Mike Scott

[Supply, February 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I truly never thought I would be sitting in this Chamber listening to the Liberals and the Tories bragging about who ran up the best national debt. I cannot believe it. But the member has a point. In 1984 Mr. Mulroney was elected with a landslide on the promise to do something about the debt. He had nine years to do it and he did not.

With the concern about the brain drain that is coming from the Tories, would the member not agree that the brain drain has already occurred, that the people with any brains have left the Tories and joined the Reform Party?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of Indian affairs.

Grassroots aboriginals are angry and upset that the minister's office leaks confidential letters and yet withholds information which might embarrass the department.

We have an internal departmental memo which directs a senior bureaucrat to withhold information requested by a band member under access to information because it might make the department of Indian affairs look bad.

Did the minister direct her bureaucrats to withhold this information? If not, did this directive come from her? Where did it come from?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 17th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, that investigator will have a full time job pretty quickly over there.

Let me quote from the internal memo: “It is suspected that the requester plans to use the information in an attempt to embarrass either the chief and council of the Gull Bay First Nation or the department, or both. Particular diligence and review of the information prior to its release is recommended”.

How can anybody have faith in the current investigation, necessitated because of the department's breach of Bruce Starlight's privacy, when we have evidence of such cover-ups?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 17th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the saga for us in the department of Indian affairs continues. I have in my possession an internal departmental memo in which one senior Indian affairs bureaucrat instructs another not to release information requested under access to information because it might embarrass the department. Requested under access to information and denied because it might embarrass the department.

Does the Indian affairs minister agree that this is nothing more than a cover-up?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 16th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, just so that we are clear, the Deputy Prime Minister and the minister of Indian affairs have already acknowledged that this is an unacceptable breach of confidentiality. Mr. Starlight wrote a letter and as a direct result of this government's failure to respect his private and privileged correspondence, he is being sued.

I am going to ask one more time: Will the Deputy Prime Minister please commit here and now to paying for Mr. Starlight's legal fees?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 16th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Bruce Starlight wrote to the minister of Indian affairs last fall. His privacy was breached and his letter leaked to the chief, Liberal Roy Whitney. Chief Whitney is now using taxpayers' money provided by the minister of Indian affairs to sue Mr. Starlight.

The Deputy Prime Minister said last week that he is looking into paying for Mr. Starlight's legal fees because he recognizes that this is a breach in confidentiality. Is he now prepared to assure Mr. Starlight that his legal fees will be paid?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

Bruce Starlight wrote to the minister of Indian affairs last year, only to be betrayed and have his letter leaked. The minister is now investigating herself.

Yesterday we asked if the report of this investigation would be tabled. The government said it was concerned that this would be subject to the privacy act and may violate the privacy act.

Why is the government attempting to hide behind the privacy act to protect itself when it obviously had no concern for Bruce Starlight's privacy? Will the Deputy Prime Minister commit here and now in this House to table this investigative report when it is finalized?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have the ludicrous scenario of the minister investigating herself and then reporting to herself.

The Prime Minister should know as a former minister of Indian affairs that trust is very important to aboriginals and indeed to all Canadians. There is a very real sense of betrayal on the part of grassroots Indian people as a result of this unacceptable breach of confidentiality.

Can the Prime Minister tell us what particular steps he will take to restore the faith of grassroots aboriginal peoples in his government?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Over a month ago we exposed the fact that a confidential letter was leaked from the office of the minister of Indian affairs. The minister says she is investigating this breach of confidentiality but her actions indicate that she is not taking this matter very seriously. Yesterday she could not even remember the name of the investigator until the Deputy Prime Minister slipped her a note.

Can the Prime Minister assure this House that this investigator's report will be tabled in its entirety in this House?

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Starlight family confirms it never received even an acknowledgement. The only response Bruce Starlight has to date is a lawsuit by his chief. We know the minister has not contacted Mr. Starlight.

I have another question motivated by concerns that the minister may be trying to protect the chief who happens to be a prominent Liberal. The minister has not contacted Mr. Starlight. What contact has she had with the Liberal chief?