Steven Fletcher

[Canada-Panama Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, November 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's comments. I think he may have free-trade envy of the Conservatives, because we have brought forward so many free trade agreements that benefit Canadians.

He is saying, all wrapped up in process, that if there were a vote, the bill would probably pass the House. The answer is yes, it would pass the House, because the government has a majority in the House. The question is whether his party supports the bill. Would his party stand up for free trade, or has it decided to go the way of the NDP and the way of its interim leader and be against anything that would expand the pie for everyone in the world? Does the member support free trade? Does his party support free trade? Does his party support this free trade agreement?

[Canada Post, November 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, sadly, Canada Post has not posted positive revenue in the last couple of quarters in large part due to the work stoppage, which that member's party continued and caused many of Canada Post's customers to move to other forms of transmission of data.

In regard to rural areas, we have the new Canada postal service charter and we expect Canada Post to follow it.

[Canada Post, November 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to universal, effective and economic postal service for all Canadians. As a crown corporation, Canada Post operates at arm's length from the government and is responsible for its operational decisions. We expect that no taxpayer money would go into Canada Post.

I know the NDP would rather control Canada Post. It would rather have it all unionized, run by the government, and charge a fortune to the taxpayers. We will not do that.

[The Environment, November 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the premise of that question is wrong. There will always be common law that would apply to all waterways throughout the country. This is really dealing with the large waterways where scientifically empirical evidence demonstrates that having a Navigable Waters Protection Act helps.

The other issue the member raises is completely false.

[The Environment, November 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Navigable Waters Protection Act is an act respecting the protection of the public to navigate. It is not an environmental piece of legislation. I do not know how many times we have to say this. There are other ways of protecting the bodies of water that the member pointed out.

Navigation, period. That is all it does. The changes that we have made have been widely applauded right across the country.

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as we sit kitty-corner in the chamber, without any listening device, I could hear the member for Winnipeg North very well. I appreciate his passion, but it is misdirected.

I want to focus on a comment the member made about representation in the House of Commons.

We have a system where the House of Commons is a representation by population as much as possible. The member has said that he thinks there are too many politicians, or too many representatives of the people, which is another way of putting it.

Is he saying that he is not in favour of B.C., Alberta, Ontario or Quebec getting additional seats so they can be represented appropriately in this chamber? It is a bit rich for a member from Manitoba to say that a vote in Manitoba is worth more than a vote in Ontario.

[Transport, October 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the navigable waterways act is about navigation. It has always been about navigation.

Let me share with the member what other people have had to say. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities said:

The changes announced today will allow local governments to spend less time processing paperwork for small, low-risk public works projects by removing redundancies, red tape and project delays that result in higher costs for property tax payers.

The Construction Association commented on this. If had time, I could read them. The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities had a fantastic quote. The former premier of B.C., Gordon Campbell, is really thrilled about—

[The Environment, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the member is making up acts. This act is dealing with navigation and has always been, and remains, about navigation and only navigation. It has nothing to do with the environment. There are other pieces of legislation that are focused on the environment. This one is focused on navigation.

I can help you navigate through the legislation if you wish.

[The Environment, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this legislation has always been and remains about navigation and navigation only. The amendments would focus resources to ensure that this would still be the case. This would not affect the government's protection of the environment. In fact, I can list several pieces of legislation that do deal with the environment : the Canada Environmental Protection Act; the Federal Sustainability Act; the Fisheries Act; the Migratory Birds Convention Act; the Species at Risk Act. Shall I go on?

[Aviation Safety, October 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of respect for the member but in this case the member is way out of line. Canada has the safest airline standards in the world. The government has invested $1.5 billion in airline security. The number of people working on the lines at the various airports adjust depending on the usage of the airlines and airports. By the way, a carbon tax would make it a lot more expensive.