Pasloski pounded over Peel
Friday September 23, 2011
Mike Thomas/Yukon News
The Liberal Opposition is blasting Premier Darrell Pasloski for his waffling on development of the Peel Watershed.
For Liberal Leader Arthur Mitchell, Pasloski’s evasions bring to mind the infamous words of another conservative politician: Kim Campbell.
“During the 1993 election campaign, Kim Campbell famously told Canadians, ‘An election is no time to discuss serious issues.’ Given the Yukon Party Leader’s recent comments on the Peel Watershed, Yukoners have to be wondering whether Mr. Pasloski is a big fan of the former prime minister,” said Mitchell.
There may be other similarities. Campbell never sat in the House of Commons as prime minister during her brief, 132-day reign.
Pasloski, having won the Yukon Party’s leadership this spring, doesn’t yet have a seat in the legislature. And he won’t after October 11, if David Sloan has his way.
RELATED: Read all of our election coverage.
The former school superintendent is challenging Pasloski for the new Mountainview riding. And Sloan says, most voters he’s spoken to want the Peel protected.
“(Pasloski’s) clearly tone deaf to what the vast majority of Yukoners want,” said Sloan. “I’ve gone to many doors where the first question asked is, ‘What’s the position on the Peel?’ Either he’s not listening, or he doesn’t want to listen.
“Yukoners don’t want any more backroom deals. They want clear answers on the Peel, and they want them now.”
Sloan had a comparison of his own to make: Pasloski’s attitude towards the Peel is similar to that of his predecessor, Dennis Fentie, he said.
It was Fentie who prevented pro-conservation comments prepared by the Department of Environment from being submitted to Peel planners.
He stopped them by issuing an irate phone call to a senior government official, according to records obtained in the autumn of 2009 by the Yukon News. Fentie later refused to explain the move.
Pasloski’s latest evasions are no different, said Sloan. “It confirms that Yukoners can’t trust the Pasloski-Fentie government,” he said.
Pasloski insists it would be “irresponsible” to express any opinion on the final plan to protect four-fifths of the Peel Watershed, because a final round of community consultations has yet to be held.
Nonsense, said Mitchell.
“Is he accusing First Nations of being irresponsible?” he asked.
“They’ve all clearly stated what their position is. That doesn’t preclude having additional conversations with Yukoners. And it doesn’t preclude sitting down at the table, and perhaps a line moving a little way this way or that way.
“Those First Nations, who are parties to the same process, have been very clear in saying, ‘This is our desired outcome.’ What we’d like to know is, what is the Yukon Party’s desired outcome?”
Pasloski has said he’d like to see part of the Peel protected. But he won’t say how much.
To do so would make the issue “political,” he’s said.
But the fate of the Peel will ultimately be decided by politicians. So, naturally, the decision will be political, said Mitchell.
“Politics is coming together to talk about how we deal with the most important ideas we face as a society. Of course, it should be politicized. How else are we going to choose to move forward?”
The Liberals, NDP and Greens all support the Peel plan. If approved, it would protect 55 per cent of the watershed forever. Another quarter would be protected for at least the next decade.
If the plan is signed off, one tricky question to follow will be what to do with several thousand existing mineral claims in the area.
This is not an insurmountable problem, said Mitchell. When Tombstone Territorial Park was formed, the government met with individual claimholders to work out settlements.
“The bulk of it was done without compensation,” said Mitchell. “Many people agreed to just forgo their claims. Others were given credit to claims elsewhere, in terms of assessment work.”
The Liberals are proposing to handle the Peel in a similar way.
Even with a big swath of northeast Yukon off-limits to mining, the industry would still have ample opportunities to dig, said Mitchell.
“The mining industry is thriving, and nobody is working in the Peel.”
Contact John Thompson at
(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).









11:22am 09/26/11 | mlehner wrote:
Susie - Since the protection percentage number has changed 3 times since the beginning of this situation, which particular number are you referring to when you say “and it is obvious that the Yukon Party does not” ?
9:13am 09/26/11 | riptide wrote:
Strategic voting is such a crock. Vote for whomever you want. IF the party is deserving, has a good platform, and deserves to win, then hopefully they will. Suzie, if you really want to defeat the YP, then go spend time helping other candidates, knocking on doors, putting up signs, etc.
2:19pm 09/23/11 | susie rogan wrote:
Page 1:
The question is which party to vote for. Who has the best chance of defeating the Yukon Party candidate in each riding between the Green, NDP, Liberal and First Nations party. Unfortunately even though the magority of Yukoners support the reccommendations of the Peel Planning commission, (and it is obvious that the Yukon Party does not), if the vote is split four ways the Yukon Party will come up the middle again. Vote strategically. Protection of the Peel has permanent implications which are more important than my personal interests and tastes this time around.
2:18pm 09/23/11 | susie rogan wrote:
page 2:
It is time for a change anyway and Yukoners are good at throwing out the old and bringing in the new. We’ve had 8 years of the Yukon Party stonewalling the public and supporting their personal constituency. If another party gets in with a bent toward something else for 4 years, I am okay with that. Calls of other parties ruining the economy if not for the lovely Yukon party are bogus. They have blown our budget despite record revenues, and that is just for starters. Next, the Yukon Party claiming credit for unprecidented global demand for metals, and unprecidented global prices for the same is just ridiculous. Back to our economy, people are unable to find housing. Furnace repair technicians cost $100 per hour (what I paid last week and I ain’t complaining, just stating a fact), the cost of a load of pit run went from $120 to $175 - 220 per load in two years(quotes on the phone two days ago), etc.
I do not believe that the mining industry or our economy is threatened by protecting the Peel. The mining indusrty is making record profits, there has been over $400 million spent in the Yukon last year in mining despite not having access to the Peel, (up from lows of $40 million and averages of about $90 million) Time for a big slow down and re-assesment, especially when our royalty rates are so low as to be not even worth charging (case in point, placer gold royalties = 37 cents per ounce. Leaving approximately $1,799.63 for the placer miner.)
Add a comment
The Yukon News has provided readers with the opportunity to post their views and opinions regarding any stories published on its website to foster dynamic discussions. Comments on this site are not the opinions of the Yukon News and comments with vulgar language, libelous statements or falsified facts will be removed. If you have a complaint regarding a comment or have a question please contact the web administrator at webadmin@yukon-news.com. Comments will be added once approved by a moderator.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.