44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 26, 2022 10:00AM
- Apr/26/22 2:20:40 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, no. This matter was settled years ago when the Ethics Commissioner released the report. While the Conservatives continue to focus on petty politics and on me, Liberals are going to continue to focus on Canadians, on investing in housing across the country, on $10-a-day child care for families and on continuing to lead on world-class investments in fighting climate change. That is what Canadians expect of us. That is what we continue to do.
79 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:42:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, rather than tackling the supply issues driving the housing and affordability crisis, the NDP-Liberal government has doubled down on its failed approach. The NDP-Liberal budget promises the same failed programs that will not see any additional houses built this year or help a Canadian family afford a home who otherwise could not. The average home price in Canada is now $868,000, up nearly 30% in the last year alone. Canadians need help now. When will the Liberal government take this housing crisis seriously?
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:43:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians do not need is a mishmash of conflicting policies from the official opposition. The leader of the official opposition believes that we should download the costs of housing to municipalities. The member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon believes that we should download the costs to provinces. The member for Calgary Centre believes that we should not ban foreign owners. The member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry believes that we should pull back from federal investments in housing. The member for Calgary Centre does not believe in building multi-unit buildings for affordable housing. That party does not get its story straight on housing.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:44:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the best way to deal with housing affordability is to increase housing supply and to do it faster. Unfortunately, if the member opposite is so concerned about housing supply, she should talk to her leader, who opposes our collaboration with municipalities to increase housing supply. She should talk to her colleague from Calgary Centre, who opposes a ban on foreign ownership. She should talk to her colleague from Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, who believes we should just download the costs to provinces. She should talk to her colleague from Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, who believes we should just get out of the whole national housing strategy.
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:45:30 p.m.
- Watch
Zack has a job offer in my riding of Peterborough—Kawartha, but he cannot find affordable housing. This is a common theme across the country. There are a lot of job vacancies, but no housing. How can we fix the employment crisis when we have a housing crisis?
People need a place to live. It is a basic human need. How is Zack supposed to pay off his student debt if he cannot accept job offers? Will the housing minister continue to roll out one failed program after another, and is Zack the latest victim of his housing policy failures?
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:46:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talks about housing as a basic right. When we brought forward the National Housing Strategy Act to recognize housing as a human right, that party voted against it. That is not—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:46:30 p.m.
- Watch
Order. Are we ready to continue?
I will allow the Minister of Housing to restart his answer.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:46:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the solution to housing affordability is housing supply. We are collaborating with municipalities through the housing accelerator fund to build 100,000 new homes in the next two years and double the number of new homes built in the next 10 years. We are also extending supports through the first-time homebuyer incentive and the tax-free savings account to first-time homebuyers. We are also tackling speculation by banning foreign ownership of Canadian residential real estate in the next two years, and we are building more affordable housing.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:54:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are seeing inflation rise right around the world, and we know that this is due to the war in Ukraine, among other things.
However, I would like to remind the Conservatives that in our budget we have put forward a plethora of measures in order to ensure that housing would be more affordable and to ensure that child care would be more affordable. Prior to that, we lowered taxes for the middle class on two occasions, and the Conservatives voted against it. We have helped raise 300,000 children out of poverty, thanks to the Canada child benefit, and we are supporting vulnerable seniors with an increase in our supports for them. We are there for Canadians.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 3:15:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is, as always, a privilege to rise in the House to share the concerns of the people of Perth—Wellington and bring those concerns to this place.
This year's budget was the third opportunity the Liberals had to address the real concerns of Canadians. Since the election, they could have addressed the concerns of Canadians in the fall economic statement, in the implementation act for the fall economic statement or in this budget. Sadly, the issues I am hearing about every day in phone calls, emails and conversations at community events were not addressed by the Liberals in this year's budget.
Canadians are feeling the impact of inflation. I hear from families who have lost hope on ever owning their own home, and I hear from others who are struggling to find rental housing that is not only affordable but also large enough for their families. I hear from seniors who have worked hard their entire lives and who are now struggling to pay the bills. They are on fixed incomes that are stagnating while the costs of groceries, utilities and housing keep going up. Their costs keep rising, but their incomes remain that same. That is the cruelty of inflation.
No one saw any humour in the government’s April Fools' Day joke to once again raise the carbon tax, which is a tax that impacts the people in the lowest income spectrum the most. These are the people who can least afford to pay it.
The government had options that could help Canadians. It could have taken the advice of our Conservative motion to temporarily remove the GST portion of the HST to give all Canadians a temporary 5% reduction on the cost of gas. Any Canadian who has filled up their tank recently knows the impact of $1.84 per litre and the impact it has on families commuting to work or taking their kids to soccer practice or baseball practice. The government did not take our advice and our modest, common sense proposal was voted down by the Liberal government and the other opposition parties.
I am very proud to represent a strong rural and agriculture-based community. Here in Canada, one in eight jobs is linked to the agriculture and agri-food sector. This generates 140 billion dollars' worth of economic activity each and every year. In Perth—Wellington alone, agriculture is a billion-dollar industry, with grain farmers cultivating some of the most fertile farmland in the world. Dairy, beef, pork, egg, chicken and other farmers provide high-quality food to feed our communities, our country and the world.
Anyone who tuned in to hear the Liberal government's budget speech would be sorely disappointed to know that this economic powerhouse of agriculture was not even mentioned in the finance minister's budget speech. In her 3,000-word speech, she did not once mention agriculture or agri-food, farmers and farm families, or food processing and rural communities. Not once was this economic powerhouse of agriculture and agri-food mentioned in the Minister of Finance's speech.
When a speech is used to highlight the priorities of a government, what is left unsaid is awfully telling. Farmers and farm families quite literally feed the world. They work hard, and they innovate each and every day. Thousands of farmers are up early every morning, while most of the country is still sleeping, making sure the food supply chain remains intact.
Agriculture has always been a challenging field. There are unknowns no one can predict. What farmers do not need is the uncertainty caused by their own government. Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, fertilizer costs and supply issues were a problem. This included the ongoing efforts of the Liberal government to limit the fertilizer farmers use on their crops.
On March 2, when the government announced sanctions that were supposed to target Vladimir Putin and his thugs, it was Canadian farmers who were left feeling the greatest impact. As we approach the spring planting season, farmers and agribusinesses still do not have certainty from the government on whether the 35% tariff will apply on fertilizer purchased pre-March 2, but delivered after that date. In a case like this, the farmer and only the farmer is feeling the impact, not Vladimir Putin and his thugs.
No one is disagreeing with the need for sanctions against Putin, but those sanctions should not penalize those who prepurchased fertilizer last fall and now are being left with the bill. The budget was an opportunity to provide clarity on this issue and, once again, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Minister of Finance failed to do so.
The cost of fertilizer is not the only challenge facing Canadian farmers. There is also the cost of the carbon tax, as I mentioned earlier. For farmers there are very few, if any, alternatives to the use of carbon-based fuels to dry their grain or to transport grain to elevators for export around the globe. However, the Liberals continue to unfairly and punitively charge the carbon tax in situations where there are simply no alternatives, and the cost simply accrues to those who feed our country. Canadian farmers have long used the most sustainable measures to protect and preserve our land and national resources, but while they are doing the work necessary, they do not get the credit, and they are actually penalized for their work.
Once again, there is an easy solution. My friend and colleague, the member for Huron—Bruce, wisely introduced a private member's bill that would exempt farmers for the responsible use of fuel on their farms. Bill C-234 would achieve this. In fact, a year ago, a bill similar to this one, Bill C-206, passed through this House and was well on its way to passing through the other place when the Liberals dissolved Parliament for the unnecessary summer election.
In a perfect world, we could have passed Bill C-206 a year ago, but the next best option would be to pass Bill C-234. The budget could have done this. Sadly, it failed to do so. Farmers and farm families deserve better than what they are receiving from the Liberal government. For the sake of our food sovereignty and food security, they must do better.
In the six and a half years I have been in this place, at almost every opportunity in almost every budget, I have raised the concerns about rural broadband in my riding and in rural communities across the country, but these past two years especially have shown the necessity of reliable Internet service. The Liberal government has been slower than dial-up. Every day I hear from constituents who cannot complete their education, grow their businesses, communicate with loved ones or even access mental health services because the high-speed Internet infrastructure is not there. Let me highlight that point. They cannot access mental health services because they do not have high-speed Internet.
I have heard from constituents who have had to drive to a Tim Hortons parking lot to use its Wi-Fi to access services. In 2022, this is not acceptable. In fact, yesterday in the House, we heard the Minister of Rural Economic Development highlight their plans to get Canadians connected by 2030. Eight years from now is not good enough. It is not good enough for the families in Perth—Wellington, and it is not good enough for the rural communities across this country who need reliable high-speed Internet for their families, their communities and their country.
I know my time is running thin, but I must highlight the issue of housing. In my community and in communities across Perth—Wellington, housing has simply become unaffordable. In some places we have seen an increase of 30%, 40%, 50% or more in the cost of housing, year over year. In a single year this has driven up the cost to where families are just priced out of the marketplace. There are things we could do. We could use the advice of the Ontario Home Builders’ Association and its efforts. It has stated that one million new homes need to be built in the next 10 years. We need to work toward that outcome. We need to remove the red tape blocking communities and home builders so families and communities can grow.
Sadly, this budget has left out rural communities. It has left out rural communities in Perth—Wellington and across the country. That is why I will be voting against this budget.
1449 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 3:45:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the issues that I am quite disappointed about with respect to the budget is the lack of action by the government on its promise to deliver a “for indigenous, by indigenous” urban, rural and northern housing strategy. The budget only outlines $300 million, which is just a drop in the bucket, truth be told, to address the crisis with urban indigenous people in need of housing. Over 80% of urban indigenous people live off reserve, yet they are 11 times more likely to end up in a shelter.
My question to the member is this. Will he take up the cause to advocate, on behalf of urban indigenous and northern indigenous people, for the government to make a substantive investment in a “for indigenous, by indigenous” housing strategy in this budget, and also with the fall economic statement coming up?
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 3:46:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is an extremely important issue and priority, obviously. The government has taken housing very seriously from day one of its election in 2015. We are already on track, by 2027-2028, to deliver more than $72 billion in financial support through the national housing strategy, which is the very first national housing strategy in Canadian history. Of course, a priority on indigenous housing is an important part of that, and it should be. It is something we need to keep an eye on in the future.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 3:49:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I was interested in the reference my colleague made in a previous response to the national housing strategy.
Housing affordability is a huge issue in the riding of Cloverdale—Langley City, and I have been really pleased to see in this budget the commitments to housing. I wonder if my hon. colleague could speak for a moment about the housing commitments that are being made and how they will positively impact ridings such as mine.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 3:49:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, housing is a very complex area. We have brought in some important measures to help with housing affordability. We have a new savings vehicle. It is a very creative combination of a TFSA and an RRSP that will benefit first-time homebuyers.
There are other aspects of the housing situation that are under the control of municipal governments. I think the member has probably seen this in his area. I have seen it in mine. There is a big debate going on in my community about densification, and some amount of densification is going to be necessary if we are going to increase the housing supply in a geographic area that is already highly developed. Obviously, we cannot influence municipal bylaws and permitting, but through the housing accelerator fund we can exert a certain amount of influence, and hopefully that will be helpful.
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 4:03:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we continue to be separatists, no matter who is in power here in Ottawa, including the Conservatives.
I note that she spoke at length about housing. I also note that the Conservatives' housing suggestions are different from ours and the government's. This leads me to believe that the government should perhaps stop imposing conditions, like the new set of conditions in the budget, and simply transfer the money to the provinces.
The provinces are the ones that know their ecosystems and their housing markets. They are the ones that develop plans, and they should be allowed to implement the measures that they want.
Would that not be the best way forward?
123 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 4:04:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the answer to the housing crisis is that we simply need to build more houses more quickly. We need to ensure that federal dollars are incentivizing municipalities to build homes more quickly. I think we need to be moving forward in our economy. If our economy is going to keep growing, and if our population is going to keep growing, we need to ensure that our housing continues to grow as well.
To the Liberal member, I know in his riding I am sure he is having the same problem as I am. He is a similar age to me. Half of our generation cannot afford homes. The government is spending $74 billion on housing, yet housing prices have doubled since they have been in government. Something is going seriously wrong here. It is unacceptable.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 4:33:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first, in my riding, one of the reasons that local businesses have to close earlier and more often is that there is no affordable housing for workers to come in and use. A very real concern of local businesses in my riding is that places that used to rent to summer students and workers are no longer available because they are Airbnbs, so we can pursue that conversation later.
Meanwhile, the difficulty with carbon capture and storage is that it works far less than advertised. It can sequester some carbon, but in no project around the world has it ever met its goals or targets. It is about the most expensive way, and one of the less reliable ways, to do what is needed to be done reliably, quickly and affordably.
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 5:06:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, today I want to talk about budget 2022. I would like to thank my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé for sharing his time with me.
Budget 2022 is, ostensibly, “a plan to grow our economy and make life more affordable”. I doubt anyone will be surprised to hear me heave a sigh of exasperation. As I will show in my speech, there are still far too many who are not getting any help to make life more affordable.
Only one of our five unconditional demands was met: housing for indigenous communities. The government is planning to invest $4 billion over seven years starting in 2022-23 through Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to accelerate work on housing.
I applaud this initiative because I know it is essential to put an end to violence against indigenous women and girls. I was just at a meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, where we discussed this issue. There is no way we will be able to extricate these women from the cycle of poverty without providing them with adequate, affordable housing.
That said, the government does not understand that Canadians gave it a minority mandate, that they did not want to give it a blank cheque, and that they did not want to let it scatter money willy-nilly and in areas of jurisdiction that are none of its business.
I am forced to see the glass as half empty today and criticize what is not in the budget. In particular, I want to talk about seniors, our health care system, and economic development in areas still affected by the pandemic and recovering from the crisis. As the critic for seniors, I will begin by highlighting the complete lack of help for seniors.
We had made help for seniors one of the five prerequisites for passing this budget. To add insult to injury, in addition to not announcing anything new, they included a chart to tell seniors that they do not need any additional help. The government should tell them that while looking them straight in the eye and trying to explain why they are still being discriminated against based on their age.
For the rest of this part, I will let our seniors speak. Here are the words of those I have met over the past few weeks who are not happy: “Why do the Liberals insist on dividing us?” “I may get sick before I'm 75”; “My car will soon give out on me and I won't be able to get around. How will I maintain my independence?”
Take Michel and his wife Josée, or even France, for example. These three retirees feel penalized by the lack of federal government assistance for people between the ages of 65 and 75. They tell us that they want to enjoy life, that they have needs and that they want to help restart local economies.
An organization in my riding, SOS Dépannage, told me that there has been a sharp rise in the number of seniors relying on food assistance. Do we really want to reduce seniors to standing in line for food hampers?
Contrary to what the NDP-Liberal alliance is saying, it is not dental insurance that seniors want to talk to me about. Besides, this dental plan comes without any transfers to Quebec and it would not cover seniors until 2023.
Seniors need more money in their pockets now. It is not to invest in tax havens; rather, it is simply to be able to age with dignity. It is nice to have great teeth, but that means nothing if you cannot afford groceries at the end of the month. It is not a year from now that seniors will be hungry. They are going hungry now.
As I said, poverty does not wait until people reach the age of 75. In fact, a petition is currently being circulated calling on the government to reverse its decision to increase the pension of those aged 75 and over, known as older seniors, by 10%. Instead, petitioners are asking for an increase of $110 per month in the old age security pension beginning at age 65.
People lined up at the Tim Hortons restaurant across from my office in Granby last week. People do not want this unfair two-tier senior system. I also had some nice conversations with seniors in Drummond. The meeting was organized by the Centre‑du‑Québec branch of the Association québécoise de défense des droits des personnes retraitées et préretraitées. That was also where I heard many of these first-hand accounts.
Many people feel passionate about signing this petition, which I am sponsoring and which was initiated by Samuel Lévesque. Petition e‑3820, which can be found on the House of Commons website, aims to support the the Bloc Québécois's demand for a permanent and lasting increase in old age security benefits for everyone 65 years of age and older.
The FADOQ also said that the government broke its own election promises. There is no additional credit for home support, no tax credit for experienced workers, nothing at all. There is no increase in the old age security pension for seniors 65 and older in the budget. In fact, there is nothing. The government instead proposes the creation of a panel tasked with studying the idea of an allocation for seniors wishing to grow old at home.
Once again, if the Liberals truly wanted to help seniors stay in their homes, they would have increased health transfers.
In the second part of my speech, I will talk about another major omission in this budget: health transfers. There is no increase in transfers to 35% of costs as requested by Quebec and the provinces. “Any conversation between the federal government and the provinces and territories will focus on delivering better health care outcomes for Canadians”. That does not mean anything. There is no commitment to the unanimous request of Quebec and the provinces to increase health transfers to 35%. This request also has the support of many seniors groups.
Quebec and the provinces do not need to be told what to do by know-it-all Ottawa. There is nothing on the increase to health transfers yet the government keeps repeating and boasting about the same points.
In the third part of my speech I want to talk to my colleagues about the recovery for some sectors that are still very much affected, because the government missed some perfect opportunities.
I know that my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé cares a great deal about the agricultural sector, because this sector is also very important to Shefford's economy. There is not much in the budget for this sector, however.
When I travel around my beautiful riding of Shefford, people often bring up the agricultural sector. People wanted to see some innovative and bold measures. At the very least, the government should have considered improvements to existing programs like AgriStability and AgriInvest. My colleague has already spoken extensively about that.
The agricultural sector also wants something like the agri-green program, which would help producers and processors improve their operations and compensate them for good environmental practices. Aside from the second investment, the government is proposing other types of investments, but it is not going far enough. The Bloc Québécois is therefore disappointed with this announcement, on which it had pinned much hope. We will see what producers and processors have to say about it. For the time being, compensation is a long time coming. The government wrote that compensation for CUSMA will be included in the fall 2022 update. As my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé stated, it seems that there are further delays for those hard hit by the repercussions of the last three trade agreements signed by Canada.
The situation is dragging on. I was told about this recently at the Agristars gala. The young people I met spoke to me about farm transfers and controversial Bill C-208, which would facilitate intergenerational transfers. The government is satisfied once again with conducting consultations and creating delays. It is a major step backwards for farm transfers, even though the bill was passed in the final days of the previous Parliament, after the Liberals dithered. Now, the government is delaying its coming into force. The Bloc Québécois co-sponsored Bill C-208. It is a an extremely important issue for farm succession.
1469 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 7:23:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the line I use very often is that a week is an eternity in politics, and for the past five years it has become increasingly difficult and more stressful for anybody buying a home or looking to rent anywhere.
In Cornwall and my riding of SDG, the average price of a home is now $430,000. In the province of Ontario, last month the statistics showed the price was over $1 million on average to purchase a home. It was $800,000 across the country. Those are the average prices. I hear stories repeatedly of how rents are skyrocketing, the supply is low and young people living in their parents' basements are giving up on the idea of ever being able to save up enough money to buy their own home. These stories are heartbreaking, and what has happened over the course of the past few years is extremely frustrating.
I have to admit I do not think the Minister of Housing likes me too much. He references me in response in question period quite often because the last time we had this debate on housing a few months ago, I spoke about the Liberals' failed approach when it comes to housing. It is clearly broken when the housing minister sees prices that have doubled in the past five years and claims that the government's plan is working and is a benefit to Canadians.
I criticized the shared equity program, but not just for myself. I shared examples from stakeholders and proof from Canadians that they do not support that program. The minister then twisted my words. He could not even get my riding name right, but suggested that I was somehow against homelessness funding or doing anything in that regard. I will be blunt. That is pathetic and desperate.
The line I used was “desperate people do desperate things.” The minister is getting increasingly frustrated because Canadians are seeing the frustration they are facing in every single part of this country. It was also revealed in some documents recently that the minister authorized bonuses for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Organization, which has the simple and pure mandate of making housing affordable for Canadians. With all the stats that I just showed and the frustration in the air in every part of this country, the minister deemed in his judgment that it was appropriate to give $40 million in bonuses to an organization and team that is responsible for affordable housing. He did not like that very much, and continues to cite it.
I can say that in the city of Cornwall, the challenge of both hidden homelessness, which is what we call it, and also visible homelessness has shaken our community in the past couple of years. We actually have homeless encampments now near the port of entry under the international bridge going to Cornwall Island and into the United States.
The approach from the government needs to change. The shared equity program is broken. Members do not need to take my word for it. Mortgage Professionals Canada, which represents mortgage brokers, lenders and insurance and service providers, said last month that the federal government has failed to address Canada's housing affordability problem. When it came to the first-time homebuyers' incentive program, it said that it is “simply failing”. That is the part that needs to end. The spokesperson said that “almost all clients dislike the idea of becoming a co-homeowner with the government, if they can avoid it.”
That says it all. The fact that we are at a point now where the government believes it needs to put out money to help people contribute toward the equity in their homes speaks volumes about how our system and housing system are broken.
My question to the parliamentary secretary is this. Will the government finally change course?
651 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 7:27:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this government recognizes the housing affordability challenges that Canadians are facing today. Too many in this country are struggling to meet even their most urgent housing needs, and as my colleague points out, too many are struggling to achieve their dream of buying a home. However, unlike what my colleague said in the House earlier this year when he said that we should be done with the issue, we believe that the federal government needs to do its part. In fact, I think he owes Canadians an explanation for why he opposes investment in affordable housing and opposes supporting those who dream of owning a home.
Our government has prioritized housing since the beginning of its mandate. My colleague mentioned earlier that the system is broken, but since 2015, we have invested nearly $30 billion to support, create and repair 440,000 homes across the country from coast to coast coast. We launched the national housing strategy in 2017, the first of its kind. Is it broken? It helped over two million Canadians across the country. We have made housing affordability a central pillar of our new budget, pledging billions to boost supply and put housing within reach of everyone in this country. That includes expanding and extending programs with proven records of success, such as the rapid housing initiative to quickly build more affordable housing and the first-time homebuyers program.
My colleague's constituents are well aware of the impact the first-time homebuyers incentive has had, as 24 families in Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry alone are now homeowners thanks to funding from that initiative. Other federal programs have funded nearly 1,000 new units in his own riding, and those successes are repeated across the country.
Our new budget proposes a new tax-free first home savings account. This would allow people to save up to $40,000 for the purchase of their first home. We will also work to develop a homebuyers' bill of rights to protect homebuyers. Our plan includes support for people across the housing continuum, especially the most vulnerable in our country.
The member should tell Canadians now if he believes, like many of his colleagues, that the government should not play a role in making housing more affordable. Does he not believe that housing is a human right? Canadians deserve a clear answer from him and his party.
Meanwhile, our government believes that we can and should be in the business of helping Canadians meet their housing needs. Canadians expect us to get the job done. We hope that he and his colleagues will get their story straight. Do we need to make sure that housing is a human right? Do we need to give support to homebuyers regarding affordability? On this side of the House, that is what we are doing and that is what we are going to do.
483 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
