I’d like to thank my colleague from Thunder Bay–Superior North for an excellent question. You’re absolutely right; we have seen that 46% of injured workers live in poverty. That is a cost borne by them. It is detrimental to their life, to their health, to their future, to their entire family, but it is also financially unsustainable for the province as well, because they end up on ODSP. Really, when we have a system that is meant to protect workers, it’s absolutely disgraceful that workers are receiving less. The WSIB is turning more people down even though injuries and fatalities are going up and then returning that money to employers. They are taking that money that should belong to someone who was injured for their support, to make sure they are able to be healthy, to be in their homes with their families, and yet they’re turning it over as though it’s some sort of gift. How can this government have a piece of legislation that has the word “worker” in it when they are overseeing a system that denies workers, that deems them to be able to do phantom jobs, that will pretend that their injury or their illness is pre-existing? It is absolutely unconscionable.

The province itself—and I will say as well, I want to commend the member for reaching out to their Local 4268 and bringing their cause here to the chamber. But this province, this government actually uses scab labour when it comes to the creation of advertisements. During the ACTRA strike, they were not content to actually pay workers the respect that they deserve, the trained professionals. But this is all about, again, following that money. Scab labour is something that benefits employers. It benefits this government, clearly, directly.

If this government were to actually, legitimately, authentically and practically stand up for workers, it would make sure that scab labour was something that was illegal across the province. It’s as simple as that. The government could do it today; we would support them. We can pass anti-scab legislation today.

Speaker, as we celebrate International Women’s Day and the historic protest by women garment workers, things are not looking good in the fight for economic equality. The gender wage gap is stark in Ontario’s caring economy, the health care and social services vital to our province. Ontario wildly underpays women and gender-diverse folks, newcomers and racialized people who work in these sectors.

A nurse is a nurse is a nurse. A PSW is a PSW is a PSW. ECEs—I could go on and on. The NDP fights for more for these workers, because they deserve fairness.

Do CEOs pay for their own work-related travel? Or would you be okay with lawyers getting paid by the case and not for the hours and days spent on it? Of course not. So why are governments so miserly when it comes to paying the caring professions? People’s good hearts alone should not be what hold up these vital systems.

I remember Bill 115 attacking education and the public sector—and now Bill 124: yet another expensive, loser legal battle. What is wrong with Liberals and Conservatives, that once they get into power they want to keep money out of people’s pockets?

When members of this chamber celebrate the many accomplishments of the women’s movement, they should ask why their government continues to undervalue women’s labour and starve people out of their preferred jobs.

The official opposition stands for wage parity across health care sectors, non-profits, developmental services, community support services, women’s shelters, and mental health and addictions support.

Investing in people strengthens families and builds communities.

To the government: Do you stand with workers? Show it with wage parity in budget 2024 and pay people what they’re worth.

I’d like to thank the member from Thunder Bay–Superior North for her comments that are truly in support of workers. It’s disturbing that the WSIB has taken so long to recognize workplace exposures and is still rather reluctant to recognize multiple exposures, especially where there are clusters of industrial disease.

As an omnibus bill, Working for Workers could have addressed so many other pressing issues which impacted workers. I wonder if the member could talk about the disturbing problem of deeming, or phantom jobs.

I’d like to thank the member from Oshawa for her comments. I know that she’s a member who stands with workers in thought, word and deed, but I wondered if the member could take us back in time to a time when Oshawa GM was under threat, a time when the Premier actually said, after meeting with GM executives, “They told me straight-up there’s nothing we can do”—as if taking his orders from somebody else—“the ship has already left the dock.”

But at that time, speaking of the title of this bill, Working for Workers, I would like the member to describe how Oshawa workers stood up for workers when this government rolled over and turned their back on workers.

I’d like to thank the member from Waterloo for her comments. She’s absolutely right; the trades are something vital and something that we should support, but we also need to make sure that those workplaces are ones that are safe.

I think about a terrible tragedy that happened in London, where there was a partial building collapse, where Henry Harder and John Martens were grievously injured. It was an absolute nightmare for everyone involved.

We see the Ministry of Labour and we see the Minister of Labour talking a great deal, but we don’t see enough enforcement. We don’t see enough proactive inspections. We don’t see them actually standing up for workers. We hear a lot of words about how they claim to support workers, and yet we also see the WSIB—which is routinely ignored, which needs a complete system overhaul. And yet, this government has said it’s quite content to allow the status quo, because it benefits them.

I have unequivocally stated that I am all in favour of the WSIB moving its headquarters to the London location. I am thankful, as well, that this government has finally started some communication, because I know it took them quite some time—we heard many gestures.

The member also mentioned ODSP rates—that is a reasonable gesture for those people who are able to work, but it excludes all the people who cannot. It also excludes all the people who are on Ontario Works. At committee, we heard from an individual who was living on ODSP. Many are concerned because they have to adjust their family life; they’re not able to live with the person they love, based on the fact that they’re an ODSP recipient, because family income is used against them in the determination of ODSP. This government had the opportunity to make that change within Bill 36, but they chose not to.

He’s absolutely right that this change does not take into account all the people who are on ODSP and the reasons for which they are on ODSP, which is frequently because they are unable to work. We on the official opposition side have stood for doubling the ODSP rate, making sure that it is reasonable and can actually address the cost of living challenges that people have.

The CERB program that was instituted by the federal government determined that everyone should receive $2,000 per month, and that was a reasonable income for everyone to survive, and yet this government has decided routinely that they would like people who receive ODSP to remain in legislated poverty, because that is the decision they have made. They’re keeping people suppressed.

I’d like to focus my recommendations on education. If we compare Bill 36, the fall economic statement, to the FAO report, the government is going to be short a billion dollars in education through 2024-25. If we consider the post-secondary sector, Ontario would have to spend 43% more, not to be first but simply not to be last.

The fact of the matter is that, year over year, we’ve had governments, Liberal and Conservative, that have looked at education as an expense, when it is an investment. The expenditures on post-secondary education don’t even cover a third of what is required for post-secondary students.

We know that children in the elementary and high school levels are struggling with mental health. The rates of violence are at an all-time high. We need to have investments now to make sure that people can have their best life.

Further, autism and the Ontario Autism Program never even show up in Bill 36. That is a great cause for concern. We know that the sooner we can get these interventions to children, the better life they will have.