SoVote

Mr. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC)

Dec/9/21 1:02:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to debate with the member for Winnipeg North around one specific point. He is misrepresenting the motion before us. In the previous election, we said that we would like to review “the extensive real estate portfolio of the federal government – the largest property owner in the country with over 37,000 buildings – and releasing at least 15 per cent for homes”, while improving the federal lands initiative. The government has properties within places like Toronto, like Ottawa and even just across the bridge in Gatineau, Quebec. We are talking about taking existing structures that the federal government has and going to the provincial and the not-for-profit societies, saying that we have land that can be reconverted. They may be able to take the existing envelopes and translate them into apartments for people who need them. Would the member agree that the federal government has these properties and its right place is to give those properties? Especially since we have so many people working from home now, this becomes more and more of an option.

184 words

Context: House Hansard - 14 - Dec/9/21

Mr. Dan Albas

Dec/9/21 1:40:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, during the previous engagement we had a member walking around the chamber without a mask on. I would just like us all to be mindful of each other by wearing masks in the House.

41 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 14 - Dec/9/21

Mr. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC)

Dec/9/21 5:55:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is certainly an honour to rise on behalf of the good people of Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola to debate this very serious topic. I will be splitting my time with the member for Bay of Quinte. I am very proud to say that. I suspect every member of this place knows of the housing affordability crisis many Canadians are facing. We all know it, and we certainly know the Prime Minister knows of this. How do we know this? Let us go back to September 9, 2015. On that day, the Liberal Party of Canada released a statement. The headline said, “[The member for Papineau] promises affordable housing for Canadians”. The article went onto say, “We have a plan to make housing more affordable for those who need it the most”. Where is that plan? That was back in 2015. Today, we know that there is no plan. Those were just the usual “say anything” promises from the Prime Minister, who never once himself has faced an affordable housing crisis. Worse, in 2017, the Prime Minister actually raided the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation to the amount of $4 billion. That money came from CMHC premiums that first-time homebuyers had paid. That money was meant for CMHC to help more first-time homebuyers. Instead, the Prime Minister raided that money for general revenue, which did not help any first-time homebuyers. In 2019, with an election fast approaching, and realizing he had gotten nowhere delivering on the affordable housing that he had promised in the 2015 election, the Prime Minister made another announcement. The first-time home buyer incentive program that the Prime Minister promised would “help 100,000 Canadian families buy their first home”. In 2020, after the election, we learned that only 3,252 applications were made to CMHC and, of those, 2,730 were accepted. This program was not just a failure. It was a total disaster, but wait, there is more. In 2019, the Prime Minister also promised he would take on foreign buyers driving up housing costs, a promise he made right before the election. It is now 2021, and soon to be 2022. I ask members of the House, do we have any measure from the Liberal government to take on foreign buyers that are driving up housing costs? No, we have zero. It is just another broken promise from this “say anything” Prime Minister. Of course, we are not done yet. In the last Parliament, we had another motion come before this place on affordable housing. That motion called on the government to, “examine a temporary freeze on home purchases by non-resident foreign buyers who are squeezing Canadians out of the housing market”. That is not only a completely reasonable motion, but something that the Prime Minister himself promised Canadians he would do in 2019. Guess what happened? Do we even need to guess? Despite all the opposition parties voting for that motion, the Prime Minister voted against it. Of course, he whipped up his whole caucus to vote against it as well. Let us think about this for a moment. This is a Prime Minister who promised to take action on foreign buyers driving up housing costs, and then, when he had the chance to vote for what he had promised Canadians he would do, he turned around and voted against it. It is literally unconscionable. It is this type of thing that creates cynicism and distrust from everyday Canadians about what goes on here. These are concerns, by the way, that this Prime Minister also professed to care about. Of course, it did not just end there. During this most recent election, an election only called by the Prime Minister because he believed he could win a majority government, he had the gall to say, “Houses shouldn’t sit empty when so many Canadians are trying to buy a home. So, we’re going to ban foreign ownership in Canada for the next two years”. Seriously, this is the Prime Minister who, in the 2019 election, promised to take action against foreign buyers. He then, when presented with an affordable housing motion that would allow him to honour the very promise to Canadians that he made, he turned around and voted against his own promise. In yet another election, just three months after voting against taking action on foreign owners, he promised once again that he would ban foreign ownership in Canada for the next two years. To recap, he made a promise, broke that promise, made the promise again, voted against that promise and then, finally made the promise yet another time. Who does that? No one who is serious about taking action on affordable action would do that. This is six years of demonstrated inaction, failure, broken promises, blatant hypocrisy and total failure. This Prime Minister is the Groundhog Day of failure when it comes to broken promises on affordable housing. Here we are again, debating yet another motion on affordable housing because, of course, this Liberal government has made zero progress on affordable housing. This motion is very reasonable, as was the last one, yet the Liberal government voted it down. The motion, among other measures, proposes to ban foreign investors from purchasing Canadian real estate. Not only did the Prime Minister promise to do this in the 2021 election, but he also promised it again during the 2019 election. Will the government vote for this motion, or oppose it like the government did the last time? This motion also proposes that the government commit to never introducing a capital gains tax on the sale of a primary residence. Once again, this is something the Prime Minister has already promised he would never do, but he also promised that he would never prorogue Parliament. We also know that this Prime Minister really does not care a lot about honouring his promises. However, we can hope this time that the Prime Minister will, for once, vote for a motion that would allow him to keep his word to Canadians. We also know the motion proposes to increase the housing supply in Canada, which this Prime Minister has promised repeatedly throughout his time in government. Ultimately this motion is responsible and reasonable. That is to say, I am not quite certain that this Prime Minister is actually serious about any of his promises or commitments to affordable housing after reviewing the case that I have made, mostly because it is hard to believe a Prime Minister who promised Canadians so much but has delivered so little. I am not quite certain how people could think he would actually be serious about his commitment to affordable housing. We know that this Prime Minister was serious about legalizing cannabis. He got that done, and he got it done in his first term. However, on affordable housing there is nothing but broken promises. In conclusion, I will be voting in support of this motion. What is there to disagree with? We have some members are trying to make much of our suggestion to review and utilize existing federal buildings of the 37,000 that currently exist that the federal government has in its inventory, many of them in urban centres, such as Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa, and Gatineau. There is so much there, and just 15% of that could be utilized. That is what we are talking about, not the outrageous claims by the member for Winnipeg North or by the member for Kingston and the Islands. Many of the proposed measures are things this Prime Minister promised he would do, some several times in fact. Affordable housing is important and in my riding, communities like Merritt and Princeton, which have lost housing to devastating floods, are going to need affordable housing like never before. Otherwise, there are some people who will have nothing to come back to. Let us keep in mind that Merritt and Princeton, for many, were more affordable than communities like Vancouver or Surrey. We need to help them rebuild. We need to help this whole country be able to build up and give people a place to call home.

1383 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 14 - Dec/9/21

Mr. Dan Albas

Dec/9/21 6:06:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciate the member's contribution, for her service and for being part of the debate tonight. I certainly hope she gets to ask that question from this side of the House in the future. When I first became a parliamentarian, in the 41st Parliament, one of the things I remember is speaking to the previous minister responsible, Diane Finley, about this. She had worked out, with the Government of British Columbia, an affordable housing framework. We worked hand-in-glove with provincial governments, such as with the Province of Quebec, so that we would see those dollars go farther. We could always argue whether more or less money should go to something. Naturally, in this place there is going to be politicization, but I think we need to start seeing a focus on results, which is something the current Prime Minister unfortunately has failed repeatedly at.

150 words

Context: House Hansard - 14 - Dec/9/21

Mr. Dan Albas

Dec/9/21 6:08:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to first congratulate a fellow British Columbian on her election, but also thank her for participating tonight. The NDP has made its points today with regard to it. It also has the ability to raise its own opposition day motion specifically, because sometimes political parties are going to say where they see the main problems being. It is not to say there are not other areas that could be worked on, particularly in the social housing space. That requires a lot of work, as well. However, right now we know that the system of housing, and the markets, are not working as well as they should, and that is where we need to see more supply. That is where the 15% of federal buildings would help immediately. That is why we think banning foreign buyers from investing and displacing Canadians is important right now. I will continue to advocate for the solutions I believe are important. I believe this member will do the same for her constituents and for her party's beliefs.

178 words

Context: House Hansard - 14 - Dec/9/21

Mr. Dan Albas

Dec/9/21 6:09:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I attended, along with the member for Edmonton Riverbend, the FCM meeting in Quebec City. One of the things I attended was a forum on affordable housing, and the B.C. housing minister at the time, Selina Robinson, who now happens to be the finance minister, was asked about the national housing strategy. She responded that the government had come to the table, but it had yet to invest. I would be curious to hear from her. Some of my NDP colleagues might want to phone her and ask to see if that is still the case. We want to see more results. That is why we are pushing the government.

113 words