Mike Scott

[Supply, October 23rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member, her party, which is the governing party in British Columbia, has chosen to take some actions against the Americans. We all agree that there is need of action, a real concern on this issue.

When Al Gore and Bill Clinton wanted a park created up in Tatshenshini, Mr. Harcourt said “I'll bend over and give you anything you want”. He did. What was the prime reason for creating the Tatshenshini? It was the unreal concern of the Alaskan fisherman over the downstream impacts on the Alaskan fishery.

Why does the member not go back to her friend, the premier of British Columbia, and ask him to reverse that decision on the Tatshenshini and put 2,000 British Columbians to work? That would really get the the attention of Al Gore and Bill Clinton. They have been sitting there watching this whole drama unfold without taking it seriously.

[Aboriginal Affairs, October 7th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the auditor general's report shows clearly that there is no accountability.

On another subject. As if there is not enough heartbreak stemming from serious social problems on reserves already, we learned today that the department of Indian affairs is complicit in facilitating prescription drug abuse.

The auditor general states that in one three-month period, 15,000 people went to three or more pharmacies, 1,600 obtained more than 15 drugs and over 700 people had 50 prescriptions in one three-month period. Since the government has known this problem has existed for 10 years, why has it done absolutely nothing about it?

[Aboriginal Affairs, October 7th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in question period the minister of Indian affairs bragged about the level of accountability to aboriginal people. Today the auditor general gave us the straight goods.

Over $1 billion is spent on aboriginal health care each year, yet the auditor general states that the government has insufficient information on how two-thirds of its programs are working. Given that the auditor general refers to the status of aboriginal health as a tragedy and a crisis, what concrete steps is this government going to take to ensure proper accountability for the $1 billion that is spent every year on aboriginal health care?

[Aboriginal Affairs, October 6th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's answer in no way addresses the issue of what happened over the last 30 years. If we talk to ordinary people in bands like the Stoney, the Siksika, the Kwanlin Dun, the Samson Cree, the Shushwap and on and on, they will tell us where the money is gone. It has been wasted, pocketed, misappropriated, gone missing, blown on fancy trips and plundered in 100 different ways.

What tools will the prime minister give to ordinary aboriginals to hold their band councils and the department of Indian affairs accountable?

[Aboriginal Affairs, October 6th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have another question on accountability. Nearly 30 years ago the prime minister promised aboriginals “full social, economic and political participation in Canadian life”.

Three decades later the heartbreaking reality is that aboriginal youth commit suicide at six times the national rate, aboriginal infant mortality is twice as high, and more aboriginal youth go to jail than to university.

Given that the federal government has spent over $80 billion on this matter since 1969, could the prime minister give us an accounting of what went wrong?

[Canada Endangered Species Protection Act, April 24th, 1997]

moved:

Motion No. 86

That Bill C-65, in Clause 59, be amended by replacing lines 23 to 26 on page 33 with the following:

"A copy of the report sent to a person whose conduct was investigated must disclose the name and address of the applicant."

Motion No. 88

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 60.

Motion No. 91

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 61.

Motion No. 92

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 62.

Motion No. 93

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 63.

Motion No. 94

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 64.

Motion No. 95

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 65.

Motion No. 96

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 66.

Motion No. 97

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 67.

Motion No. 99

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 68.

Motion No. 100

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 69.

Motion No. 103

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 70.

Motion No. 104

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 71.

Motion No. 105

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 72.

Motion No. 106

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 73.

Motion No. 107

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 74.

Motion No. 108

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 75.

Motion No. 109

That Bill C-65 be amended by deleting Clause 76.

[Military Bases, April 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian taxpayers are being stuck with a $500 million tab to clean up American garbage. I cannot believe the subject did not come up when the Prime Minister was smiling for the cameras and sipping white wine with his close friend Bill Clinton.

We would appreciate the straight goods this time. Will the government force the Americans to clean up their own mess or will Canadian taxpayers be stuck with toxic waste and a $500 million tab?

[Military Bases, April 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in question period the Minister of National Defence told the House that Canada was involved in negotiations with the United States over the clean-up of abandoned military bases across this country. Now we have learned that there are not any negotiations taking place and none planned for the future.

Why did the Minister of National Defence mislead the House?

[Fisheries, April 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, fisheries management in Canada has reached a new low. In spite of massive expenditures by DFO the Atlantic groundfishery is in ruins, capelin stocks are dangerously low, Pacific salmon stocks have fallen dramatically, and now the Bay of Fundy scallop beds are all but wiped out.

It is getting so bad that the portfolio of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans will soon be changed to just the minister of oceans because we are fast running out of fish.

Digby scallop fishermen who have families to feed and mortgage payments to make want to know what the minister will do for them. Is the minister prepared to shoulder his responsibility and make responsible and rational management decisions?

Scallop fishermen in Digby who have been occupying DFO offices for the past eight days want answers. They want to know that they will be able to earn a living in an industry that they pioneered 75 years ago.

[Fisheries, April 9th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

The minister and his department knew or should have known that the Digby scallop fleet could not possibly survive on the scallop beds in the Bay of Fundy alone. Corralling the inshore fleet into this confined area would result in over harvesting and depleted scallop beds. Atlantic groundfish, Pacific salmon and now scallops-DFO's management record is a litany of failure.

Will the minister take immediate steps to ensure that a proper management plan is put in place which will provide a long term, sustainable fishery for the inshore scallop fleet.