Questions?

Thank you to the member from Scarborough Southwest for her remarks.

Madam Speaker, we know that men and women who serve our country in the reserve forces are heroes, and I always say that you stay awake so that we can sleep well. So thank you for your incredible work.

Ontario is home to 1,100 reserve forces members. When they’re abroad or serving domestically, keeping our country safe, the last thing they should be worried about is whether their job will be there when they get back or not.

I had the opportunity to meet Rick Hillier, the Canadian Forces head, and we were talking about it. He said that this is the move which will support our reservists and make them proud of being Canadian and working and helping the community.

My question is very simple to the member: What would you say to Mr. Hillier about this bill? Are you going to support it? And what else can we do to support our reservists?

Question?

A quick response.

Further debate? The member from Brantford–Brant.

Thank you very much to my colleague from Scarborough Southwest for your very passionate defence of workers’ rights. It’s very, very moving to hear your many thoughts and comments and the way you speak from the heart in defending workers. Thank you.

I’m sure the member would agree with me that one method of standing up for workers is of course defending the right of workers to free, fair and collective bargaining. We have seen this government repeatedly trample on that right with Bill 124, suppressing the wages of workers; taking away right to bargain their wages and benefits, even while some of those workers had wages so low they were using food banks; imposing a collective agreement and taking away their right to collectively bargain and strike.

Does the member not agree that this is a missed opportunity from a government that does not itself respect the right of workers to collectively bargain to actually protect the rights of all workers by ensuring that employers can’t bring in scabs to break a strike, to actually allow workers to come to the table, to force employers to be there at the table and to negotiate in good faith?

I want to thank my colleague, the member from Scarborough Southwest, for her presentation. One of the key pieces of this bill that the minister and this government is highlighting is—using the government’s own words—that “scumbag employers” will be fined more than before. I think the member will agree with me that we all support bad employers being fined more. But what the people, I’m sure, would like to know is, what is this government going to do with the fines? Is any of that money going to the workers who were employed by these “scumbag employers”? Will the workers who had to deal with these “scumbag employers,” who are now being fined more, be compensated in any way? Can the member please share with this House what the government’s plans are, if any?

Thank you, Speaker. It’s very good to see you in the chair today. It’s always a pleasure to see you in the chair.

It is indeed my pleasure to rise in the House today to speak to Bill 79, the Working for Workers Act, 2023, which, in my opinion, is a landmark piece of legislation. This bill, if passed, will constitute a major step forward in our government’s continuing mission to combat the labour shortage our province faces, and it will propel our workers, the backbone of this province, in the right direction. I’m so pleased to see that the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development, under the leadership of our Premier, has once again introduced legislation that will be making a difference to so many people all across our province.

Today, our province is in the midst of a labour shortage. Nearly 300,000 jobs go unfilled in the province of Ontario. This is something that I continually and constantly hear from employers in my riding of Brantford–Brant. In Ontario, we are so blessed to have incredible innovators, and all that we have to do as a government is listen to them, to let them use that power of innovation, unlike previous governments.

Workers are integral to a strong economy and a prosperous future. Speaker, think about what people are talking about every single day. When I walk into a convenience store or a restaurant or a construction site, time and time again, I hear the same issue: There are not enough workers in the province of Ontario, or “I’m having a tough time filling this position.” I’m sure that all of my colleagues all around this chamber hear the exact same in their communities as well. If we cannot secure a workforce today, it will cause even more pain tomorrow.

I want to focus on several aspects of the Working for Workers Act, 2023, that speak to me personally. If passed, this bill will help encourage people to join the workforce, protect those at high risk and give workers the skills that they need for high-paying, long-term careers.

With that, I want to begin with the bill’s provision regarding firefighters. As you all know, firefighting is very personal to me. I have been an active duty volunteer firefighter with the County of Brant Fire Department, Station 7, St. George, since 2008. I’ve seen some of those very difficult things. I can remember when I was asked to join the fire service. What do I, as an optometrist, bring to that profession? What I realized is that it perfectly matches with what I did every day as an optometrist, that we tried to make people’s lives better. When we’re at your home, when we’re at an accident scene, wherever you’ve experienced that trauma, we’re there to make that very, very bad day a little bit better. To me, that’s what it means to be a volunteer firefighter: to serve your community in an incredibly intimate way, to come through the doors to our friends, to our neighbours and to do the things that other people are running away from.

In fact, this morning, while I was on my way here, my colleagues at home were responding to a scene of an industrial fire in Paris, Ontario. What does that mean to the firefighters in the province of Ontario? That means that we carry the burden of trauma around with us. That means that there are times when we see faces in front of us that—as I’m saying these words, I see those faces in front of me of the people that I have seen. They don’t go away. Those are the emotional scars that we carry around. But it’s more than that: It can be also very, very physical, and that’s why this legislation is adding more cancers.

This morning, my friends at home were exposed to more causes of cancer. We realize that’s part of what we do. That’s something that we are willing to do to serve our communities. That’s why claims related to thyroid and pancreatic cancers will be added retroactively to January 1, 1960, in this legislation, so that we can stand with those who are there for us.

I’ve spent many years serving my community, and I will continue to do so. I can say first-hand that these changes will benefit my peers—who are my friends—their families and all of those who are at disproportionate risk for thyroid and pancreatic cancers.

I’m going to read the list right now. Currently, the following are included in the firefighters’ regulation:

—primary-site brain cancer;

—colorectal cancer;

—bladder cancer;

—primary acute myeloid leukemia, primary chronic lymphocytic leukemia or primary acute lymphocytic leukemia;

—primary-site ureter cancer;

—kidney cancer;

—primary non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma;

—primary-site esophageal cancer;

—breast cancer;

—multiple myeloma

—primary-site testicular cancer;

—prostate cancer;

—lung cancer;

—skin cancer;

—ovarian cancer;

—cervical cancer; and

—penile cancer.

These diseases, like all cancers, are devastating, and, for those who run towards events and disasters instead of being the ones running away from them, we are going to make sure that our province’s firefighter heroes and their families get the support that they deserve.

Speaker, presumptive coverage for firefighters is far from a new idea—I think the first legislation in this place was in 2007, from the previous government—but I know that we are going to continue working for our front-line heroes each and every day. Our government is making it faster and easier for firefighters and their families to access the compensation that will support them and that they deserve.

Fire Chief Darren Watson from the county of Brant said the following, “We commend the province of Ontario for expanding cancer coverage for firefighters.

“Firefighters put their lives on the line in a variety of ways, including acquiring health conditions as a result of exposure on the job.

“The county of Brant is committed to supporting and protecting the volunteer firefighters, and strives to provide a safe and healthy workplace where every reasonable precaution will be taken for the protection of workers.

“As a result, county council approved an additional $600,000 in the 2023 budget to provide additional personal protective equipment, including a second set of bunker gear, facilities to safely store bunker gear, and washing equipment to protect the firefighters and mitigate exposures.

“The phrase ‘all reasonable precautions’ to protect the firefighters is the foundation of the decontamination and firefighter hygiene program, which assists in the reduction of exposure to contaminants at fire scenes, and, where exposure occurs, measures are in place to limit the exposure.”

This is what our municipalities are doing. I want to commend Mayor David Bailey and his council on making these changes to keep firefighters safe.

If this is what our municipalities are doing, we owe it to our municipalities and our firefighters to expand these things, as we are in this legislation, for pancreatic and thyroid cancer. That’s why we’re expanding this coverage. Speaker, our government stands with every single firefighter in the province of Ontario.

Moving on, we will always work for all workers in this province. Ontario skilled trades are vital to the health and growth of our province’s economy. The skilled trades offer careers that lead to secure jobs and a good quality of life, and that often come with benefits and pensions.

My son is becoming an electrician. It’s interesting, I’ve talked to other parents with the same thing—you couldn’t get him out of bed to finish high school, but when he had the opportunity for his final semester of high school to get into a trade, he would bounce out of bed at 6:30 every morning—he still does—to get out there. It’s amazing to hear the reports from his employers about how pleased they are with him, and it’s so encouraging to see one of your children so excited about getting out into the workforce.

The reality is that thousands of workers are needed in the skilled trades to help build more homes and complete important infrastructure projects all across Ontario. That is why, starting this fall, students in grade 11 can transition to a full-time skilled trades apprenticeship program and earn their Ontario secondary school diploma. This change means that students can enter the skilled trades faster than ever before.

Additionally, the government is starting consultations this fall with employers, with unions, with educators, with trainers and with parents on how to make it easier for young people to enter the trades. The consultations will explore the potential of altering academic entry requirements for certain skilled trades in Ontario to allow students to enter the trades sooner.

Our government, under the leadership of this Premier, is on a mission to lift people up, no matter the industry, no matter the sector or where they work. As part of our government’s goal to build 1.5 million new homes over the next decade, we are going to need more people in construction. As I said, our province is currently going through a labour shortage. To address this, our government is taking concrete actions to address these shortages, especially in the construction sector. One of the ways that we are addressing this construction sector labour shortage is by making sure workplaces are welcoming more women into construction.

If you can believe it, Speaker, it’s 2023, but one of the biggest indignities on construction sites that has existed for a long time was the condition of washrooms. I am told that our health and safety inspectors have visited over 1,800 job sites and have found over 240 violations. The common issues ministry inspectors found were no toilets provided, lack of privacy and lack of cleaning. Some cases included job sites where portable washrooms had missing doors, missing walls and no place to wash your hands. For far too long, unhygienic washrooms have been considered acceptable by constructors—but, Speaker, not anymore.

Everyone deserves a safe, clean and private washroom at work, and that’s why we are taking unprecedented action to improve washrooms on construction projects. Our new rules will, if passed, require toilets to be completely enclosed, facilities to be adequately lit and facilities to have hand sanitizer available where running water is not reasonably possible. Ontario’s construction workers that build and maintain our province deserve the basic dignity of access to a safe and clean washroom. No one should have to leave their workplace and search for a washroom. To attract more women into the trades, we need to do better, and that is exactly what we’re doing.

Speaker, in addition to protecting our heroes who fight fires and help build our province for the next generation, we need to attract new investments into our province. Why? To get our best and brightest into exciting new jobs so they can better support their families, and that takes an all-of-government approach.

Just one week ago, our government announced a historic investment from Volkswagen in St. Thomas and Central Elgin. Europe’s largest automaker is building its first overseas EV battery plant right here in Ontario. Their decision to build in our great province is a testament to Canada’s strong and growing battery ecosystem and Ontario’s competitive business environment. With a highly skilled workforce, clean energy and abundance of critical minerals, access to markets and a flourishing automotive and battery sector, we are making real progress towards making Ontario into a global leader for investments in the battery and automotive sectors. Again, Speaker, this is one of the many examples of where our government is delivering for the people of Ontario.

Not only are we delivering for the people of Ontario, we are taking concrete strides to bring more jobs for them too. Speaker, we need to use our precious minerals wisely. We need to attract more mega-sites, and we must continue prioritizing our labour force, which is the best and brightest in the world. Ontario has everything from an unmatched education system, jobs, manufacturing and natural resources—a competitive landscape and unique positioning guided by a government that values its citizens above all else. I am proud to be a part of this team on a unified mission working together for you, the great people of Ontario.

This bill is an example of how we’re delivering for workers, for job seekers and newcomers to Ontario. We’re making sure that everyone has the resources that they need to succeed and to help them secure better jobs and bigger paycheques.

I’ll conclude, Speaker, by just going back to where I started with our firefighters. I’ve stood for a 24-hour vigil at the home of one of my colleagues from another hall who passed away, leaving a wife and two young children. It was at the height of the pandemic, and myself and a colleague stood there for an hour holding vigil, guarding that house. What struck me so much was that, in that time and traditionally, friends and family would gather and surround the family with compassion, with food and all those things. We stood there alone. That family grieved in that house alone. They were completely inaccessible.

I know this morning my friends were out fighting a fire and there were toxins that got under their clothing and that will get into their systems. Those are the risks that we are willing to take to take care of our communities. Those are traumas that we are willing to take, physically and emotionally, into our systems in order to serve our communities. It’s the most gratifying thing in the world to see our municipality taking these incredible steps to keep our firefighters safe, and I feel so proud to be of a government that is willing to add cancers to the presumptive legislation in order to take care of our firefighters the way that they should be.

At the end of the day, Speaker, we are no better than how well we take care of those who are most vulnerable among us. When people are willing to stand and serve our communities like that, I’m so proud to be part of a government that is willing to stand with them. It’s so good to hear the opposition provide so many excellent ideas in their comments on what we could put into our next Working for Workers legislation. It gives me great pleasure to hear their suggestions, and I’m sure that the Minister of Labour is taking those suggestions to heart on what we could do improve.

I love the fact that we continue to put out pieces of legislation, taking incremental steps to make Ontario better. We don’t do one-and-done legislation. That’s not how you take an all-of-government approach. You work through these things. We continue to put forward housing bills. We continue to put forward bills for workers. That’s why we’re seeing our third piece of legislation to protect workers. I can’t wait to see this actually bearing fruit.

I asked my colleagues on our WhatsApp group this morning how many of our colleagues in the fire service and the volunteer service in St. George, of less than 200 firefighters, have had cancer in the last five years. And the answer someone posted back was, “10 to 15.” Those are the kinds of numbers that we’re dealing with.

Speaker, we owe it to our first responders to take care of them. I am so pleased to be part of a government that is making that happen. I look forward to seeing everyone in this House support this legislation. Thank you for your time today.

I appreciate my colleague for her speech. I’m new in this House, but I am always impressed by my colleagues filling an hour, and I appreciated her remarks.

My question: Lots of my colleagues of the younger generation are used to working from home now, or remotely, and some of us haven’t even gone into the offices we may work at. In this piece of legislation, as the minister announced earlier—last week I believe—workers working from home—remotely—obviously deserve the same protections as an employee in an office. So when a company announces a mass termination, remote workers obviously deserve the same rights as those on site. Can the member explain whether they support this proposal to include remote workers in mass terminations and ensure they have the same rights as those who are on site on a work site?

Thank you to the member for your presentation. I hear you making a lot of comments about those who are immigrants. Me being an immigrant—I’m the first generation, and I also hear a lot of the members say, even if they are the fourth generation, they still recall all the things that their grandparents or great-grandparents have gone through being immigrants. I can understand that being an immigrant is something that—when we choose to leave the place we have been for a new place, we’re going to face challenges. I appreciate the long wish list you have, but I’m also very happy that our minister has presented a lot of things, really, for the first time, really supporting a lot of the foreign workers, especially, let’s say, when we make sure that they can find a job the way that they can, and also especially on the ones that we say we’re making fines for, those who are holding their passports. These are the things that are important—

I want to thank the member from Brantford–Brant for your comments today. I share your concern about firefighters in this province. I’ve got both an uncle and a cousin who are on the Toronto Fire Services here, and you know, the expansion to include pancreatic and thyroid cancers to provide protections for firefighters across the province is actually a step in the right direction.

But when I talk to firefighters, they’re also concerned about their colleagues, their fellow workers, who are impacted by Bill 124. Bill 124 removes the right to collective bargaining for public sector workers across this province, except for firefighters and police. The courts have already decided that this is a violation of the charter rights of those workers. Your government is actually appealing that bill.

Would you support a repealing of Bill 124 as part of this legislation in order to support workers across this province?

Questions?

I want to thank the member opposite for his strong words and all his work that he’s done both on firefighting and as an avid public servant and MPP for his area.

I know that previously he introduced a very important private member’s bill on PTSD for first responders specifically to address what firefighters go through. I wanted to ask him to elaborate a little bit about how that private member’s bill and this bill complement each other, how they really show respect and honour to those who put themselves on the front line.

My thanks to the member for his presentation earlier. Just following on the question from my colleague from Ottawa Centre: The number one predictor of higher wages and better working conditions for working people is membership in a union. I’d like to know why this legislation doesn’t make it easier for workers to unionize. Why is there no card-based certification? Why is there no first-contract legislation?

I appreciate that question, and it’s interesting. I also met with firefighters when they came here and had their legislative day. What they said to me was exactly what we are doing, that they needed these protections for their members.

Again, I’ve never seen a government work so quickly that the ask comes in when I had my last meeting with them after the election, and we’re announcing that change to legislation today to include those types of cancers in presumptive legislation.

It’s interesting how those things are all tied together, emotional trauma and physical trauma. It’s amazing how an awareness day—you can think, “Oh, what’s an awareness day?” But the conversations I’ve had with first responders about the experience they have had through their trauma—it’s absolutely amazing how having that awareness day has led to that.

It’s the same thing here. We need to acknowledge and we need to do something about it. Providing the supports for firefighters in adding these two types of cancers to presumptive legislation just speaks to how much our government cares for first responders.

I’m looking forward to Working for Workers 4 and to see what else we can do to support workers in the province of Ontario. I appreciate those, and I very much look forward to his support when we pass this legislation.

As far as mass termination goes, the reality is that we’ve seen the largest shift of work to remote work in history. In the fourth quarter of 2022, about 2.2 million people in Ontario worked from home; about 1.4 million are doing so on an exclusive basis and another 800,000 were doing so on a hybrid basis. To respond to this increase in remote work and a changing economy, we are introducing legislation that puts workers first. We are updating how a workplace is defined in Ontario’s labour laws to extend these protections to those who work from home. Furthermore, our government is also proposing changes that would require employers to provide new hires with basic information in writing about their job, such as pay, work locations and hours of work, even before their first shift.

But what’s really fascinating to me is that I haven’t really heard any negative parts about this legislation at all yet from the opposition. I guess my question back to them will be: We appreciate your ideas. We look forward to having another piece of legislation in Working for Workers 4. And will you be voting in favour of this legislation and supporting workers in the province of Ontario?

That’s why it’s so exciting to see that, starting this fall, students in grade 11 can transition to a full-time skilled trades apprenticeship program and earn their Ontario secondary school diploma at the same time. They don’t need to give up on their OSSD in order to pursue the dream of a trade. In fact, in the new high school that we announced in St. George, I know, working with the school boards, we hope to be graduating students who can challenge their first exam in the trade of their choice. I’m very excited about that.

One of the threads that became apparent in the presentation from the member from Brantford–Brant was that this government is working for all workers in Ontario. That was apparent, wasn’t it, in all of what he had to say? I think that’s one of the reasons we have unions here in the province of Ontario supporting this government as well.

I’d like the member for Brantford–Brant to speak a little bit more expansively on the proposed changes, in particular—Speaker, through you—to mass termination entitlements and job descriptions and how that benefits the hard-working families and workers in our great province.

Question?

Before I begin this afternoon, I want to send out to my good friend Jim Lamontagne a very, very happy birthday greeting here from the Ontario Legislature. Have a good one, Jim.

This is a very important bill. We understand that. I think it’s also a time when we can really reflect on the true risk, the true tragedies that happen in our workplaces. We can reflect on this bill that I feel comes so short when it comes to truly protecting workers who put their lives at risk in the workplace.

We heard from the member from Thunder Bay–Superior North this week who talked about two snowplow drivers who were killed just this week doing their job keeping our roads safe for us to drive. A transport driver was also killed just doing their job; inadequate training was cited as the cause. I’d also have to say that we now have other workers who suffer fatal injuries. Very, very recently, two workers were killed. One was killed in Bowmanville, and another was just recently killed at work in Aylmer. There are not enough words to express what a tragic occurrence this is for families, for children, for mothers and fathers to have a loved one go to work, and you expect them to come home safe at the end of the day, and they die on the job. We cannot do enough to protect these workers. That’s why, really, I feel this bill comes up so short when we look at how many Ontarians are losing their lives or are being injured in the workplace. Why aren’t we doing more? Why is this bill really just tinkering around the edges when we could be doing so much more to make workplaces truly safe for workers?

There are some schedules in here and there’s some talk, but there really isn’t a clear, ambitious plan that’s here that will prevent workers from dying. We know that there are laws on the books, but what we also hear is that these are rarely enforced and that inspections have gone down. These are the kinds of things that we need when there’s existing legislation and existing regulation that—even that is not being adequately enforced to protect workers. We know, without that kind of enforcement, workers, sadly, will continue to die in the workplace.

For me and for so many families, the families that I’ve just discussed, Bill 79 could actually be called too little, too late, because for workers who are injured, for families that have lost loved ones, these measures here will do nothing to compensate for their loss and will do very, very little for future workers who are being injured in the workplace.

The labour movement, as we all know, has such a long and strong history of pushing for regulations and pushing for laws to keep workers safe in their workplace, and unions have been at the forefront of that, the labour movement has been at the forefront of that. One of the things that we say in the labour movement is, “Mourn the dead, and fight for the living.” That’s what we should be doing with a piece of legislation like this. We need to make sure. We never want to have these tragedies happen in the workplace, and we need laws that really seem to take this seriously, that are really there, with ambitious, proactive legislation to protect workers.

April 28 in Ontario and across Canada, and actually, in countries across the world, is the National Day of Mourning. This is the day that is celebrated—if it can be called “celebrated”—in recognition of workers who were killed or have been injured on the job and workers not just who have been injured on the job but who suffer long-standing health consequences of the kinds of exposures that they have in the workplace.

I just really very briefly want to talk about the history of the Workers’ Day of Mourning. It was started by two labour activists—not surprising—who were driving in April 1983 and they saw a funeral procession for a firefighter who had been killed in the line of duty. They thought that that was exceptionally wonderful, but they also worried that workers also needed to have similar acknowledgement and recognition of the losses that they suffered. So members of the United Steelworkers in Elliot Lake started to move towards creating a workers’ remembrance day, particularly for uranium miners who had succumbed to exposures in the mine. We heard a lot of this from our member from Sudbury, who talked about the kinds of exposures that mining workers have experienced, particularly in his riding.

The history goes back to acknowledging that workers, when they go to work, really are risking their lives. So this day was dedicated by the Canadian Labour Congress in 1983, and then in 1990, this became a national day of observance with the passing of the Workers Mourning Day Act. It was officially the National Day of Mourning for workers killed or injured in the workplace, an official Workers’ Day of Mourning.

It’s interesting to note that this acknowledgement has spread around the world. There is a gentleman, an activist in my riding—or in Hamilton—named Ed Thomas. He was a member of Local 5167 and he wrote a book cataloguing all of the Day of Mourning injured workers monuments around the world. While this started in Canada, this is a phenomenon that has spread around the world and it’s something that we need to make sure all of us, on October 28, are acknowledging.

Interjection.

I appreciated the comments about first responders from the member, but I want to invite him, in the answer to my question, to reflect on the fact that there are many first responders in this province. Firefighters do fantastic work, taking great risks, but so did Christine Mandegarian, a member of SEIU who went into the equivalent of a burning building, a long-term-care home infected with COVID, and lost her life. Do you know who was there for Christine, Speaker? Her union, the SEIU. Do you know what so many other care workers need in this province? A union.

I want to know from the member, who I believe does care about first responders, what his government will do to help workers like Christine—who, sadly, left us—form a union and get the respect they deserve? That’s really working for workers.

Thank you to the member from Brantford–Brant for his great presentation, which I really enjoyed listening to. I’m very excited about how we’re building the skilled trades in the province and making those jobs that are great alternatives for young people of all kinds. We’re getting women and men into the skilled trades which is so exciting. They’re exciting careers with six-figure incomes. They’re jobs for life. They’re purpose-driven and in demand.

The member from Brantford–Brant mentioned his son who is becoming an electrician. I’ve met a lot of young people who maybe aren’t really excited by what they can learn at university, but they are excited by being able to make things, to fix things, to do things, and they have a special gift. I just wondered if you could share a little bit about how the skilled trades option is being developed and how we’re reaching a whole bunch of young people to give them meaning and purpose in their lives through those skilled trades.

Pardon me; April 28, National Day of Mourning. Each year in Hamilton, the Hamilton and District Labour Council, along with many other unions and community groups in Hamilton, gathers at a statue right in front of city hall. It’s the corner of Bay and Main Streets in Hamilton. There’s a really remarkable statue there that is actually called Day of Mourning. If you google it it’s such a stark and impressive sculpture. We gather there every year to lay wreaths and honour the people who are injured or have died in the workplace.

The very first day that statue was dedicated, which was in 1990, I was there, and just that morning, before we were there, an electrician had been killed on the job at Dofasco that very morning. The family was actually there crying—grieving—because they had just got this tragic news that very morning. I was standing beside an older gentleman in front of the city hall and he said, “Yes, my brother-in-law was killed building city hall,” so killed in the 1950s. When you lose someone you always remember and you always need to recognize and acknowledge that. That’s why the Day of Mourning is really so very important.

Also I would just like to acknowledge Paul Cvetich, who is the sculptor who created that beautiful piece of work. If you’re ever in Hamilton, go and look at it. I’m telling you, you will be impressed.

I think it’s kind of ironic—or I don’t know what it is—that May 28 was picked as the day—

I think what many people don’t know or don’t realize is that when WSIB was first brought in, workers in the workplace forfeited their right to sue for injury or damages if they were injured on the job. They forfeited that right in exchange for an insurance compensation program that was expected to make them whole.

We have seen since that time that this is a program that has not worked for workers and, in fact, is continuing to actually make things more difficult for injured workers. Injured workers are having to advocate to us, to you, as MPPs, to say that this system is failing them. This system is failing them when they need it most.

I have to, again, acknowledge Hamiltonians who have done a lot of work to advocate on behalf of injured workers. Karl Crevar is a gentleman who helped establish in Hamilton the Hamilton and District Injured Workers’ Group. They come to my office quite regularly to tell the stories. He comes and quite clearly tells the stories and the plight and the injustices that workers in Hamilton—which represent workers across the province—are facing.

I think we’ve said it here before, but the methods by which WSIB is changing their benefit programs, making it so difficult for injured workers to access these benefits, it’s essentially a way of slowly diminishing benefits and cutting benefits, essentially, that people should be entitled to. Not only is this injustice, plain and simple, but it is driving people into poverty.

I would like to just talk a little bit about one of these individuals who also is a huge advocate and comes to all of our offices and I have nothing but admiration for, Marvin Mulder, who himself is an injured worked. Marvin’s story is that he was injured on the job, and he underwent six spinal injections and two failed back surgeries in an effort to recover. In that time, he was asked by WSIB to participate in its work transition program right after his accident, and they gave him an option to retrain as a millwright or an office assistant even though his injuries prevented him from walking, from sitting or standing for long periods of time. It’s unbelievable.

Marvin’s persistent health problems prevented him from completing the retraining program. Because of that, the WSIB deemed him as non-co-operative and drastically reduced his benefits each year. The issue of “deeming”—this is just an unfair, punitive practice that is used to prevent workers from accessing the insurance benefits that they pay into, that they have a right to, and so I want to salute Marvin and I want to salute Karl and all the injured worker alliances and folks that fight on behalf of injured workers across the province. We hear you and we support your fight and we are doing what we can to support that, but as you can see, with this legislation there’s an opportunity to address this injustice in this bill that is supposed to be about workers, but the workers that most need help have been excluded when it comes to WSIB.

A couple of the members on the Conservative side have talked about the presumptive legislation, and I would just like to make sure that I acknowledge that we here feel that any opportunity, any time that benefits can be extended to workers in the workplace, that is a wonderful thing. We’re fully supportive of that.

In fact, the first presumptive legislation that was introduced in the province of Ontario was spearheaded by our former leader Andrea Horwath. She did that because of a firefighter in our community named Bob Shaw. I knew Bob Shaw and his son, Nathan Shaw—not related, but I did know them. He was one of many firefighters that fought the Plastimet fire, which was a devastating tire fire right in the centre of Hamilton. It caused a lot of damage, and a lot of firefighters breathed in those toxic fumes and were working in that toxic water, and a lot of the injuries that they suffered were because of that. So the first presumptive legislation was in honour of Bob Shaw, and we are happy to see this extended.

I would also like to say that a good friend of mine who was a firefighter—his name was Dave Begley. Actually, we called him Bugsy; it was his nickname. He also fought at Plastimet day and night for many days if not for a week or so, and he died shortly thereafter as well. So this legislation is near and dear to all of our hearts, mine as well.

But I have to say, what you’re talking about—the extension of presumptive legislation to include pancreatic and thyroid cancer—is not in the bill. You can talk about it, and it’s important to talk about it, but if it’s that important, why is it not in the bill? I find it is actually a bit of a sleight of hand, if you will, that the government gets up and talks about something that’s in the legislation that actually isn’t in there. So I think people need to read the bill and see that it’s not there. Don’t judge a book by the cover, or don’t just take the government’s word for it. The “trust us; we’ll take care of it” hasn’t worked for many people in this province with this government.

And when it comes to presumptive legislation, extending this to firefighters, this also is the case. My guess is firefighters expected this to be in the legislation, and they’re probably dearly disappointed that it’s not. I am hoping that the government will be true to its word and make sure that they pass it at legislation, but it would have been a proud moment to see it right here in the bill.

I also just would like to acknowledge the many things that are missing from this bill. While we think, in schedule 2, it is absolutely wonderful that members of our armed forces will be extended the kind of mental health benefits that they deserve and that we all deserve, I would just like to acknowledge that in the city of Hamilton, access to mental health services is abysmal. It’s absolutely abysmal, particularly if you’re a youth in the city. We’ve had two, now three mental health service providers closing due to lack of funding from this government and due to the inability to retain workers because of your wage-cap, punitive Bill 124. It’s great that you’re extending these benefits, but it will be very difficult for anybody to access mental health services, because they’re drying up and they’re closing in cities all across the province.

We’ve put forward legislation. Our opposition day motion called for emergency funding for the Canadian Mental Health Association, emergency funding that would have kept the doors open at some of these services all across our ridings, and this government voted no. You turned down funding for mental health service providers in the middle of a mental health crisis, and that is just really mind-boggling as to why you would do that.

Further to Bill 124, I just want to talk about PSWs and the injury and the risk that they faced when they went to work during COVID. I want to talk about a PSW in my riding whose daughter wrote to me to say that due to Bill 124 her mom struggled to pay the bills, struggled to keep her job. What happened was, at one point, she was in a client’s home and she was exposed to bedbugs in the workplace. She brought those home and then she had to incur the cost of making sure that her home was cleared of that—very expensive, hired an exterminator. Then she was told, basically, that if she did not go back to work that she would be fired, essentially. In her distraught state, she spoke to the Ministry of Labour, and was told that there was nothing that they could do to protect her in this instance. This is a PSW working in people’s homes, home care, making sure we can keep our loved ones at home, who faced an exposure in the workplace where she needed protection, and was told by the ministry that there was nothing that they could do to help her.

There’s so much missing from this bill. I would say that we have been advocating for workers on this side of the House for five years now with this government. We have been saying that we want to make sure workers are protected in the workplace—true protections that include enforcement and true fines. We’ve been calling for a minimum wage for workers so that they can actually go to work and put food on their table. We’ve been saying that you need to repeal Bill 124. It’s unconstitutional and it’s harming people all across the province. I don’t understand your stubbornness not to repeal this bill. I think that women, who are the majority of health care workers, really need real pay equity in this province.

There are many, many things that you could have put into this bill to really work for workers. It falls short in many aspects, and I hope that the government will take some of our consideration and put it into their next bill that apparently we’ve been hearing is coming along.