Brian Fitzpatrick

[Nuclear Liability and compensation Act, June 19th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to part of the member's speech. I am not quite clear on this, but he seems to be opposed to any private ownership in the nuclear industry and he wants control retained by the government. Maybe he could clarify this. It was my impression that the New Democrats were absolutely opposed to any nuclear development, period, whether it was done by the government or by corporations. I would like that clarified. If that is the case, it seems to me there is a lot of sucking and blowing going on at the same time.

[Food and Drugs Act, April 30th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I was astounded to listen to the member's presentation and the one from the Bloc as well. I have come to the conclusion that maybe we should have a special law that prohibits big corporations from distributing and selling prescription drugs to NDP members and their supporters, and maybe Bloc members as well, because we would not them to take something they feel is unscientific and would not have any benefit.

Let us be clear. For every drug cleared through the clinical trial process, there are literally thousands of drugs that do not get to first base. This is not a slam dunk process and it costs an awful lot of money. There are a lot of other safeguards. The EU has a clinical process that is very tough. The Japanese have one that is very tough. The Americans have one that is very tough. If manufacturers fail in the United States, they get through the entire process and get a drug approved but if they make a mistake, they can be financially ruined by the American tort system.

However, for members of this House to say that we are just allowing drugs on to market without any due diligence or any comprehension for public safety and that there is some great conspiracy between members of Parliament and the drug companies to foist all these poisonous and toxic drugs on people is total nonsense. I cannot believe the member actually believes that. I do not want to disagree too strongly with her opinion because it might insinuate that I am challenging her intelligence.

[Business of Supply, April 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, in listening to the NDP I could not help but recall Churchill's famous quote. I think the NDP goes back a lot further than 50 years ago. It sounds like it is going back 100 years with its rhetoric. The quote of Churchill was that: “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” That is the type of quote that I thought really registered with some of the rhetoric that I heard today.

I do appreciate the point that the member raised about corporate tax rates. Being of Irish ancestry, the miracle in western Europe over the last 20 or 25 years has been the Republic of Ireland. Let us look at the performance of that economy, from 1986 up to the present, and at the current level of income, the growth rates and unemployment rates and so on.

I am sure that the member for Markham—Unionville, who is a professional economist, knows more about what went on in the Republic of Ireland than I do. I have read some things about it. There have been terrific results for that society. People are returning to Ireland from all over the world. It is a place to be and it has a terrific record to bestow upon itself.

It seems to me that the corporate tax rate in the Republic of Ireland, if I am not wrong, is 12%. At different times the corporate tax rate has been as low as 10%. I wonder if the member from Markham could comment on the miracle of Ireland and--

[Business of Supply, March 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address some of the comments of the Bloc members.

I want to make it clear that I am a provincial rights person. I think the Constitution of our country should be adhered to and followed. However, I want to emphasize this for the Bloc members.

Under section 91 of the Constitution, the federal government is given exclusive jurisdiction over something called trade and commerce. Every public company in the province of Quebec is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange. Unless I am missing something here, it is the only major public exchange we have in Canada. Why are Quebec companies listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange? They want investors in Alberta, B.C., Saskatchewan, Ontario and all other provinces to invest in their companies, which is a good thing to do. Companies need capital to run a business. I did not know the Bloc was back to the socialistic mentality of 50 or 60 years ago, but in a free market economy companies need capital. Those companies have freely listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange to raise capital and to grow and become good companies, which they are.

I have invested in many of these Quebec companies over the years. They are good companies, and I think it is a good thing. However, if I were a shareholder, and I have been one, I would object to having to put up with the inefficiencies of adhering to 13 provinces and territories, their regulations, their lawyers and the expenses involved in trying to do business. It is unnecessary.

Americans would shake their heads over this. They have one agency, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, that sets the rules for all 50 states. They have big capital markets. It is the place to do business in the world.

We want to do business in Canada and grow Quebec companies and other companies. Why does the member want to handicap Quebec companies by imposing all the rules and regulations from 12 other jurisdictions on them and pay lawyers and bureaucrats in Saskatchewan, or in Alberta, or in other provinces, to impose the unnecessary duplication of rules on the trading of their shares on one market? It does not make any sense to me.

[Business of Supply, March 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have a comment with respect to the member's speech. There are some really good Liberals in the country. One I happen to know is Harold MacKay from Saskatchewan, who was appointed to a commission by Mr. Chrétien or the previous prime minister to study this whole issue of a single regulator in Canada. He came down decisively in favour of the position that is being presented by Minister Flaherty and the Conservative government, as we can see if we look at the report.

I wanted to pass on that information. This may be another point at which the Liberal opposition party will be supporting the Conservative government once again.

[Business of Supply, March 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that virtually every Quebec public company that I am aware of trades on the Toronto Stock Exchange and they do it to gain access to national and international capital markets.

If I were to talk to the CEOs of these companies, whether it is BCE, Bombardier or any other company, I am quite sure they would be the first people to say that we have too many regulators in the business. It drives up the cost of public financing and it makes the cost of capital uncompetitive in Canada. I think they would be the first people to step up to the plate and ask to be freed from this over-regulation that we have across the country.

Oil companies in Alberta would probably be in the same boat. They are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and they must comply with the Ontario Securities Commission's rules and maybe 13 provincial and territorial agencies on this. It drives up the cost of raising capital and gaining access to the markets.

The reality is that Quebec companies are trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange today. Does the Bloc Québécois not understand that reality?

[The Budget, February 27th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, back in the early 1990s, we had a serious recession in North America, and there are concerns that we may have a replay of that type of recession.

People in the province of Ontario elected a New Democrat government led by a fellow by the name of Bob Rae. What did Ontario get during that period? High taxes, big government, a huge massive deficit and a debt that was over $100 billion. It tried to spend its way out of this thing with high taxes and massive spending and so on. Where did it get the NDP government?

If the NDP members had power or had some say in Parliament, is that the recipe they would use to try to deal with the situation we have to deal with today, and that is higher taxes, more spending, big deficits, try to spend their way into prosperity?

[Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, January 30th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member's comment about cellulosic ethanol and it is my recollection in last year's budget that $180 million was targeted for the cellulosic ethanol operation that he mentioned in his riding, Iogen, to build the first commercial plant in Canada, fortunately in Saskatchewan, my home province.

However, the member referred to it as being an incoherent policy, that we are just emphasizing grain-based ethanol. Is the member suggesting today that the $180 million funding for the Iogen project to move ahead is a one-sided, incoherent strategy?

[Business of Supply, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the member, but before she answers, I have a little bit of a follow-up, because I do not want to set a trap for her.

Has the federal government a responsibility to actively protect and defend the rights of Canadian women? I want to warn the member that the member for Winnipeg South Centre said that for the federal government to actively defend the rights of aboriginal women on the reserve would be paternalistic. For government to be active on trying to protect the rights of Canadian citizens, whether they are aboriginal women or anyone else, if I understand it correctly, we cannot do that because it would be paternalistic.

What is your position and what is the position of your party?

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I get upset when Liberals talk about rights. One would think they had a monopoly on rights in this country. Let us look at some facts

. In the second world war, Nazi refugees trying to flee Nazi Germany came to Canada. They were turned down by this country, sent back to Nazi Germany and ended up as Holocaust victims. Who was in government at that time? It was a Liberal government.

Who interned Japanese Canadian citizens and deprived them of their property and fundamental rights? It was the Liberals.

The only time in Canadian history that martial law has ever been imposed in this country, where our citizens had their rights suspended and people were rounded up and put into internment camps, was during the Trudeau regime. Every Liberal should know that.

I should not speak so fast because they have a tough time remembering a few of these things.

Who granted the women the right to vote in this country? Which government did that? It was a Conservative government.

Who granted aboriginal people the right to vote almost 100 years after the slaves were freed in the United States? It was a Conservative government.

Who appointed the first woman to a cabinet post in this country? It was a Conservative government.

We Conservatives need not take any lectures from that group about fundamental rights and freedoms in this country.

I think we need a charter of rights, a bill of rights, to protect Canadians against Liberals.