Playing dumb

Yesterday morning: one of the major political stories of the day is the Globe and Mail's report on Chuck Strahl's plan to force massive governance changes on First Nations with virtually no consultation. As part of the story, Strahl changes his position after being confronted with leaked documents discussing the plan.

Yesterday in Question Period: Strahl pretends to have no idea what his questioner is talking about in mentioning the documents cited in the article:

Mr. Todd Russell (Labrador, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I heard the minister's answer. He tries to play first nations like a fiddle but he is only step dancing around the whole damn issue.

The Conservatives have slashed the budget for consultation and they keep their communications “low profile”. Those are his words from his own documents.

Why is he excluding first nations from meaningful consultation? Why is it that he said one thing in June about the apology and did another thing through his actions? Why will he not come clean with the first nations people of this country?

Hon. Chuck Strahl (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I have never seen the document that the member is talking about. I have never seen it and I do not know where it came from.

So let's run this past a smell test.

Strahl was obviously aware the story was in the works since he was personally quoted and confronted with at least some of the leaked documents. And he was also apparently expecting to be questioned about it based on a number of his other answers.

From that starting point, it would strike me as nowhere near plausible to suggest that Strahl and his department did nothing to figure out what documents had found their way to the Globe and Mail. But either way there would seem to be a serious problem for Strahl: either he avoided finding out what's going so as not to have to answer for it personally, or he misled the House as to what he knew about the documents. And while either outcome would be entirely consistent with the Cons' usual communication strategies, it's hard to suggest that either is even remotely compatible with competent government.