NDP leader Liz Hanson: Land use planning is a cornerstone of Yukon First Nation final agreements. The Yukon government committed to complete land use plans in good faith and with the aim of creating land use certainty and promoting sustainable development and co-operation with Yukon First Nation governments.
In a strongly worded letter to the parties of the Peel land use plan, the Yukon Land Use Planning Council said, and I quote: “…regional land use planning program is in trouble. A number of negative precedents may have been set that undermine the trust and public confidence required to sustain an effective land use planning program.”
This is not news to this side of the House, to the public, nor to First Nation governments. What is the premier doing to rebuild the trust and public confidence required to sustain an effective land use planning process?
Premier Darrell Pasloski: This Yukon Party is very loud and proud of the accomplishments that it has made going forward in terms of identifying protected land in the territory. In fact, 12.68 percent of Yukon land is protected, second only to the province of British Columbia. We’re not exactly sure where that will end up after the next regional land use plan, the Peel Watershed Regional Land Use Plan, is finished. Perhaps we’ll even be in the number one position. We’ve identified six territorial parks, numerous habitat protected areas and special management areas. This government has done very well in terms of moving forward with land use plans. We have completed the north Yukon plan, we’re almost through the Peel watershed plan now, and we have in fact started a third one in the Klondike area.
Both the Liberals and the NDP have been in power since the Umbrella Final Agreement came into place 20 years ago. The NDP and the Liberals accomplished no land use plans. This is the only party that accomplished land use plans. We’re proud of that. We continue to move forward.
Liz Hanson: If the Premier looks, he’ll find that it wasn’t he who created those special management areas. It was the final agreements. The Yukon Land Use Planning Council confirmed what many have already said. The Yukon Party government’s unilateral introduction of eight new principles after the final Peel land use plan was recommended was not helpful and jeopardized the work already done by the commission, by Yukon First Nation governments, by government staff and Yukon citizens. The council also noted that requests for clarification from the Yukon government on the policy basis for these eleventh-hour principles have gone unanswered. This has caused uncertainty and concern and has had, for example, a negative spillover effect on the Dawson regional land use plan that recently started.
So will the premier explain to this House how Yukon First Nation governments could have any confidence in the land use planning process in which the Yukon government changes the rules after the fact and undermines the planning process?
Minister Brad Cathers: First of all, I’d like to note with the letter we received from the former chair of the Yukon Land Use Planning Council. That individual was at the end of his term and was not reappointed by the federal government to that position. He provided us with a letter reflecting his viewpoint. We’ll certainly look through that and give it consideration for where there may be ideas that are of use. I do have to point out that there are some statements in that letter that are not factually correct and which the government cannot accept, including his characterization at the end of the first page of that letter that whether government follows the Umbrella Final Agreement or not is largely irrelevant. That is absolutely incorrect in government’s viewpoint.
We have followed the Umbrella Final Agreement process. We will continue to do so. But really, the leader of the official opposition, the NDP member, should give consideration to her own role and contribution to the public debate. The NDP’s contributions have often not been factual and certainly lead to a polarization of debate, which really is not in the best interests of Yukon society. The member should look in the mirror and think long and hard about the NDP’s role in this process.
Liz Hanson: It is unfortunate this government continues to attack citizens who are appointed by governments to represent all of us. The letter from the Land Use Planning Council continues by noting that the introduction of modifications to the Peel land use plan prior to public consultation is, and I quote: “inconsistent with the spirit and intent of the land claim agreement”. The council also said that this action by the Yukon Party government muddies the consultation process. The council then noted that this behaviour, and I quote: “undermines the government effort to demonstrate that the Yukon is a good place to invest.”
These are serious allegations.
This government is undermining final agreements; they are undermining confidence in land use planning, and they are creating economic uncertainty. When will the premier show real leadership and get the Yukon’s land use planning process back on track?
Brad Cathers: Again I have to point out to the member that, as the premier noted in his response, the NDP and the Liberals both had time in office in the 20 some years since the Umbrella Final Agreement was signed. Neither ever did even a single regional land use plan. It is only the Yukon Party that has completed one process with our First Nation partners, has another almost completed and another underway.
This type of polarizing rhetoric we hear from the NDP does not contribute to a good public understanding of what the process is, what has occurred and what is required to occur. Really, the member needs to look only to her own rhetoric to understand that the NDP’s contribution to the public debate, since the election of the member for Whitehorse Centre as leader, has been entirely negative and rarely factual.
This government will review the letter from the former chair of the Yukon Land Use Planning Council.
We will give it reflective consideration. He has provided his viewpoints on the process and his thoughts, and we’ll give that consideration. If there are ideas in there that are useful to government and our planning partners, of course we will incorporate those in future planning processes.
Click here to read the planning council's five-page letter.
No comments:
Post a Comment