The member opposite just made reference to symbolism and symbolic references in the bill and that this doesn’t go far enough. I would ask her—there’s a very, I think, important schedule of this bill that refers to cancer coverage for firefighters. This is something that other jurisdictions do. It’s something that Ontario was lagging behind in. I’m just wondering if she agrees with the Canadian Cancer Society and with the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs that this is a very, very good piece of this bill, and if she’ll be supporting it.

I appreciate the question from the member, and I know he’s expecting an answer from me. However, I would like him to show me the schedule in the bill where that measure is set out, because there is no schedule in the bill that talks about presumptive coverage for those cancers for firefighters.

Now, I understand that in the media releases around the bill, when the minister has been speaking to the bill, that is what he says the bill will enable. But this legislation actually makes no reference to presumptive coverage for cancers for firefighters. That is in the regulations. Let’s see the regulations, let’s talk about the regulations, and then we can discuss further.

Absolutely, Speaker, anti-scab legislation would be an important step that this government could take to show that they are actually working for workers. We know that when workers band together to withdraw their labour, that is the only tool that they really have. So scab labour undercuts the ability of workers to obtain their rights, and it undermines the financial security of the workers’ families and the viability of the employer’s firm itself.

I’m very proud of the track record of the NDP in fighting for presumptive coverage to those kinds of cancers for firefighters. I know that the former leader of the official opposition, Andrea Horwath, had brought in a private member’s bill—I believe it was her first private member’s bill, shortly after she was elected to this place—to make that presumptive coverage available to firefighters. A former member for Parkdale–High Park, Cheri DiNovo, also brought in private member’s legislation to ensure that there was WSIB coverage for PTSD for first responders.

So, yes, of course, we would support those measures. We have supported them always in the past. We have pushed the government to bring in those kinds of changes.

I’d like to rephrase my question to the member opposite. I would be interested to know whether or not she would support regulation changes that are going to be contained within this bill that will help firefighters—and I think the provision is backdated till 1960, if I’m not mistaken—whether she would support that, whether she would support the Canadian Cancer Society and whether she would support the Ontario chiefs of police in calling for that. Hopefully, maybe this time we’ll get an answer.

Thank you to the member from Perth–Wellington for his speech. In my riding of Newmarket–Aurora, I had several conversations with the Central York firefighters; in the House here, I had a meeting with our Ontario firefighters association, and they were asking for us to consider expanding the list of presumptive cancers. I would like the member to speak to that, because to me, our government was listening. Can you please speak to what we are doing as far as presumptive cancers are concerned for our firefighters?

I would like to review a quote from Jeffery Lang, president and CEO of the WSIB, regarding the announcement of expanding cancer coverage for firefighters: “When anybody is facing a work-related illness, we are here to help. Our team gets to work as quickly as possible to help people and this change will help us get started faster for firefighters and fire investigators with thyroid and pancreatic cancers.”

My question to the member is, will you vote with us on this bill and vote to support our firefighters?