Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 17
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-222, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (travel expenses deduction for tradespersons).
He said: Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in the House today to carry forward the work of the always honourable Scott Duvall and table a bill entitled, “an act to amend the Income Tax Act for travel expenses deduction for tradespersons”.
I would like to thank the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for seconding the motion. This bill would allow for qualified tradespersons and indentured apprentices to deduct travel expenses when they travel to job sites more than 80 kilometres away from their ordinary places of residence.
I would like to extend sincere thanks and congratulations to Pat Dillon, the recently retired business manager and secretary treasurer of the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario, who has been a lifelong leader and advocate for the building trades. I would also like to extend my thanks to my dear friend Mark Ellerker of the Hamilton–Brantford Building and Construction Trades Council who continues to push this issue forward. Last, I want to give a special thanks to Stuart McLellan of IBEW local 105, who has already made it very clear to me that while these types of tax deductions already exist for white collar workers, it is well past time to ensure that similar financial supports are extended to the hard-working people in the building trades.
During the last election, both the Liberals and the Conservatives committed to support for tradespersons, so I believe this bill is one that we can find support on.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me to end 2021 on a high note by sharing my gratitude for the people of Hamilton Centre, who put their trust in me to return to this 44th Parliament and ensure that our working-class values continue to be well represented here in the House of Commons.
I thank, from the “Hamilton Centre” of my heart, my riding association and the hundreds of campaign volunteers who mobilized to go door to door, street to street and neighbourhood to neighbourhood.
I say to my family, both blood and chosen, who act as my deep roots of grounding, that with their strength I may, from time to time, be forced to bend, but I will never break.
Finally, I offer my deepest and uttermost gratitude to my incredible spouse Jade and our dear son Langston, for whom I will never stop fighting to build a better world. I thank them for the sacrifices they have made throughout this work. Although it bears my name, it continues to be a burden they both have to carry. I love them all dearly.
Merry Christmas, happy holidays and happy new year.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I rise quite sheepishly, having not received the memo on the festive tone of this afternoon's debates, so I will ask members to indulge me. In my community, plain talk is not bad manners, and I have prepared a full speech that does identify some gaps, which I think are germane to the conversation. This is not intended in any way to end off on a bad note or a sour note, but to really contemplate deeply what is at stake here in the House. It keeps me up at night, like many members I am sure, and it wakes me up early in the morning.
While there remains much to be said about the timing and need of the last election called by the Prime Minister, I have to admit the opportunity for me to retreat from this place of privilege and return to the doorsteps of my constituency provided me with an invaluable grounding for what is at stake among these future proceedings of the session. This is a monumental day, and I do not want to take anything away from that. It is a burden that we carry. In fact, we have asked millions of Canadians to carry a very heavy burden in order to make it through this COVID pandemic.
While returning to this topic and supporting Bill C-3, having heard the various interventions pertaining to the same, many members have questioned the relationship between the first two parts of this bill, which would amend the Criminal Code, and the third part, which would be establishing something under the Canada Labour Code.
For those from the public, and who may be tuning in to this debate through livestream, or perhaps reading it in the Hansard, I will provide a summary of Bill C-3. The first two parts would amend the Criminal Code by creating two new offences relating to the protection of health care professionals and patient access to health care. The first offence would apply to any act of intimidation that is intended to cause fear in a patient, health care professional or any person who supports them and prevents them from accessing or providing health care services. The second offence would also cover intentional acts that prevent a person from accessing services provided by a health care professional. Both offences would be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of up to 10 years and up to two years on a summary conviction.
Part three, which seems to be where perhaps some people have the disconnect between these two, pertains to amending the Canada Labour Code to establish 10 days of paid sick leave. This leave would be available each calendar year to employees in federally regulated private sectors who have been continuously employees for more than one month.
In fairness, perhaps on the surface these two policies under different acts may not appear to be connected. It is in fact my intention today to offer my support for the deep relevance between these two interconnected parts. I would argue that the deep despair and well-documented societal impacts of four consecutive waves of COVID, each with its own circumstances of social isolation and economic hardships, are ultimately due to all levels of government's failure to adequately respond to the scale and the scope of this pandemic.
The utter fear, uncertainty and doubt experienced by segments of our population have made them especially susceptible to this anti-science, anti-government and, by extension, anti-health care movement, from which come many of the targeted and vile attacks we are now legislatively responding to
Since the beginning of the pandemic, health care workers have faced a high risk of infection and violence. In fact, since long before the pandemic health care professionals are four times more likely to experience violence in the workplace than other profession. Unfortunately, many of these acts of violence go unreported. According to the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, in 2019 61% of nurses reported experiencing violence, harassment and assault on the job, and because women make up a significant portion of the health care workforce, they are disproportionately victimized by these acts of violence.
To discourage these acts of violence, the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions has recommended amending the Criminal Code, which is what is before us today, so I commend them on their long-standing work. This request was also the subject of a 2019 health committee recommendation. Specifically, the committee recommended amending the Criminal Code to require that it be considered an aggravating factor in sentencing if the victim of assault is a health care worker. This recommendation was based upon the NDP's bill, Bill C-434, introduced by my dear friend and NDP caucus colleague, the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway.
As it pertains to putting the 10-day paid sick leave issue into context, people should never have to choose between their income and their health. Since the beginning of this pandemic, the NDP caucus has been demanding that the Liberals provide workers with 10 days of paid sick leave.
After winning an initial concession on this leave by offering it to people with COVID-19, we succeeded in forcing the Liberals to offer two weeks of federally funded leave through the CRB sickness benefit. The New Democrats not only support 10 paid sick days, we led the calls for it in the House. My hon. colleague for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie fought hard at committee, where he tabled four amendments, two that were unanimously supported and two that were rejected.
I feel it important to note on the record today that the NDP fought for amendments that were accepted unanimously. One is that an employer cannot request a doctor's certificate for less than five consecutive sick days. This is major because stakeholders say that asking for a doctor's certificate is a barrier to its use and people would rather go to work than chase an appointment. Plus we know that it clogs up the health care system when it does not need to.
The second amendment that passed due to the hon. member is after 30 days of employment, the employee gets one day of sick leave. In the original version of the law, it was at the beginning of each month, which would have meant that someone hired on January 1 would have to wait until March 1 for their first accrued day.
Both amendments were intended to make sick days more accessible and the NDP forced the issue to make the program more accessible to workers and more responsive to their needs. This is a victory. The five consecutive days before the employer has the option to request a doctor's certificate will make a significant difference.
We did, however, have two other amendments that failed. The first amendment opposed by the Liberals was that all employees, upon hiring, would have access to four paid sick days. They would accumulate another six, one per month, as proposed in the bill, of up to 10 per year. Having four days right from the start is very important because stakeholders tell us that very rarely do people take a day off work and an illness often requires a few days off.
The minister, in his testimony yesterday morning, said that he was open to such an amendment, speaking of the urgency of the current omicron context. By voting against the amendment, the Liberals have refused to speed up access to paid sick days in the midst of another pandemic winter. Workers will continue to go to work sick since they will not have access to enough days to isolate themselves at home until next November at the earliest. This is irresponsible.
The second amendment that the Liberals opposed was that all employees with two or more years of seniority would get 10 sick days when the law came into effect. This would have provided access to the full strength of the program immediately for the majority of employees under federal jurisdiction. Since this amendment was rejected, all employees will begin accrual as if they were newly hired. I suggest that this is precisely because of these types of gaps in our social safety nets that we ultimately remain in this mess of targeted attacks on our hospitals and health care workers.
Last week, called on the hon. member on the Conservative side to join our calls for more advances and protections. We have the opportunity to take a first step in the right direction in the House today as an informal form of sectoral bargaining for workers. We know this is going to be a vital protection.
This past election allowed me to speak to my constituents on their doorsteps. It is heartbreaking to feel as though people who I know to be rational, family members and classmates who I grew up with, neighbours I have known to be caring and compassionate, have been manipulated by the rhetoric of right-wing populism, grifters and agitators who would seek to turn this profound moment of suffering into some sort of personal sales pitch or nationwide tour targeting our front-line health care workers fighting the onslaught of successive waves of COVID.
For those caught up in this fear and confusion, I offer to endeavour to work harder as a member of Parliament to ensure that their basic needs are met and the most current evidence-based information is communicated without political interference or manipulation.
I call on the members of the House, who have rightly identified the divisions in our country, to recognize its root cause. It is the failure of all levels of government to adequately take care of the basic needs of all people, not just throughout COVID but in the decades preceding it.
I will close with the simple reassertion that these three parts of Bill C-3 are the cause and the effect of the social isolation, political estrangement and economic isolation felt by everyday people and, most unfortunate, targeted at our front-line health care workers. In taking better care of them, we will take better care of each other.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, we have heard the hon. member and, in fact, all Conservatives flaunt the private sector and flout government investments of around $400 billion. However, they never seem to talk about the $750 billion that went into Bay Street and the big banks, which was absolutely the gasoline on the dumpster fire of this housing crisis.
Given all they have created in the Conservative plan for housing, the Conservatives have never once talked about rentals, and they have never once talked about the financialization of housing. Would the hon. member agree that there need to be steps to eliminate the preferential tax treatment enjoyed by financial firms and big companies such as REITs, particularly through CMHC, which are gobbling up all of our rental stock?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Edmonton Mill Woods for honouring the soldier and person he knew who passed in this very solemn theatre of war. In my own reflections, I am thinking about Hamilton's own Mark Anthony Graham. He was a larger-than-life Olympian who served in the 1st Battalion of the Royal Canadian Regiment of the Canadian Armed Forces. I am also reminded of the casualties of war and who ultimately pays the price for war.
I ask for those on the front lines and all the civilians who have been left without any choice in the results of the Afghan war, how does the member think donor governments should interact with the Taliban authority when it comes to international assistance? No western government, including Canada's, is likely to offer diplomatic legitimacy to the Taliban anytime soon. What suggestions does the hon. member for Edmonton Mill Woods have in terms of the pragmatic problem of getting food, medicine and shelter to the people who need it most?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, without a doubt, the hon. member for Scarborough Centre is well connected in her community. As she expressed and hearing the stories from folks who were being settled through this process, they will know the dire consequences their relatives, friends and families are being left with back home.
I think back to the government's attempts to settle 25,000 Syrian refugees. As a former city councillor, one who was working on the settlement side in Hamilton, I have grave concerns about the lack of adequate planning and perhaps supports for local communities in settling these purported 40,000 refugees.
My question for the hon. member is this. What is her government doing to ensure that, while these lofty promises are being floated out there, particularly at election times, local cities and municipalities are going to be adequately equipped and funded to ensure those who do make it here are accounted for?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound for his service to this country and indeed all hon. members in this House who have served our military prior to their service as members of Parliament.
Given what the member has described in terms of our moral obligation to the Afghans on the ground who served alongside our military throughout operations, I appreciated that he provided interventions on what immediate measures can be taken by the government based on what we have learned. Has the member determined, based on his subject matter expertise, which countries around the world involved in the Afghan war serve as a gold standard for how they supported and ultimately protected those Afghans who served in their respective nations and if so, which nation should we be looking to and which immediate next steps should we take, learning from them?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, one of the first privileges we have when rising in these opening weeks of a new Parliament session is to be granted the opportunity to acknowledge the honour that has been bestowed upon us by our respective constituents as either newly elected or re-elected members of Parliament.
With the Speaker's indulgence, allow me to begin my intervention, as many of us already have, with a brief reflection on the deep gratitude I owe to the people of Hamilton Centre, who have put their trust in me to return to this 44th Parliament to continue the important work of ensuring that the working-class values of Hamilton Centre continue to be well represented in the House of Commons—
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, is this better now?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I appreciate your indulgence and the suggestion from the hon. member from the Conservative side. Is my microphone okay now?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I rise today to capitalize on the good minister's basking in the light.
We have heard much conversation in the House about collaboration. I have to share with members that our labour critic, the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, and of course our entire caucus has been calling on this government to improve the bill by ensuring that workers do not have to wait 11 months for 10 paid sick days, and ensuring that workers have access to the first day of sick leave after a continuous period of employment of at least 60 days. This is with the goal of not unduly delaying access to the first day of sick leave.
There are many ways in which we can improve the bill before us, and I am hopeful that the good minister, in basking in the light, will work with the NDP caucus to close the gaps in the very porous first draft of this legislation.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, hallelujah, we heard here today this hon. member from the Conservatives say the word “union” perhaps more times than he did in all the days of the last session of Parliament combined. I am more than willing, as is the entire NDP caucus, to continue down that line. He brought up specifically a bill that was first introduced by Chris Charlton and then my colleague Scott Duvall on the construction mobility tax credit.
What other possible worker-friendly and union-friendly policies could this member present to us today that we might find some common ground on?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I really need to strike while the iron is hot. My good friend from Northumberland—Peterborough South made the bold statement from the Conservative side that we needed more union jobs in Canada, and I could not agree more.
Will the hon. member rise in the House today and join the New Democratic caucus in supporting sectoral bargaining to ensure that more Canadians across the country can have access to well-paying union jobs?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, who, as our labour critic, has been incredible in raising the alarm around the issue of contract flipping. One of the concerns we have about this bill is that it raises questions about the entitlement to sick days for workers subject to contract flipping.
Would the hon. member care to comment on how, in principle, workers doing essentially the same work despite a possible change in employer should have their work standards and sick leave entitlements preserved?
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the hon. member for rising. In the past session, he was a bulwark of the party's truth and reconciliation process, through which the government is engaging in the atrocities that have been uncovered in our residential schools across the country.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has denounced the doctrine of discovery. Four of the commission's calls to action, calls to action 45, 46, 47 and 49, urge the government to publicly disavow the racist and white supremacist notion of the doctrine of discovery. The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly stated that the heart of reconciliation is to reconcile the pre-existing rights of indigenous peoples with the assertion of Crown sovereignty. The phrase “assertion of Crown sovereignty” is a Canadian euphemism for the doctrine of discovery.
The Mohawk Institute Residential School, which is near my riding, is beginning its painful process of recovering bodies. As we know, close to 7,000 children have been recovered across the country so far. Given its correlation with the deaths of over 7,000 indigenous children, would the hon. member repudiate the doctrine of discovery?
Results: 1 - 15 of 17 | Page: 1 of 2

1
2
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data