Ron Irwin

[Indian Affairs, May 12th, 1995]

Then perhaps if the member would clarify-

[Indian Affairs, May 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, if this is an allegation against Chief Roy Bird, it smacks of the usual allegations made by the Reform Party.

I have been working with Chief Roy Bird-

[Indian Affairs, May 12th, 1995]

You know that, good. I am glad you know it because you may learn something from that.

We share the same aspirations for the aboriginal people of the country. There has to be adequate sharing of resources if we are truly to get self-government and self-determination, on paper, in the House, something the Reform Party says at the press scrums it supports.

[Indian Affairs, May 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, this assertion on the position of the federal government is so patently incorrect that I am almost encouraged to call it false. But I would not do that because it might get me thrown out of the House.

A year ago January the province of Saskatchewan, the Government of Canada and the FSIN sat down to try co-management in Saskatchewan. At the invitation of the province of Saskatchewan we funded nine areas where we could possibly do co-management, co-jurisdiction in Saskatchewan. We put a draft proposal on the table, the FSIN put a draft proposal on the table, and we are still waiting for the province of Saskatchewan to put a draft proposal on the table.

I have met at least twice with the minister from Saskatchewan in the last two or three weeks, and on Thursday I met with the premier of Saskatchewan. We may be of different parties, but we share the same feeling on the aspirations of aboriginal people.

[James Bay And Northern Quebec Agreement, May 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said on numerous occasions about the right to gather food as a broad right-not necessarily an aboriginal right but an aboriginal and non-aboriginal right-that these rights will be facilitated.

Let us take the logic of the hon. member to the extreme. He is saying that it is okay for Cree to go there and hunt seal or caribou with an AK-47, with an assault weapon, with a Sherman tank. This defies logic; it is incorrect.

What the Minister of Justice is doing does not break the spirit or intent of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

[James Bay And Northern Quebec Agreement, May 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.

I am pleased the hon. member raised the issue of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, because we were rather proud of that. It was the former Prime Minister Trudeau and the present Prime Minister, who had this job at the time, who actually implemented the James Bay and Hudson Bay and northern Quebec agreement. It is part of our culture, part of our policy, part of our tradition.

I am really pleased that the hon. member has now taken up the issue of treaty rights. I hope I see that in the future when we bring forth these things, and not not what I hear outside of the House with the Reform saying let's get rid of treaty rights, let's not have any more treaty process.

The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement talks about fishing and hunting rights. The bill of the Minister of Justice talks about guns and regulation. They are two distinct things. There are rights under treaty to hunt and fish. To take the logic of the Reform, he is saying that the Cree can go out and hunt with a Sherman tank and the Government of Canada would have no

recourse. We are talking about gun registration, not rights of hunting and fishing.

Maybe I should not be so pleased. Perhaps it is just a sign of desperation of how far the Reform Party has gone in trying to save what is now a losing position.

[Indian Affairs, May 8th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, again this is an allegation of criminal events. It is up to the Sûreté to do the investigation. We will co-operate fully with the police.

[Indian Affairs, May 8th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, this is a criminal matter. The police are investigating.

Our position in any of these investigations is to co-operate with the police, provide assistance and any information we have. However, we have to stay at arm's length from any criminal prosecution.

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, by way of background, in Alberta where the Siksika are, the treaty is sacred. They say it is sacred and they do not feel we have fulfilled the spirit and intent of the treaty.

Chief Strater Crowfoot is one of the pre-eminent chiefs in this country. He has had a difficult time with his first nation. The difficulty is that he wants to establish trust with the federal government. We will work with him and hope that he gets back into the system.

Rather than saying that Strater Crowfoot and the Siksika are temporarily out of the process, I want to go back to what the Minister of Justice said when members of the House voted for gun control. Forty First Nations are still in the process and still working toward completion.

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what category the hon. member is talking about. If he is talking about community based self-government, this program had gone on for about eight or nine years before we arrived back in government. If he is not, he will have to clarify it later.

As far as what Reform is doing here today, I have this reflection. The Reform Party does not care about the 1760 Murray treaty or the Hurons, the Cree, the Ojibway, or Treaty 6. What Reform wants to do is to go to its last issue in B.C. and disrupt the B.C treaty process. That is Reform's agenda.

We have spent the better part of a year and one-half getting 120 First Nations to the table. That is something the Reform could never do in the millennium. They are negotiating and we are committed to the B.C. treaty process, no matter what the Reform members do or how disruptive they are.