to address the specific needs of the identified project.
Mr. Cardiff: Do we have enough quality data to make decisions that won’t come back to haunt us in the future? That maxim applies to everything in life and it especially applies to mining projects that the government regulates. Yukoners have great concerns about whether our regulatory regime is adequately measuring what are called cumulative effects of development.
The Liard First Nation raised issues of cumulative effects on the Yukon River watershed about the Selwyn project. We need water-quality monitoring for cumulative effects in the right locations. We need baseline data. Maybe we need more data collection on water and on weather to aid us in future planning.
What is this government’s plan for increasing our data collection abilities and for better measuring cumulative effects?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Well, there’s a variety of different projects that go on throughout the Government of Yukon, whether it’s in the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, Department of Education, or one only has to look at Yukon College and the Climate Change Research Centre of Excellence. That was a research institution established by this Yukon Party government at Yukon College to work with researches throughout the territory on the collection, assimilation and coordination of data. This is a government that very much believes in making data-based decisions.
That’s why we put in decisions to build buildings where we have, put in hospitals where we have. We’re responding to identified needs throughout our community. We will continue to work with all of the departments within government to collect data, to use data and to use that information to inform future decision-making and also to influence the regulatory enforcement and compliance. Really, I can’t say enough about the good work that the folks in our Client Services and Inspections do throughout the territory. I just wish others would recognize the value of their work too.
Mr. Cardiff:Yesterday I asked the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources several questions about this government’s management of the mining boom. It’s safe to say he was unprepared and he got flustered. We’re looking for evidence of this so-called strong regulatory regime. In response, the minister used a lot of words like “trust” and “faith”, but never answered the serious questions that we posed.
Yukoners want to see some evidence that, apart from taking credit for the boom, this government is actually managing it properly. So I will ask the same question as yesterday, and I hope the minister is prepared today, and can provide some details.
Why is the Department of Environment — the department with the most experience in knowledge of water quality testing — been dispossessed of the mining file?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I would encourage the member opposite to vary from his script, and to listen to the responses that are provided in this Assembly. We do have a very strong regulatory process in this territory. Look at our different vehicles we have for accessing projects, whether they’re through YESAA or the different legislation we have, whether it’s through the Waters Act, the Quartz Mining Act, the different regulatory processes such as the quartz mining land use permit or the mining land use permit.
The member opposite, the NDP, is putting forward the idea that inspectors in the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources are less professional, less responsible and follow the Waters Act less than other inspectors would.
Again, I’ll say for the member opposite, that is ridiculous. He should retract any statement of that nature. It’s insulting not only to me, but to the inspectors, through client services and inspection in the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. They do an excellent job of following Yukon legislation, ensuring compliance, working with industry and working with the environment.
Mr. Cardiff: As I said yesterday, it’s not the officials or the employees we’re concerned about; we’re concerned about the minister’s leadership on this.
The second question I have deals with the court challenge around Western Copper. The Water Board said no to the water licence in this controversial project. The company said, “We’ll see you in court” — something that’s popular with this government. Important stuff.
The Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council’s report, entitled Water Quality Protection in the Yukon River Watershed, says this case could make or break our water regime.
We wanted to know yesterday what this government plans to do. What is its position? Instead, the minister got angry. He said the NDP was impugning officials. That’s not what we were doing. The minister said I was off-topic. He was the one who was off-topic. Let’s try again. How will the minister defend our strong regulatory regime before the Supreme Court on this action?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Yes, I will get angry when officials in this government, the hard-working people who do the work that they’re entrusted to carry out, are insulted by others. I will get angry at that.
Again, the member opposite needs to clear the water on this. He needs to stop muddying it. We’re hearing a couple of different issues being brought forward here. He has talked about the Water Board; he’s talking about environmental standards. But he doesn’t seem to grasp the areas of responsibilities that all have.
I appreciate the question. Let’s try to provide a bit of clarity to this. The Government of Yukon has significant pieces of legislation and regulation on our books. These include the Waters Act, the placer regulations, the quartz mining regulations — we follow those. We also go through with an assessment process through YESAA, which is done through the federal government with the involvement of the territorial government, Yukon First Nations and others. We also have the Water Board, which is a quasi-judicial body that follows its own processes. There are significant processes in place to protect Yukon’s environment and to allow for reasonable development in the territory.
Mr. Cardiff: The Waters Act has been enforced since March 20, 2003, without substantive changes being made. It is high time that we look at the act and bring forward changes that would, among other things, strengthen the powers of inspectors. It just makes sense that we would constantly be looking for ways to strengthen the regulatory regime.
Yesterday I asked whether this government has been sitting on recommendations about amendments to the Waters Act. He didn’t answer that question either, so I’ll try again. Is it true that an internal review suggesting amendments that would strengthen the Waters Act has been gathering dust for years at the Cabinet table?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Well, we know the NDP would like Yukoners to believe that inspectors in the Department of Energy, Mines, and Resources do less of a job than inspectors in other departments. That patently isn’t correct. I appreciate it does get heated in here, but we do have to recognize the strong regulatory framework that we have in the territory with strong pieces of legislation. We have to respect the issue of devolution, the devolution of the Waters Act, and the good work of successor resource working groups, in order to provide successor legislation. These are issues that the government is currently working on.
We’re responsible for not only that act, but the Lands Act and a number of other different pieces of successor legislation. Devolution was an important step for this territory, and it’s one that this government has responded to responsibly. We will work with our inspectors, whatever department they’re in, to ensure that our legislation is met, followed and enforced appropriately.
Mr. Cardiff: The Department of Environment has ample experience in doing water quality testing. It is responsible for water testing and inspections for industrial, municipal, hydroelectric, agricultural and quartz mining use licences. The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources has long had the file on water licences involving placer mining operations.
A few years ago, we discovered that water monitoring for the Minto mine water licence was transferred from Environment to Energy, Mines and Resources through a memorandum of understanding.
We understand this MOU has been renewed again. We also understand that another MOU is expected, transferring the responsibility for water testing at the Yukon Zinc mine to Energy, Mines and Resources. I want to give the government an opportunity to clear the air on this one because MOUs, though legal and sometimes necessary, are hardly the most transparent method of announcing a major change in environmental policy.
Why has Environment, with the most experience on water issues, been—
Speaker: Thank you.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: This government certainly takes very seriously the responsibilities that we have, and one of those responsibilities is safeguarding the environment and ensuring that people are following the appropriate regulatory processes that are laid before them.
Within the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, our client services and investigation folks do an incredible job of working with industry and with Yukoners to ensure compliance with the appropriate regulations, to enforce the regulations and to raise the appropriate flags when the issues are out of compliance.
I have the utmost faith in the folks in our regulatory process. I know they take their job very seriously and work with a lot of integrity. I trust them to do their job. I trust them to do the job that Yukoners have entrusted them to do.
Mr. Cardiff:The Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources said earlier that the Yukon has a strong regulatory regime and we have in place controls for the orderly, responsible development of Yukon’s resources. I think this government needs to provide more detail and evidence of this strong regulatory regime because some cracks are emerging.
Consider that staffing levels for the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources have been the same since 2002, despite being given added responsibilities of water monitoring at major mines. Consider that advanced exploration work is going on at Selwyn, despite the Liard First Nation’s concerns about water quality issues on their traditional territory and the Yukon River watershed. Consider that Western Copper has filed a suit, asking Yukon Supreme Court to quash the Water Board’s decision to deny them a water licence. How will the minister be defending our strong regulatory regime before the Supreme Court?
Speaker: You’re done, thank you. Minister responsible, please.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources has substantial human resources to address many of the issues that it faces. There are broad areas of responsibility within the whole department. We’ve increased the capacity of the department through devolution with the transfer of federal employees, and they’re doing the good work for Yukoners.
I certainly trust all inspectors in the Government of Yukon, whether they work in the Department of Environment, Health and Social Services, or in the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. To impute that because they’re working in one department or another means that they’re going to take their job less seriously is just, frankly, offensive to me and to the employees in the department.
Mr. Cardiff: It’s not the employees I’m worried about, it’s the minister. A recent study said that by 2050, clear, fresh water will be worth more than gold. This government takes a lot of credit for the mining boom, but it’s the management of the boom that needs to be put under some scrutiny. This government will be judged on how it managed this boom, and it will all be negative if we emerge from all this development with fouled rivers, creeks and lakes. This government position is basically “Don’t worry, everything’s fine.” We have a strong regulatory regime but there are cracks emerging.
I understand that an internal review suggested amendments that would strengthen the Waters Act but it has been gathering dust at the Cabinet table for years. Is that true?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: This government has significant responsibilities and we live up to them every day — whether it’s working in the Department of Health and Social Services or Yukon Housing Corporation to build 156 new units for Yukoners, we’ll take very seriously the obligations before us. And yes, of course we will work with all parties involved: Yukon First Nations, the federal government. We only have to look at the placer authority to which the member opposite is referring to see how we can put in appropriate adaptive management tools and techniques to address the issues that we have in our environment.
We’re not muddying the waters, unlike the Member for Mount Lorne who is tossing into this discussion considerable situations that are outside of the topic at hand. We take very seriously the professional work that our regulators do, that our inspectors do. We have trust in them; we have faith in them. I would ask the member opposite to recognize the competency of these officials and to recognize the good work that they do.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, we were shocked to hear that the Kwanlin Dun First Nation has barred social workers from its territory. Now the Carcross-Tagish First Nation has announced it will implement its own child welfare legislation even without government funding. Unfortunately, we’re not surprised by these actions. This minister has not shown he respects and includes First Nations’ views on child welfare. The new Child and Family Services Act was pushed through ignoring First Nation requests to discuss proposed amendments in this House. That is just one incident in a long list of First Nation complaints over years and years.
In the interest of cooperation, we hope the minister has been meeting with First Nations and has some news for us about how he’s resolving the issues.
What can the minister tell us about the action he and his department have taken to alleviate the problems that have occurred in the past few days?
Hon. Mr. Hart: There was a substantial consultation period with regard to the Child and Family Services Act. I’ll remind the member opposite it entailed more than five years of work, including all the stakeholders involved in dealing with children in the Yukon. That information was compiled and brought to this Legislative Assembly. It was processed through the Legislative Assembly here and the new act was proclaimed.
The new Child and Family Services Act provides great increase in services for all individuals in relation to child security. With that in mind, I will just add a bit of history of the Child and Family Services Act for the member opposite.
As I said, we’ve received a letter from the Chief of Kwanlin Dun First Nation with his comments and we are actively trying to set up a meeting with the First Nation to review his concerns.
Mr. Cardiff:It may have been five years of consultation, but I don’t think the minister remembers 18 months ago when there were all kinds of people sitting in the gallery. Under the legislation, social workers and family support workers now find themselves in a dangerous situation, working at the Kwanlin Dun First Nation. If they followed a law, they could be faced with physical restraints, and possible abuse. If they stay away, they are breaking the law.
This stalemate needs to be resolved very soon. We want to know that the minister has made agreements with the Carcross-Tagish First Nation for providing services to children there, when their act is implemented. We are concerned, not only about the health and safety of the department’s employees who are barred from their jobs, but for the children involved in this crisis, who may need protection.
What direction has the minister given to his department, in order for them to carry out their duties to ensure the protection of children in these two First Nations?
Hon. Mr. Hart: The Yukon government supports the efforts of the Carcross-Tagish First Nation to develop its family act. In fact, we have assisted that First Nation in the development of that act. We have participated in the consultation with them, as well as taking a very active role in the assumption of responsibilities with CTFN and the Government of Canada.
Now, the self-government agreement is very clear about the funding. Assumption of the responsibility always has to be respected and the process of these agreements followed. Every First Nation has the right to draw down this process and they have the ability to do so. Under a self-governing agreement, they can do so. We have been advised many times over the years of First Nations intending to do so. However, the Carcross-Tagish First Nation has indicated recently that they are about to proceed, with or without the funding from the federal government. But, as I stated previously, we have assisted this First Nation with regard to their agreement, and we look forward to working with the Carcross-Tagish First Nation as they roll out their new program.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, the minister didn’t answer the question. He didn’t say whether or not they have an agreement to help them implement it and roll it out, including funding. Now, in its guiding principles, the new Child and Family Services Act states that First Nations should be involved as early as practicable in decision-making processes regarding a child who is a member of the First Nation.
Further, the act’s service delivery principles underline that collaboration builds on the collective strengths and expertise of children, families, First Nations and communities. From the information at hand, it appears the minister and his department have engaged neither Kwanlin Dun First Nation nor Carcross-Tagish First Nation on their work with children. The intent of the new act is not to be oppositional; it is to be inclusive.
How is the minister being inclusive in responding to the very serious problems First Nations are exposing and that he has to face today and into the future?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I appreciate that the member opposite is reading from the act. He has also answered his own question. Under the Child and Family Services Act, we are required by law to inform the First Nation of our involvement with their citizens, and most certainly if we are taking their children into care. This is something that we like to avoid at all great cost. It is one of the main reasons why we would be collaborating with the First Nation in question with regard to the child at whom we’re looking, because the main thing we’re looking at is the child and the safety of that child. That is what we’re here for — to look after the child.
It matters not which government will look after the process, whether it’s the First Nation or ourselves. It’s up to one of the governments, whichever has the authority to do so, to look after the safety of the child.
Currently the Government of Yukon is the legal aspect in looking after the child with regard to dealing with this First Nation. However, as I stated, we have correspondence with the chief. We are looking at trying to set up a meeting so we can discuss the situation and review the concerns of the First Nation.
Mr. Cardiff: Yesterday we presented a proposal to look at the important work done by 600 citizens serving on 100 boards and committees on behalf of Yukoners. We brought this proposal forward because we are quite frankly disturbed by the acrimony, the mudslinging around appointments to boards. Opposition and government are both guilty of this. We brought forward this proposal because we were looking for solutions, Mr. Speaker.
We wanted to see improvements to our extremely important method of citizen democracy and how we recognize the valuable contribution that they make. It only makes sense. But the government shot this down. They amended the motion so the government could conduct the review, which they then vetoed.
Why was it so important for this government to maintain control on this issue?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Actually, the government doesn’t maintain control on this issue at all. There is the Umbrella Final Agreement; there are legislative mechanisms, policy and regulatory processes that control boards and committees. There are even corporate acts that control boards and committees.
Unfortunately, the member of the Third Party, after coming to my office to talk to me about this, does not reflect here in the House to Yukoners what our discussion was. I was very open and clear with the member opposite that what the Third Party was proposing logistically, timeline-wise, and given the order of magnitude of what must be addressed, cannot be done. I expressed that to him in no uncertain terms. Then I said the government would probably, in the debate in this House, amend that motion so we are better able to actually conduct the process that the member seeks.
That’s what the amendment was about. Unfortunately yesterday, as private members’ days tend to go, the debate turned into political theatre instead of focusing on the item at hand. The government does not control boards and committees.
Mr. Cardiff: But they wanted to control the review process.
Now when the issue of wages for MLAs came up, what did we do? We had an independent review. It just makes sense that on certain matters we ask others who have no stake in the outcome to review and to make recommendations. Our boards and committees system is an integral part of our democracy. Our boards are responsible for so many functions and so many laws. Through our motion we suggested that there are some problems that might need to be addressed, like the inconsistency with remuneration levels, like deciding when boards outlive their usefulness, or when new boards should be created.
The major issue is the politicization of appointments. Whether truth or perception, this is a problem and it may make it more difficult to find Yukoners willing to participate on boards. Yesterday was an opportunity to be non-partisan and to give away a little bit of power to do something for the good of all. Why did the government reject that opportunity?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Unfortunately, the member opposite not only doesn’t understand the task and the scope and the order of magnitude of what boards and committees do, how they’re structured, how appointments are made, how all facets of this process are conducted, he doesn’t even understand what transpired in the debate yesterday.
The government side was pretty clear in our response to what we thought was a constructive motion, which is now appearing to be something else, but we pointed out that this Assembly and these members and this House should not even be alluding to a perception of politicization when Yukoners submit their names. If the member had looked at the process, he’d realize that soliciting names from Yukoners to serve on boards is done is a very public manner. It’s advertised through the media. Yukoners who choose to put their names forward aren’t expecting a political appointment; they’re expecting to serve on boards and committees on behalf of Yukoners. That’s what the member doesn’t understand.
Furthermore, the member, once again, ignores the fact that the Third Party was clearly told that the scope of the undertaking of what the motion proposed was impossible. The government offered an alternative to get there.
Mr. Cardiff: The Premier seems to have a little bit of a defeatist attitude on this.
The former MLA for Whitehorse Centre used to talk about the need for us as MLAs to raise our game and to set a higher standard. For him that was critical if we were to engage people and to combat cynicism, the indifference and the apathy. That was our motivation in bringing this motion forward yesterday, to get away from the mudslinging, the accusations around appointments and to improve the system.
At the end of the debate, Hansard records that the government voted against the motion, even after they amended it. It was their motion at that point. Unfortunately, Hansard doesn’t capture everything. It doesn’t capture the behaviour on the government side; it doesn’t capture the mocking, the laughter and the derision.
Maybe they can let Yukoners in on the joke: what was so funny about yesterday’s motion debate?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Nothing is funny about yesterday’s debate. What’s even more of a concern is, before the government side could even fully articulate the amendment it was proposing, media were calling government offices about an amendment. I wonder how that happened, when it comes to raising our game?
Furthermore, when you talk about raising our game, yesterday the NDP released a press release regarding the Peel planning process. Clearly, the NDP would usurp the obligations of governments in that planning process by standing down on the public consultation required under the Umbrella Final Agreement, which is enshrined constitutionally.
Raise our game? I think it’s time the Third Party raised its game.
Now, back to a constructive approach, the member tabled a motion, once again, and the government’s side offered, unequivocally, our support to address the issue, but the government’s more interested in doing it in a manner where we actually get something done.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, at meetings of the federal, provincial and territorial justice ministers in 2006-07, the ministers decided to be tough on crime and as a result, the federal government introduced and passed the Truth in Sentencing Act. This act, which became law in February, no longer allows a judge to give extra credit during sentencing for time spent in remand.
Guess what, Mr. Speaker? According to the preliminary Justice Canada report, it turns out it is really tough on the poor, and the people in Whitehorse are spending far longer in custody today than before the new sentencing rules were imposed.
Did the Minister of Justice raise any objections or concerns when she and her federal, provincial, and territorial counterparts decided this new law was in the public interest?
Hon. Ms. Horne: I can assure the member opposite that this government respects fairness to all and that each citizen is respected. It’s too early to say whether the figures are really up or down from the new laws that were passed by the federal government, and we will be watching them closely.
Mr. Cardiff: Critics of the Truth in Sentencing Act warned the federal Conservative government at the time the legislation was introduced that it would unfairly target the poor, the illiterate, and First Nations. The John Howard Society and the Canadian Bar Association said these groups were less able to advocate for themselves and often cannot afford to pay bail. Canada’s parliamentary budget officer warned the federal government that this legislation would be tough on taxpayers, and drive up the cost of running our correctional system.
Can the Minister of Justice tell us what the financial impacts are of this draconian new law and what impact it’s having at the Whitehorse Correctional Centre?
Hon. Ms. Horne: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask the member to think about the name; it is “truth in sentencing”. It will ensure that its time spent in remand. Our remand times in the north are historically higher than the rest of Canada. The new legislation will gradually reduce the amounts of time inmates spend in our correctional system and the number of inmates that are within the system.
We’re already aware that there is a disproportionate number of First Nation offenders within our correctional system, and we have taken steps to address the issue. We will be watching this issue very closely and following the time.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, that’s what this is about. Historically in the north, people who are involved with the courts are spending a longer time in remand without all of the necessary services sometimes. Now, the executive director of Yukon Legal Aid said in a radio interview that he has observed more illiterate people, more poor people, and more First Nation people at the jail, just like experts expected.
The minister is right — First Nations are disproportionately represented in our correctional system. In fact, the director confirmed that the new law penalizes those unfortunate ones who cannot afford to pay bail and the Whitehorse Correctional Centre is getting more crowded than usual.
Will the Minister of Justice ask her federal, provincial and territorial counterparts at their next meeting to review the effects that this law is having on the poor, the illiterate and on our First Nations population?
Hon. Ms. Horne: The remand inmates are normally in custody for such brief periods at a time, it does not allow them to attend programming, and this is in the rest of Canada. In the Yukon, our remand inmates are able to attend all the programming that is available to the sentenced inmates.
You know, the best solution here is for these individuals to not break the law. This is what we’re trying to do; we’re trying to get our inmates to come up out of the Correctional Centre and be contributing members of society. The higher rates in the Yukon are attributed to the higher rates of incarceration in Yukon and the northern territories.
Mr. Cardiff: Last week some ministers in this House made inflammatory statements that added little substance to the debate that we are having in the territory today on a subject of utmost importance to many Yukoners. I found their comments about the existing mineral claims in the Peel watershed and our options for dealing with them to be uninformed, irresponsible and very unproductive. If they had looked into how this issue was being dealt with in other Canadian jurisdictions, they would quickly realize that litigation is not the only way.
Was the Minister of Economic Development being deliberately provocative when he said in the Legislature last Tuesday, “What are you going to do when the lineup starts at the courthouse and the lawsuits start flying, when the government has to start laying out huge sums of money in embarrassment then try to settle these things out?”
Hon. Mr. Rouble: This government takes very seriously our obligations under the Umbrella Final Agreement, our responsibilities with Yukon First Nations and particularly the responsibilities laid out in chapter 11 regarding land planning.
We have embarked on a process; we’re building upon the success of this. One only has to look at the north Yukon plan, which took a number of years to complete but which was completed under this party’s watch. We’ve laid out a plan in conjunction with the four affected Yukon First Nations; we’ve put forward the timelines for that; and now the governments are going to the good work of working through that plan.
I appreciate the member opposite’s comments on this. We’ll certainly take them into consideration. We recognize that in this area there are not only environmental and economic considerations, but also other aspects that are important to Yukoners.
Mr. Cardiff:Well, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources needs to get it right. This isn’t about the chapter 11 process. This is about a government policy. Rather than trying to frighten people, this government should be showing leadership by initiating a debate, seeking advice, developing a coherent and principled approach for compensating the holders of mineral claims.
Instead of raising the spectre of litigation, it should be fostering a public dialogue on how we can balance the expectations of the mining industry with the expectations of Yukoners, and that the decisions made about where and when mining occurs are done in a 21st century context. The Yukon is not the first jurisdiction in Canada to have to deal with finding this balance. Both British Columbia and Alberta have had good regulations on their books for more than a decade.
When will the government take concrete steps to address the issues associated with the escalating conflicts that we’re seeing between the 19th century staking regime, and the 21st century land use needs and values?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: I can’t comprehend the understanding coming from the member opposite. Perhaps we’ll send over a copy of the Umbrella Final Agreement. This process is about chapter 11. This process is about honouring and implementing the modern treaties. This process is about building a balanced approach, one that recognizes the importance of the environment and also recognizes economic opportunities.
This is all about honouring the Umbrella Final Agreement and chapter 11. To hear members opposite suggest that we just dispense with this in favour of some easier, quicker way — well, this government isn’t about to do that. We have an obligation and we’ll live up to that. We’ll work with our partners in this process, as we have successfully done in other jurisdictions.
We will work collaboratively toward a final plan that incorporates a variety of land use activities within the Peel watershed and addresses the interests of the parties in a balanced manner.
Mr. Cardiff: I’m not suggesting we throw out the chapter 11 process. I’m suggesting that we respect it and have a policy so it can proceed without threats of litigation and the sowing of seeds of fear, and the pitting of one group against another, as this government is doing. The New Democratic Party would like to propose that we find solutions to the conflicts.
In British Columbia, a commission was set up to look into how the government could determine appropriate compensation for mining interests, and it said that a line must be drawn between exploration properties and advance properties.
Now, the NDP has a long history of supporting responsible mining and mining exploration. It’s the one that established the mining incentives program and reopened the Faro mine. It has established things like the small business incentive tax credit and it would take steps to address these issues.
When will the government develop a policy to determine fair compensation for claimholders when public lands are withdrawn?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: The government has been very clear. In February 2010, we announced a letter of understanding with the go-forward plan — the go-forward plan that looked at our obligations under chapter 11 about land use planning. We’ve done a plan review, we’ve done additional public consultation, and we’re now continuing with the hard work.
I appreciate that the member opposite has brought up thresholds because that is an important point that all Yukoners should consider. Even in the area where we don’t have specific land use plans, we still have those thresholds for development. That’s addressed in our YESAA process, which does look at the different thresholds of activity. We don’t allow irresponsible development to take place by happenstance out in the Yukon.
The responsible development that is allowed in the Yukon goes through our YESAA process, our permitting processes and our very strict regime. Of course we’ll follow these policies and practices. We see the different thresholds that we have for activities and the level of examination that has to happen.
That’s the whole point of a YESAA process: one that examines and promotes responsible development through the territory. We’ll continue to work with our YESAA process, our legislation, our regulations and our policies to address these needs now and into the future.
Mr. Cardiff: Multiple sclerosis is a disease of the central nervous system that in many cases is disabling. It most often strikes young adults between the ages of 15 to 40, the years when we focus on a busy life around families and careers. The symptoms can be vision problems, fatigue, unstable walking, dizziness, muscle weakness or stiffness and speech difficulties. There is no known cause and there is no known cure.
In a recent interview, the Premier stated that multiple sclerosis rates in the Yukon were three times the national average. Will the Minister of Health and Social Services tell the House what this government is doing to support those suffering from multiple sclerosis?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I was recently at a meeting of health ministers in Saint John’s, Newfoundland, where this particular subject was discussed in detail. All jurisdictions came out with a very common theme on this particular subject, and basically we are in support of the Government of Canada following through with the research work that is currently being done both here and in the United States — also being focused in Alberta and British Columbia. We are waiting for the results of that research.
Clinical tests will take place based on that research, as the jurisdictions have indicated. We’ll look at a pan-Canadian process to ensure that we can participate, which will include the Yukon.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, Canada has one of the highest rates of MS in the world. Recently a controversial procedure, which has been dubbed “liberation treatment for patients with MS”, has been made available. It is to treat a condition in multiple sclerosis patients that was discovered by a doctor in Italy and refers to the reduction of the flow of blood from the brain to the heart, due to the narrowing of various veins along the spinal cord. The treatment is similar to that used for heart disease — unblocking veins by expanding them surgically.
Many Canadians and Yukoners are travelling to the United States, Costa Rica, even to India and Bulgaria, among other countries, to have this treatment, which is not available here.
Will the government consider financially supporting Yukon patients who must travel overseas for treatment to relieve their MS symptoms?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I don’t think the member opposite was listening to my previous answer. All the jurisdictions in Canada — all the jurisdictions in Canada — with regard to MS and the research that’s being undertaken right now have indicated they will support that research, and await the results of that research to identify and ensure that the “liberation treatment” is something that will alleviate the problem the member opposite has indicated.
There have been several incidents where this particular form of therapy has not proven to be what has been indicated to be provided to many patients. For that reason alone, all the jurisdictions have indicated they will await this research, and they will ensure that the “liberation treatment” is something that can be supported by all the jurisdictions, and it will be done on a pan-Canadian process.
Mr. Cardiff: The Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada is setting aside $1 million for an all-Canadian clinical trial of the “liberation procedure”. Their partner agency in the United States has committed $2.4 million to support research projects for this therapy. Pan-Canadian or not, the governments of Newfoundland and Labrador and Saskatchewan announced they will fund in-province studies of MS patients who have already undergone the treatment; however, Health Canada does not feel the therapy trials warrant public money.
What is the position of this government on financially supporting Yukoners who might take part in those trials, which will be taking place in Saskatchewan and in Newfoundland and Labrador?
Hon. Mr. Hart: With regard to the action being taken by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, that particular program is merely an observation program, whereby the provincial government will do an assessment of those individuals who are going out to get the “liberation treatment” and they will provide services before they go and after they come back. Those assessments will be done on those who have had the treatment and on those who have not had the treatment, so they can determine whether or not the factor of the “liberation treatment” is ethical.
Now, on that particular one, they are also working with professionals in the field to assess that process. The Government of Saskatchewan has indicated that once their research has provided that clinical trials can take place, based on the research provided, they will proceed with clinical tests in their province, and look at also allowing other provinces to participate. I might add too that the Government of Alberta has indicated they’ll be doing much the same process and have offered their facilities for other jurisdictions to tag on, if necessary.
Mr. Cardiff: Many people believe this government made a big mistake when it failed to act on a request by the Peel Watershed Planning Commission to put a moratorium on mineral staking in the region at the start of the land use planning process. As a result, many thousands of new claims — some of which people have described as nuisance claims — were staked there since the planning process started back in 2004.
In a relatively short period of time, the number of claims in this area jumped from under 2,000 to more than 12,000. My question is simple. Will the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources tell us whether he learned any lessons from this experience?
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Some of the lessons that we’re learning in Yukon are that responsible resource development has significant positive outcomes for Yukoners, that we now have 600 people employed in hardrock mining opportunities, and we’re expecting more than $150 million be spent this year in the territory on exploration and mining development.
A lesson that we’re learning is that we can do these mines in an environmentally responsible manner. We are working with others to develop the resources that we have here in the territory. We’ve all seen the increases in gold prices and base metal prices, and that has caused a flurry of activity throughout the territory. We will continue to work with industry; we’ll work with environmental organizations; we’ll work with the Yukon First Nations, to ensure that we promote responsible resource extraction here in the territory, and that it has significant positive benefits for all Yukoners.
Mr. Cardiff: Unfortunately, the minister seems to be a slow learner. I’d hoped to hear him say that he wants to avoid repeating that same mistake in other regional land use planning processes. I had hoped to hear him say that he had instructed his officials to develop a policy to address this problem in the future. I had hoped to hear him say that he wants to do everything that he can to avoid exposing the Yukon government and the citizens of the Yukon to potential, future, legal actions for financial compensation from mineral exploration and extraction companies.
Why is the minister so slow to develop a policy? This issue is sure to keep coming up in other regional land use planning processes.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: Mr. Speaker, I think what we’re hearing here is the NDP’s underlying philosophy on this — that we should put a moratorium on all development in the territory until any and all planning is done and that we should prohibit staking anywhere in the territory until a land planning exercise is done.
Mr. Speaker, we’re not going to do that. We’re going to work with industry. We’re going to work with the strong environmental regulations, the assessment processes that we have in place to ensure that we have responsible development.
Are we going to look at protecting areas of the Yukon? Of course, Mr. Speaker, we only have to look at the amount of area protected in Yukon already. We’re only second to B.C. in the percentage of land mass under protection. At the same time, we’re encouraging balanced, responsible mineral development. It’s having significant economic benefits to Yukoners. We have hundreds of people employed; it’s affecting really all areas of our economy. We expect to see about $150 million in economic activity this year in the mining sector and this is having a positive impact on all Yukoners.
Mr. Cardiff: It’s unfortunate that the minister doesn’t understand the NDP position on this. It’s about certainty for Yukoners, and it’s about certainty for the industry. In March of this year, the minister compounded a problem created by his predecessors’ lack of action. He issued a relief order giving companies with about-to-expire claims in the Peel watershed a free ride for one year at the public’s expense.
This week, the Chamber of Mines threatened the Yukon government and the citizens of Yukon with legal action for financial compensation if their ability to access their claims is jeopardized in any way by the final Peel plan. The chamber says, and I quote: “It is not credible to assume that the more than 30 individual prospectors and mining and exploration companies with an interest in the Peel will just walk away from their investments.”
Will the minister now admit that his actions and his predecessors’ lack of action have needlessly exposed the Yukon government and Yukon citizens to the possibility of court action by the holders of those claims — something this government seems to like to do.
Hon. Mr. Rouble: The NDP talk about certainty. We certainly saw this under previous NDP governments. We certainly saw the amount spent in the territory for exploration and mining dip to, I believe, about $6 million, prior to the Yukon Party being elected. We saw the devastating impact that that had on our community and our economy.
The Yukon Party government went to work; we went to work on putting in place practices and processes to encourage responsible resource extraction, and we’ve certainly taken a balanced approach on this.
Yes, in the Peel planning area we’ve withdrawn the area from staking. We’ve also recognized the impact that that would have on those in the mining industry and those claim holders. They do have a right to access their claim and follow the current regulations that are around them. We also recognize the significant impediments that they would have in gaining capital investment because of the questions being raised around the Peel area.
Yes, we did grant relief for a year for those claims that were expiring. It’s a balanced approach, Mr. Speaker. We’ve withdrawn it from staking, provided some assistance to the mining industry, and we can see how the benefits are coming. We’re now one of the most attractive jurisdictions in the world. We’re bringing in investment. We saw this just last night with other foreign companies investing in Yukon. Other people have faith in the Yukon, I have faith in the Yukon, and the Yukon Party has faith in the Yukon.
Mr. Cardiff: Back in June of 2008, I attended the annual general meeting of the Yukon Women’s Transition Home Society and I believe the Minister of Justice was there. So, can the Minister of Justice tell us what progress has been made on the proposal given to her back in June 2008 for second-stage housing for abused women trying to escape violence?
Hon. Ms. Horne: I’m pleased to inform the member opposite that the Women’s Directorate, along with Yukon Housing Corporation, Health and Social Services and Kaushee’s Place, have been working together to build a new second-stage housing project. It is coming along. We have a few sites in line, and we are working on this very actively.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, it’s taking a long time. The number of battered and abused women across the territory in the shelters is shocking. It’s totally unacceptable and should be an embarrassment to this government.
Currently Kaushee’s shelter in Whitehorse is full and overflowing. They have a wait-list of six for one unit in second-stage housing. For years they have been working on expanding that essential service.
The minister is proud of all the work that’s being done by the Women’s Directorate on violence against women. Here’s her chance to do something tangible.
Will the minister agree to use her influence with her colleagues and actually begin the process of building that second-stage housing accommodation now?
Hon. Ms. Horne: Let’s give our head a shake here. We want to make sure that this project is done properly and that it is meeting the needs of the women. We had a survey in the Yukon a few years ago and we are meeting the largest gap in women’s needs, and that is the affordable family housing unit.
We have built 32 units to house women in need. We have financed the Kaushee’s Place, Help and Hope in Watson Lake, the second-stage housing in Dawson City. We are very proud of our track record.
Mr. Cardiff: I want to tell the minister and members in the Legislative Assembly about only one situation that we know of. This woman has a very young child. She has been in and out of the shelter at least twice because of physical abuse from her partner. She’s ready for second-stage housing and is on the wait-list at both Kaushee’s and the Yukon Housing Corporation and the Whitehorse Housing Authority.
In the next few days, she’s likely to find out that there’s no place to go. Now, she’s not the only woman using the shelter who is facing homelessness momentarily. This is the reality of violence against women, and it’s the minister who needs to give her head a shake.
The reality is that housing is a huge problem for those women courageous enough to try and get out of those violent relationships. Now I made this offer to the minister last spring: will she agree to come out with me, to search out possible building sites and even maybe housing that’s already in place to serve as second-stage housing?
Hon. Ms. Horne: As I just said, we are working with Kaushee’s Place. It’s not an easy project to select a site for a second-stage housing unit. We are working actively with Kaushee’s Place, and I am very pleased to announce, as the members opposite know, that Yukon Housing Corporation provides for women who are fleeing from violent situations. We are taking care of the women in the Yukon. We know there is a need. I’d like to reiterate what the Premier said just last week — that this government abhors any type of violence against women.
Mr. Cardiff: I want to read something into the record from the Yukon Hospital Corporation’s strategic plan. On page 16, it says, “Our approach to building a stable, skilled workforce will be as follows: we will become both an employer and a workplace of choice. This means offering supportive working environments in which employees can learn, grow and advance within the organization and realize the value they bring to patients and to the organization.”
Those nice-sounding sentiments don’t mesh with what we are hearing from demoralized and frustrated nurses at Whitehorse General Hospital, where the turnover and burnout rates are unacceptably high.
Does the Minister of Health and Social Services know what the turnover rate for nurses at Whitehorse General Hospital is? If he does not know, will he find out and table that information in the House this week?
Hon. Mr. Hart: Obviously I don’t have that kind of information. I’m not in charge of the staff at the Yukon Hospital Corporation or Whitehorse General Hospital, for that matter. The CEO is in charge of that information, along with a board of directors, who handle and provide guidance on policy with regard to the HR people who are involved in the Whitehorse General Hospital.
However, I will endeavour to obtain that information the member opposite has requested and provide it at a later date.
Mr. Cardiff: Well, the Hospital Corporation has unlimited funds to hire agency nurses to work at Whitehorse General Hospital, but it is reluctant to offer permanent positions to new grads with strong ties to the Yukon, who have had their education supported by government grants. The high rates of pay that the Outside hiring agency gives to the nurses is only a fraction of what the agency charges the Hospital Corporation.
This practice of relying on agency nurses, along with all the extra overtime the corporation is paying because of the continuing nurse shortage at Whitehorse General, is not only undermining staff morale but it is driving up health care costs.
Can the Minister of Health and Social Services provide me with any documents or studies demonstrating the cost benefits of using a hiring agency to bring up nurses on short-term contracts versus offering full-time positions to the nurses who already live and work here in the Yukon?
Hon. Mr. Hart: With regard to providing services to the Yukon, this government, through the college, has an LPN program that was successfully completed this past year. I might add that this government has hired all of those recipients coming out of that program to positions, either through our continuing care and/or our health system through community nursing.
With regard to Whitehorse General Hospital, I will reiterate what I said before. It is the council and the CEO of the board of directors that take care of the HR issues with regard to Whitehorse General Hospital. It is they who make the decision on policy. It is they who work on providing services for the hospital and also providing direction on how and when they hire their nurses.
Mr. Cardiff: I’ll remind the minister that it’s the Yukon taxpayers who are on the hook for the bill. The minister has a responsibility to ensure that there is some accountability for the money. Now, the management at the Hospital Corporation is unusually top-heavy for a 49-bed facility. There are currently 22 senior managers at the hospital. This is also contributing to the rise in health care costs. Many of these managers are there to ensure that Whitehorse General gets its accreditation rating and gets named as one of the top 100 employers in the country.
They are not there to address the myriad complaints the nurses have filed with the hospital’s Professional Standards and Practices Committee, as a result of the poor working environment.
Yesterday the minister mentioned the study with regard to the issues I have raised and the recommendations that are supposedly coming forth. I believe that it is called the “Sanchez report”. It is two years old. Will he table that report?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I thank the member opposite for his question; he obviously has a pipeline to some disgruntled employee. I will indicate that the CEO has indicated to me that a study has been completed with regard to the nursing issue as it relates to the Whitehorse General Hospital. Recommendations have been put forth by this report, and that report is being reviewed by the board of directors and the CEO with regard to dealing with the issue. I’ve been assured by the CEO that they are reviewing the situation in an effort to reduce some of the casual labour that they have with regard to nurses at Whitehorse General Hospital.
Mr. Cardiff: The Yukon Hospital Corporation’s public meeting last week proved to be an exercise in frustration and futility, as far as getting any real answers. So once again we’re asking, by motion, to have the chair and the CEO of the Yukon Hospital Corporation appear before the Legislature this sitting to answer the many questions that we and the public have.
We’re asking for greater accountability for the now $100-million plus the board expects to borrow to build new buildings and expand existing ones. Today we will focus on one major issue, among many, the corporation is not addressing.
Is the Minister of Health and Social Services aware of how frustrated, how anxious and how demoralized nurses working at the hospital are feeling today?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: I think we have to reflect on what transpired in this House a few short months ago. The very questions that the member is seeking answers to were asked in this House; the witnesses were before the House. I understand that the Third Party is frustrated. All things considered, I think anyone would be frustrated. However, we, the Yukon Party government, have actually taken over the NDP agenda when it comes to social programming services and health care. Our focus in those areas is second to none when it comes to NDP or Liberal governments.
As a Conservative government we’re very proud of those commitments to Yukoners and the fact that we’ve delivered on them. By the way, we value the hard work that the members of the board of trustees are providing Yukoners in the delivery of health care. I think if you ask Yukoners today, we are very fortunate in this territory, considering our capacity overall in the health care system that we have, and this Yukon Party government has been a contributor to that health care system.
Mr. Cardiff: Not even close, Mr. Speaker. We’ve been advised that nurses at the hospital have filed dozens upon dozens of complaints about their various concerns and are still waiting to have these concerns addressed.
Because of the continued shortage of nurses, they are regularly called into work on their days off or when they are on holidays. As the minister knows, this leads to staff burnout, staff turnover, not to mention much higher costs for all the overtime pay. This is also not good for the patients. Having so many nurses employed as casuals or temporaries is not a good use of public money. It only has the appearance of saving money. Over the long haul, it actually ends up costing much more money.
When will the minister go to bat for the overworked, frustrated and demoralized nurses and ask the chair of the Hospital Corporation to sit down and address the many concerns that they have?
Hon. Mr. Hart: For the member opposite, with regard to the nurses’ situation at the Whitehorse hospital, the situation has been reviewed. I’ve been advised by the CEO that they have conducted a study by an Outside firm with regard to the work being completed by the nurses and an evaluation of that process has been provided to the CEO. They are reviewing that information and will be looking forward to the recommendations coming from same to assist in providing assistance to the nurses at Whitehorse General Hospital.
Mr. Cardiff: We also understand that the hospital’s emergency ward is short a nurse. The maternity ward is understaffed as well. These and other staffing shortages and problems have resulted in nurses breaking down in tears. They tell us they don’t want to work here if they can’t provide the level of care they feel their patients deserve.
We also hear that the hospital continues to rely heavily — far too heavily — on an Outside agency to bring nurses up here to fill in on a temporary basis. Of course, the agency charges a stiff fee for this service, and this is only further driving up nursing costs. Nurses have argued for a long time that it is far cheaper to offer nurses permanent positions and rely less on casuals and temporaries from Outside. If the corporation can’t recruit and retain nurses at Whitehorse General Hospital, how does it hope to do so at the hospitals it is building in Watson Lake and Dawson City?
The issues I raise today were not adequately addressed at the corporation’s public meetings, so I will ask the minister responsible: will he ask the corporation to sit down with the nurses and address their serious staffing and other issues—
Speaker: Your time is up. Thank you.
Hon. Mr. Hart: I thank the member opposite for his question, but I will repeat that the study on the nursing situation at Whitehorse General Hospital has been completed. Recommendations have been provided to the CEO and the board of directors.
They are reviewing that information. They are taking into consideration the use of casuals and looking at making some of them full-time. That situation is currently being reviewed. It will be discussed by the board and recommendations will be forthcoming to hopefully assist in that process and provide great health care services for all Yukoners, especially at Whitehorse General Hospital.
Mr. Cardiff: Yesterday I attempted to get answers to questions about a serious situation involving youth in our community. We were told by the Minister of Health and Social Services that moving the youth shelter from the Sarah Steele Building to a social housing unit was dealing with an overcrowding situation at Sarah Steele. That was the only information we were given. We hope he is better informed about the situation today of the homeless young people who are seeking help to find a bed overnight when they so desperately need it.
Can the minister tell us how youth at risk are being advised about the change and what the process is for them to find a bed overnight?
Hon. Mr. Fentie: Unfortunately — and I would ask the House’s patience and indulgence — the minister is feeling quite ill today, but doing his best to be here.
On the matter, I will quickly wrap up. The issue before us is always a challenging one. I know the members opposite can reflect on all that we’ve done when it comes to youth — in investing in our youth groups and working with Skookum Jim’s in providing new facilities for our group home needs, and the list goes on and on.
I would also point out that the members opposite opposed all those things when it comes to helping our youth. One would hope now that the member of the Third Party recognizes that this is an issue and that the member from the Third Party, at least, will support the efforts of this government in what it’s doing to address those issues and the challenges our youth face.
Mr. Cardiff: Three times yesterday the minister stated they’re dealing with it. He also said that using the housing unit was a temporary solution. His reply begs the question of whether the homeless youth will be sent back to the detox centre when it’s not overcrowded.
Dealing with a major social problem such as youth on the streets of Whitehorse when winter is fast approaching, as we witnessed this morning, should not be done in any kind of a temporary manner. It’s time we stopped shuffling our youth from one place to another as if they are excess baggage that needs a temporary place to be dumped. I don’t understand why the minister chose not to consult or inform stakeholders and how that can be called “social inclusion”.
Will the minister commit that he will work with stakeholders like Angel’s Nest to establish a permanent shelter for youth at risk?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I thank the member opposite for his question. As I stated yesterday and he also reaffirmed this afternoon, this is a temporary situation that we’re dealing with regarding the youth shelter. We are utilizing a facility from Yukon Housing Corporation to temporarily house our homeless youth in this area.
I might add that we don’t have a large number of youth whom we’re dealing with at the current time or over the past few months but, as the member indicated, the winter is fast approaching and our numbers generally go up during the cooler seasons of the year. We are in that process, as I indicated.
We have moved the students out of the Sarah Steele Building but, as I stated yesterday, it’s on a temporary basis. We look at repairing the facilities in the Sarah Steele to accommodate the youth on a much better basis in the future.
Mr. Cardiff: It was nice to have the Premier engaged in the conversation as well. He should pay attention to this, because they’re not doing enough for youth. It’s about priorities.
Now the minister and the Premier are some of the few people in this territory who can actually do something about improving this situation. Right next door to the new location, there are 10 licensed beds available at Angel’s Nest. If the government chose to work with non-government organizations that provide services to youth at risk, we could find a solution to the issue at hand. But it appears that neither he nor the Premier is willing to do that. I’m afraid neither of them is really well-informed about the realities of youth homelessness in Whitehorse.
Yesterday I asked the minister to arrange a tour of the new facility. My question for the minister is this: will the minister agree to come with me to tour the new youth shelter and the Angel’s Nest shelter right beside it before Monday?
Hon. Mr. Hart: For the member opposite, I thank him for his question. I thank him for also providing the fact that we are aware of the situation.
I will state to him that I’ve already had a couple of visits to Angel’s Nest with regard to that facility, and I’m well aware of the facility where we are putting our youth currently, so it’s not necessary for us to make a visit there prior to Monday.
I will state though, for the member opposite, with regard to Angel’s Nest — we have doubled the contribution agreement to that facility, or to those people, to assist in dealing with youth at risk. That money has been doubled by this government to address the situation as identified by those non-profit organizations, and we look forward to the work that they do.
Mr. Cardiff: Yesterday, while touring the Whitehorse Centre riding and representing the interests of those constituents, I noticed something very interesting. It appears the temporary emergency youth shelter, administered by the Skookum Jim Friendship Centre, has moved from the Sarah Steele detox centre to a new location.
Can the Minister of Health and Social Services confirm this and can he explain the reason for the dramatic change?
Hon. Mr. Hart: We are dealing with a situation at Sarah Steele because of the crowding that’s involved there, and we are handling the situation to ensure that the youths being handled are being taken care of through the Skookum Jim process.
Mr. Cardiff: Yesterday the minister gave us his philosophy of social inclusion, and you can read it in the Blues. He said that he was working with stakeholders and they must review any new concepts or buildings and provide a priority list before any action can be taken by his department. I would assume that the clients of a service are stakeholders.
I would also assume that the relatives of the clients of a service are stakeholders. I would assume that the organizations that provide services to at-risk youth are stakeholders. I would also assume that the citizens affected by the location of a service in their neighbourhood are stakeholders.
I would hope the government’s decision to move the emergency youth shelter from the Sarah Steele Building to its new location on Jeckell Street involved discussions with all these stakeholders.
Can the minister explain why this change was not publicized — announced — and why it did not involve the stakeholders or the public at large?
Hon. Mr. Hart: As I stated earlier, we are dealing with a crowding situation at Sarah Steele. We are working with all the groups in hand. This is a situation we feel we can handle on a temporary basis to ensure that we can alleviate and cover all the issues related to the youth in question.
Mr. Cardiff: I think it’s probably a good thing to move the youth shelter from the detox centre. We’ve been critical of that before and I would actually congratulate the minister on doing that. I don’t think it’s appropriate that the young people were housed in close proximity to addicted adults. I’m not questioning the move itself; I’m questioning how it was done.
It was done without consulting any of the key stakeholders involved, contrary to the minister’s own very clear statements yesterday about social inclusion and including stakeholders.
Will the minister provide me with a copy of the operating plan for the new emergency youth shelter, including the intake procedure, the programming, the staffing and the budget for the services being provided there, as well as a summary of the consultations that took place before this change was made? Will he arrange to provide me with a tour of this new facility, please?
Hon. Mr. Hart: As I stated earlier, we’re dealing with a situation; we’re handling it in the best possible way we can with the services we have and the stakeholders we’re dealing with, to ensure that all individuals are being handled properly.
I thank the member opposite for his comments.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, over a year ago, Todd Hardy called for the creation of a social inclusion summit to bring people together to come up with real measures to eradicate poverty and address issues of social inclusion, like the lack of affordable housing. Since the summit, there is now an office of social inclusion and poverty reduction. There has been a survey. There is a website. A report is being commissioned to study the cost of poverty in the Yukon.
The Minister of Health and Social Services even got in on the act by painting sidewalk messages about social inclusion. These messages were perplexing and rubbed some people the wrong way. The good thing about it is that people did talk, and I guess that can be viewed as a small success. We commend the minister for really getting it on social inclusion.
When the minister sits down with his Cabinet colleagues, how are his concerns about social inclusion factored into the government’s decisions about projects, policy and programs?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I thank the member opposite for the question. I also thank him for paying attention to our recent campaign in August.
I will advise the member opposite that we have a substantial number of stakeholders who are assisting us in evaluating and compiling the information and data that will be utilized by our department for data collection to ensure that when we make decisions they are being made on the information that is provided by the stakeholders and by the general public.
We look forward to compiling that information, receiving the information and having the information ready and compiled later on this fall.
Mr. Cardiff: I feel for the minister. He gets the issue, but recent developments show that his government does not and that his social inclusion is already being undermined from within Cabinet. In Whitehorse, we have a 0.6-percent vacancy rate for rental housing. The housing squeeze has meant that housing prices have gone up every year.
I heard stories of a young woman, earning just over minimum wage, paying $1,300 per month in rent. I have also heard stories of a young man who has a job, but he has to sleep in his car because he can’t find an apartment.
If the minister wants to address social exclusion, he needs to deal with our deplorable housing situation. His colleague, the minister responsible for lands, announces that 144 new lots will be put on the market, either at prices that are out of reach for those most in need of affordable housing or are part of a competitive bidding process that is going to drive the prices up.
Can someone please explain how the Ingram and Takhini North land sales plans reflect government policy—
Speaker: Thank you. The minister responsible, please.
Hon. Mr. Kenyon: The member opposite brings up some good points in there, but I do have to point out that housing prices are up consistently across Canada. I can’t speak for the United States and some of the problems down there, but they are up. While it’s good in some respects — if you own property, its value has radically increased, but if you’re looking for property, it has added to the problems. We’re well aware of that.
I do have to point out for the member opposite that in the time that this government has been here, we have added 162 units to social housing — a 35-percent increase compared to the previous short-lived Liberal government and the previous NDP government, which provided no housing whatsoever, to my knowledge. So we are addressing that.
We have put a great deal of money into programs with federal help: replacement of the Alexander Street apartments, the Korbo apartments in Dawson, the seniors residence in Watson Lake, in Faro, in Teslin and elsewhere — the Abbeyfield. So, we are working on this. It’s difficult to keep up with the increase in population in the Yukon though — thanks to our very good and very hot economy.
Mr. Cardiff: Mr. Speaker, it was nice to hear the minister pinch-hit for the Minister of Health and Social Services, but that wasn’t the answer we were looking for.
The NDP caucus wants to see poverty eradicated and barriers to people’s participation eliminated. We want to see action sooner, not later. What can we do right now? We can make land available at affordable prices. We can raise social assistance rates. We can raise minimum wages. We can run a guaranteed annual income pilot project. We can hire more social workers in adult services.
Those people are overworked. We can create a wet shelter pilot project. We could build a youth shelter for our youth. Things that can be done now should be done now and not be put on hold until after an election or the unveiling of a social inclusion strategy.
What real tangible things will this government do now to reduce poverty and social exclusion?
Hon. Mr. Hart: I thank the member opposite for his question. All those issues the member opposite just discussed are things that this government is working on through the social inclusion program. We are dealing with our stakeholders in all of the subjects the member opposite indicated.
For us to go out and, for example, build something ahead of time — before our stakeholders actually sit down and review the information that’s out there and, among themselves and the government, provide a priority list of the items that should be addressed first — that would just defeat the whole purpose of us going through and obtaining the information from the stakeholders.
We intend to do that, as I said earlier. We will obtain this information and work with the stakeholders. We will have another conference with the stakeholders to identify those issues and come up with ideas that we can move forward with in the new year.