SoVote

Dec/9/21 11:02:56 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my next‑door neighbour for his question. Indeed, there is no river separating the two of us. I also congratulate him for the work he is doing in his constituency. My colleague and I understand that the housing crisis in Montreal and the rise in housing prices are being felt everywhere. Just like him, I am concerned about my constituents who are looking for solutions. However, I would remind him that our government is the one that introduced the national housing strategy, the very first housing strategy. The Liberal government has made historic investments in housing, and I am very proud of that. I look forward to working with my colleague on housing issues and projects in our respective ridings.

125 words

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Dec/9/21 11:03:53 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to offer my congratulations to the parliamentary secretary on her new role. I want to pick up on a question asked by the hon. member for Vancouver East earlier in this conversation. We know activists across the country have been calling out the need for more investments in non-market, public, subsidized and co-op housing. We have not built co-op housing in this country since the early 1990s. Can the parliamentary secretary comment on that need, and the commitment from the government to begin reinvesting in co-op housing?

95 words

Ms. Soraya Martinez Ferrada

Dec/9/21 11:04:29 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for the opportunity to point out that when his party was in power, it invested the least in housing. I know that because at the time, I was a private citizen trying to get funding for co-operative projects, but there was no money. Today, our government plans to fund co-operative, affordable and social housing projects across the country to fix the previous Conservative government's mistakes and make up for its long history of inaction.

87 words

Mr. Irek Kusmierczyk (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion, Lib.)

Dec/9/21 11:05:27 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my hon. colleague for her excellent work on this file. In the last two years, I was able to participate in a number of historic announcements in Windsor—Tecumseh on affordable housing, which is a critical issue there. There was a $170-million partnership, through the repair and renewal fund, to repair and renew 4,700 units across Windsor-Essex with local partners; a $25-million partnership with a private developer to build 33 or 31 new units in the town of Tecumseh; $22 million, again in partnership with local partners, to build affordable housing in the Meadowbrook project; and $9 million to build new units for the rapid housing initiative, as well. I notice that in the opposition motion there is no mention of partnerships. I wanted to ask the parliamentary secretary this: Is that one reason why we have seen more investment in affordable housing in Windsor—Tecumseh over the last two years? These are historic investments, more than we ever saw in 10 years of Conservative government.

178 words

Ms. Soraya Martinez Ferrada

Dec/9/21 11:06:43 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for the opportunity to point out that it was the Conservative government that pulled out of all of the housing partnerships and abandoned the housing file altogether. The funds that we have created, including the national housing co-investment fund, will enable us to create at least 60,000 new housing units over several years and invest more than $13 billion over 10 years. I believe that these historic investments will deliver meaningful results every year for all Canadians across the country.

93 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

Dec/9/21 11:07:31 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, let us tell it like it is. The government is making big funding promises for all of its programs, but very little money is actually being spent. Sometimes, only 25% of the expenses are covered. Other times, the program criteria are so restrictive that no one is eligible. The reality is that the current government is not spending that much more than in the Harper era. Given that we are at the height of the housing crisis, does my colleague not think that the government should stop talking and actually take action?

94 words

Ms. Soraya Martinez Ferrada

Dec/9/21 11:08:06 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. However, comparing our government's track record to the Harper government's is just plain bad faith. I worked in the renovation and affordable and social housing field for many years, and I have to say that real results are being achieved. Two low-income housing providers in my riding waited for over 30 years to get funding. Some of the housing units were boarded up. Thanks to federal government investments, those units can be renovated. That will deliver real results across the country and provide Quebeckers and Canadians with affordable, accessible housing.

103 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

Dec/9/21 11:08:59 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the reality is that Canada is actually losing more affordable housing and social housing than it is creating. During the campaign, the Liberal government only committed to 20,000 units of non-profit affordable housing to be built and created. My question to the parliamentary secretary is this. Would she call on her own government to do what the NDP has been advocating for? That is to build 500,000 units of affordable, cooperative housing so that we can, in fact, give people who need housing and who are unhoused the opportunity to have a home?

98 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Dec/9/21 11:09:44 a.m.
Watch

I would ask the hon. parliamentary secretary to provide a brief response.

12 words

Ms. Soraya Martinez Ferrada

Dec/9/21 11:09:47 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. I do not have a lot of time, but I can say that during the last election campaign, I was surprised to see that the Liberal Party platform was 10 times more progressive and ambitious than the NDP's. I would be pleased to talk to her about all the measures we committed to. If there is one platform that made housing a priority, it is the Liberal Party's platform.

80 words

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

Dec/9/21 11:10:22 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am very happy not to be sharing my time for this speech. I am going to try to speak for 20 minutes on the issue of housing. I am very glad that we are talking about this issue today. I thank my Conservative friends for bringing forward a motion on this issue today. I have noticed, and I am sending them the signal, that this issue has been very much on the table since we resumed two weeks ago. I am pleased with that. The Conservatives have been asking a lot of questions, and the Liberals have even been planting questions on this issue to pretend that they are dealing with it. In fact, one of the things I hate most in the House is seeing a Liberal backbencher read out a question to a minister, who then thanks them for asking such a good question and doing such a wonderful job. I think it is bad acting and a huge waste of everyone's time. That is where we stand. Six months down the road, we are going to talk about housing. I remember doing a speech about housing in June. Unfortunately, the situation has not changed. It has gotten even worse. There is quite a contradiction that I need to point out, because it makes no sense. We just had a totally useless election. We wasted a lot of time, energy and, most of all, money. We just spent $600 million on an election that yielded the same results as the previous one. Do my colleagues know how many social housing units $600 million would build? We could have helped 3,000 people, like women fleeing domestic violence, people with mental health issues, and seniors made more vulnerable by the pandemic. We could have used that money to house these people. It is shocking how much time we wasted, all to end up with the same result. We have the same Parliament: the Conservatives are in the same place, the Liberals are in the same place, the NDP is in the same place, near the door. It is all the same in the same Parliament. It is outrageous. During the election campaign, one thing kept coming up. At least, the people in the Bloc Québécois heard it a lot, and I cannot help but mention it today because it is very important. We kept hearing that the Bloc Québécois will never be in power, which means that, on a number of issues, there is nothing it can do or decide, and that the Bloc will never be the one making the decisions. We heard that a lot during the election campaign. Consider Montreal, for example. Right now, 23,000 people in Montreal are on the waiting list for low-cost housing. Since 2015, when the Liberals came to power, the numbers have only grown. If we look at the electoral map, Montreal is almost entirely red. Some 25 Liberal MPs, including nine ministers, are supposed to be sitting down making decisions. There are nine federal government ministers on the Island of Montreal, including the Prime Minister. They were told that they should be sitting at the table where decisions are made. I imagine that the Prime Minister is also at that table and that he can make decisions. His own riding, Papineau, is one of the ridings struggling most with the housing crisis on the Island of Montreal. That is something worth mentioning. What is our Prime Minister working on? What does he do all day? Let us be honest. We are going through a difficult time. There is a housing crisis, but that is not the only crisis there is. In fact, right now, there are four major crises in Canada. There is, of course, the health crisis, which we hope to get out of as soon as possible. There is also the climate crisis, about which the Liberals are doing absolutely nothing. They have one of the worst records of the G7. Just because they have a former environmental activist in their ranks it does not mean that we think they will make quick progress. This is one of the worst crises of our time. In Quebec, there is also a language crisis looming, and we are still waiting. Six months ago, we were supposed to pass legislation to reform the Official Languages Act, but we are still waiting. We put everything on hold for five weeks. There was an election and, six months later, there is still nothing. French is in decline everywhere in Montreal and across Quebec, but no legislation was passed because of the election. Ultimately, the government is unable to do much to improve the situation, but it can do a lot to make it worse. We in the Bloc want to keep them from making things worse. There is the housing crisis. The Liberal record on housing is disastrous. Let us talk about the current situation in Quebec, where 450,000 households are in dire need of housing. That is a lot of people—those who pay 30% of their income for housing or who are in unsuitable or substandard housing. Someone might be able to find decently priced housing, but it is unsuitable if eight people have to share a one-bedroom apartment. Nearly 200,000 households see over 50% of their income go to housing; that is when things start to get deeply troubling. I am referring to pre-pandemic numbers here, but I will point out that all of these numbers have gone up during the pandemic. Around 82,000 households in Quebec spend 80% of their income on rent. That is right, I said 80%. If someone makes $20,000, $16,000 goes to rent and they have $4,000 left for 12 months, which means times will be tight, as my mother used to say. It is easy to imagine the anxiety and problems that come with that, which is terrible. The situation has not changed after six years of Liberal government. The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Housing just buried us in statistics. I think her intentions are good, but she cannot really see what is going on out there. More people are homeless. It was one of the most important issues in the Quebec municipal campaign, if not the key issue in Longueuil, Montreal, Laval, Gatineau and Quebec City, and for the mayors of all of Quebec's big cities. In fact, I have a meeting tomorrow with the new mayor of Longueuil, who has made this one of her crusades and wants to set up a round table with Montreal and Laval to find solutions. The problem is that the municipality does not have the means to meet this challenge. It takes massive investments. Where is the money? It is in Ottawa. Obviously, housing is a provincial jurisdiction, but over time, the federal government clawed back spending power, which it is misusing. My colleague talked about that earlier. A national housing strategy was introduced. Let us go over a bit of its history, without going back to the beginning of time. Where did it come from? Why did we hear so much about it? It is because it was the first one. Before that, there was nothing going on in housing. In the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, the government decided that it had to get involved in housing the most vulnerable, people who could not afford it themselves. The federal government made investments in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, and housing was built for the most vulnerable in Quebec and across the country. Then, in the early 1990s, the Conservative government of the day stopped those investments in the name of budget cuts. They axed that funding, and then nothing happened. In 1993, the Liberals returned to power under Jean Chrétien. During the election campaign, he promised that he would start building again, that everything would go well, that he would take care of the most vulnerable. What happened? He did not keep their word. He did not start investing again. According to a study by FRAPRU, if the government had resumed investing in 1993 at the same pace it had been in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, nearly 80,000 social housing units could have been built in Quebec. We could have housed a bunch of people, all sorts of people who have all sorts of problems, as we are seeing right now in the streets. For 30 years, nothing happened. Then, three or four years ago, the Liberal Party decided to launch a program. As my colleague said so well earlier, the national housing strategy comes with big numbers, namely $70 billion. However, those numbers are inflated with helium, because the investments will be made over 10 years and they include investments from the municipalities, organizations and the provinces. That is where things stand. The national strategy caused major problems in Quebec, because for three years, nothing happened. Since this is a provincial jurisdiction and the federal government was slow to come to an agreement with Quebec, for three years, no money was spent on housing the most vulnerable. Last May, a mother and victim of domestic violence from Longueuil made the front page of the Journal de Montréal because she could not find housing for herself and her three children. She was trapped in a difficult and toxic relationship, but could not find housing and she was very anxious. This woman lives in Longueuil. Had the agreement with Quebec been signed when the national strategy was launched in 2017, we could have found housing for her. This woman needs an apartment suitable for herself and her three children. A three-bedroom apartment in Longueuil costs $1,500 a month and that is considered affordable. That is the average rent for a three-bedroom in Longueuil. Who can afford that? It makes no sense. In short, had this agreement been signed, we could have provided these people with housing. Let us talk about the national housing strategy. Beyond the fact that it took three years for an agreement to be signed, which has caused all kinds of problems in Quebec, there is another problem. As my colleague mentioned earlier, the suite of programs intended to create affordability under the national housing strategy means that in Montreal, for example, a unit that costs $2,200 a month is considered affordable. That is just crazy. During the election campaign, the Bloc Québécois proposed to shuffle all the programs, take the money and put it where the needs are, by giving it to organizations on the ground or to technical resource groups. Since the groups know what the needs are, they could take the money and look after people's real needs. The groups working on the ground are the ones that have the required expertise. That was our proposal during the election campaign. Right now, a lot of money is being spent for nothing because it is missing the mark. That makes no sense. Let us now talk about the rapid housing initiative, RHI, which is interesting. Two years ago, the government sort of woke up. It realized that the situation made no sense, that it needed to invest in housing for the most vulnerable, not just those with money. That is why the government launched the RHI. It is not a bad program, but it is grossly underfunded. The government announced that it would invest $1 billion to build housing units. The plan was to quickly renovate low-income housing units that had fallen into disrepair and to turn small highway motels into bachelor units for people experiencing homelessness. That is a good program. However, there was a big problem with this $1‑billion program, which included $500 million for major cities. Out of that $500 million, $200 million went to Toronto and $57 million to Montreal. We did not understand that at all. In total, $63 million, or 13%, of that $500 million for major cities went to Quebec, yet Quebec accounts for 23% of the population of Canada. The decisions are made in Ottawa, and the minister responsible for this file is from Toronto. This may be a coincidence, but something is not right here. It makes no sense that Quebec contributes $50 billion a year in taxes and that some of that money gets spent on people in Toronto who are unhoused. It makes no sense. This $1‑billion initiative is not a bad one, but it was not enough money. Do my colleagues know how many requests the government received for projects to house the most vulnerable when this program was launched? It was actually a good program; people had three months to apply, and tenants had to be able to get into the unit a year later. That, in itself, was very good. In fact, it was almost too fast, because organizations that could not afford to submit projects had only three months to do so. There were even organizations that applied for grants from CMHC, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I spoke with a representative of an organization in the Montérégie who applied to CMHC for $40,000 in funding to help him submit the project. His application ended up being rejected. It is completely ridiculous. The government received $4 billion in project applications, when it had an envelope of only $1 billion. Everyone knows that people do not have any fun on Saturday night or Sunday morning. Not having anything to do, they concoct the idea of whipping up an application for housing meant for the homeless. That is not what happens. These people are involved in their community, and they are familiar with what the community needs. They know where the needs are. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities applied for $7 billion under the same program. They saw the big pot of money and said that it was a good program to apply for $7 billion. It is a fine program, but it is underfunded. The government launched it with $1.5 billion, but, again, that will not solve the problems. The national housing strategy is supposed to build 4,000 units in Quebec over 10 years, but Quebec has 40,000 people waiting for low-income housing. That 10-year plan will not meet those needs. We are talking numbers, and we are going to talk numbers all day. That is fine because this is an important issue. The housing issue is about people. One of the things I have enjoyed most over the past two years is meeting all the people at work on the ground in Longueuil. There are people everywhere working on homelessness, right in Montreal and all over. This is a good time to salute their incredible work. I was talking to the parliamentary secretary about homelessness earlier. An organization called La Halte du coin was founded in Longueuil during the pandemic. It is an incredible organization that offers resources 24/7. What is more, its threshold for entry is low, meaning it accepts anyone and everyone. At the beginning of the pandemic, we realized that many people experiencing homelessness were going to the Longueuil metro to get out of Montreal, and there was a significant risk of an outbreak. All the homelessness advocacy organizations immediately came together and quickly developed an amazing project, La Halte du coin. They are anxious to find out if they will get funding. Among the people who worked on this project was Danielle Leblanc, an extraordinary woman who works to tackle homelessness. My riding is home to a program called Repas du passant, a resource that offers meals for $4, five days a week, to people experiencing homelessness. Ms. Leblanc is an incredible woman. There is also Danielle Goulet, from Macadam Sud, who goes around on the bus to connect with young people in Longueuil; Lucie Latulippe, from Abri de la Rive-Sud; Marlène Harvey, from Casa Bernard-Hubert, a transitional resource for men; Nicholas Gildersleeve, the new director of La Halte du coin; Sonia Jurado, a pillar of housing advocacy in Longueuil who founded Les Habitations Paul-Pratt, a seniors' residence; Marie-Claire McLeod, who has been working to address homelessness for years and is calling for federal investments; and Chrismene Lesperance, who has a homelessness resource in my riding. These people are there and they are ready. It is now our turn to make decisions and send them cheques. They are going to be looking after people because they know how to do it and how to do their job. Now they want us to do our job, which is to send them a cheque in order to meet the needs of the most vulnerable. That is what they are asking for, and I am certain that they are watching us right now. Gilles Beauregard and Hélène Bordeleau of the Table Itinérance Rive‑Sud are fascinating people, just like Lazard Vertus and Sonia Langlois, who runs L'Antre‑Temps, a resource for homeless youth. Just imagine how terrible it must be for a 50- or 60-year-old to find themselves homeless on the streets of Montreal—

2922 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Dec/9/21 11:30:30 a.m.
Watch

I must interrupt the hon. member, because his time has expired. He can add anything else during questions and comments. The hon. member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

36 words

Mr. Bernard Généreux (Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, CPC)

Dec/9/21 11:30:44 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we were treated to a fiery speech, to say the least. We are quite familiar with the issue. In fact, we are the ones who brought it forward for debate today. My colleague spoke about community organizations, which are indeed very important in Canada’s 338 ridings. In our election platform, we suggested taking 15% of federal buildings and making them available for co-operatives that could be offered to community organizations. Does my colleague think that this is a good idea?

85 words

Mr. Denis Trudel

Dec/9/21 11:31:31 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent idea. The Bloc Québécois even suggested it in its election platform. That means we can conclude it is a very good idea. However, we must ensure that these lands will actually meet the needs of the most vulnerable. They should be used to build social housing, not office towers or condos. That is the challenge we face. The Bloc Québécois agrees with the idea of using surplus federal land. However, it really should go to the most vulnerable.

92 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Dec/9/21 11:32:14 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I truly enjoy listening to my Bloc colleague's speeches in the House. They are always very vibrant and full of passion, and I sincerely believe that he comes to this place with a deep sense of caring for the housing situation we see in Canada. The situation is quite dire. In my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, we regularly see properties being overbid by $100,000. It is a real crisis. I agree with the member's comments on the election. It was an unnecessary election that cost $600 million. However, the fact that all the major parties spoke so eloquently and passionately about housing gave me some hope and optimism that it would be addressed in this Parliament. The motion before us today is a missed opportunity because the Conservatives do not make any mention of an indigenous housing strategy. They do not make any mention of giving aid to municipalities to help them with their land-use decisions. There is also no mention of building affordable non-market housing, which is so desperately needed. I am wondering if my Bloc colleague could expand on the missed opportunities we see in the motion.

199 words

Mr. Denis Trudel

Dec/9/21 11:33:27 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. He is absolutely right. Getting housing out of the speculative market is the big challenge that we face when it comes to the housing crisis. There was actually a motion adopted here in 2017. It recognized that housing is a right, like health. As soon as we recognize it as a right, we must act accordingly. If we leave it up to the market to set prices, housing will end up costing $2,000 a month, putting it out of reach for the most vulnerable. We need to find a way to get housing out of the speculative market. That is the major challenge.

113 words

Mr. Chris Bittle (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.)

Dec/9/21 11:34:12 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member had a throwaway line in his speech about housing being an area of provincial jurisdiction, and the rest of his speech was focused on federal intervention. I think we both agree that there should be federal intervention, but as an Ontario MP, I have noticed the absence of our provincial partner, the Ford government. It has not been there on housing the way previous governments have been. The hon. member really glossed over what the provincial government is doing in Quebec. If this is a provincial area of jurisdiction and things are getting worse, is it time for the Government of Quebec to stand up? I think the Province of Ontario, the Ford government, needs to step up as well.

124 words

Mr. Denis Trudel

Dec/9/21 11:35:02 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we must avoid partisanship when dealing with such an important issue. We need to take care of people. I know this issue falls under provincial jurisdiction, but I will not start judging what the Government of Quebec is doing, and whether or not it is enough. There are problems with housing, and mistakes have been made on both sides. However, I think that I made it pretty clear that the way the money is being spent by Ottawa is not working at all.

85 words

Ms. Sylvie Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, BQ)

Dec/9/21 11:35:51 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend my hon. colleague for his great speech. I would like him to explain the national housing strategy. The government is promising significant amounts of funding, but, in the end, those promises end up broken.

41 words

Mr. Denis Trudel

Dec/9/21 11:36:16 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in 2017, Quebec was supposed to receive $3.8 billion under this national strategy, shared equally between the federal and the provincial governments, but nothing much happened for three years. There was money for renovations and for building new housing units, but as members have mentioned and as we have talked about a lot today, a lot of funding was earmarked for making housing more affordable. However, one of the big problems is the definition of the word “affordable”. Often, federal programs are loans that are based on the fair market value in a particular community or region, when really, they should be based on the ability of households to pay. That is the problem right now. The strategy was announced, we did not get any funding for three years and now we are making do. The crisis is acute, and the funding needs to be distributed more quickly.

154 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 14